Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Well, good morning everyone and welcome to administrator issues and updates on March 10th, 2026. County Administrator Gary Schmidt, would you do us a favor and call the role? Yes. Thank you, Chair. Commissioner Shrader is out of the office today. Commissioner Savis is on his way. Roll call. Commissioner Helm here. Commissioner West here. Chair Roberts

here. And thank you. What do we have first, Gary? First item is your meeting as the board of county commissioners. This is an item for an upcoming business meeting. This bis week's business meeting. Approval of a board order designating the district attorney's office as responsible for civil commitment proceedings. There's no fiscal impact. There are no county general funds involved. Uh Billy Williams County Council and John Wangworth, District Attorney, will present. Go ahead, please.

Thank you. Um good morning, uh Chair Roberts and commissioners. Um the the memo outlines what we're asking you to do, which is to basically reverse what you put into place last June. Um, and uh, as I've discussed this with with you uh, a couple times about the reasoning behind it, uh, DA Wentworth and I have met uh, at least twice on this this issue with the um, requests from county council's office that the district attorney's office considered taking the responsibility back um, for a variety of issues, but two primary ones um, we we don't have adequate legal staff to handle this this uh continuous docket. Um I I I don't know all the historical reasons about why uh the proposal was made uh uh in 2025 and at this point it doesn't matter what the reasons were really because you either have the staff or you don't and I I made a recent uh uh decision on a staff member who was handling this. Um, and since that time, uh, John and I, uh, talked when I made that decision, and he reiterated his willingness and interest in taking the responsibility back. It's a long-term responsibility the DA's office has handled, uh, like it is in other counties as well. So, I really appreciate his willingness to do that. and uh uh uh two weeks ago we had uh a a series of meetings with his staff and then the staff of behavioral health. Um we will continue to uh answer the legal questions that come up on behalf of the

behavioral health section. Um, but with that, I I I just ask that you you uh agree to this to pass uh uh the board order on Thursday. And I'll turn to John in case there anything you want to add.

I I guess the two things I would say is I appreciate county council's willingness to try this. Uh they came to us and asked whether and this is u Mr. Williams predecessor, would we be willing to hand it over to county council? We said, "Sure, if you're going to take work off our plate, happy to have that happen. Um, but I completely understand the the position that county council's in and we do have the capacity to take these back and so it's not an extra burden for our office. Um, it it just makes sense, I think. All right. And Commissioner Helm has a question or comment.

Just one. Thank you. Uh, Mr. Wentworth, I we did we did get some uh communication from an uh w Mr. Watkins um yesterday or today um regarding their um objection to this. Can I don't I'm sure you've read the letter. Can you please can you please address that? Thank you.

Uh I appreciate and understand Mr. Watkins concerns that this shouldn't be an adversarial system that we engage in with those who are mentally ill. But the fact of the matter it is. And his whole letter begins with the fact that it is a deprivation of li liberty. when you take someone and you confine them for whatever reason in this case it's for a civil commitment um but their liberty is deprived and my office works in that business we do that for a living uh no disrespect to county council but this is our wheelhouse the the uh allegedly mentally ill person does get counsel uh so it's treated almost in a quasi uh I don't want to say criminal but it's treated in a similar vein and my office is equipped to do that much like we're equipped to handle contempt motions which are not criminal uh for violations of restraining orders. We do it every day. Defense gets an attorney. You do it in front of the judge. Same process. So I understand his concerns. Uh but the fact of the matter is we're better equipped to handle it, I think, than county council.

Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner West. Good morning, DA. Um uh would you agree that Oregon civil commitment process is uh complicated, cumbersome more than most states and it's a very difficult process even to engage in or to even civily commit to anybody who may be a harm to themselves? Yes. And often this population, am I right, um has lacks the ability to any further advocate for themselves or um and so we're stepping into uh intervene when one can't um doesn't have the ability or the cognizant ability to to advocate for their own wellbeing. Yes, I agree.

So this is for the health and safety of the individual, not to take their liberty, but also to make sure that their life is protected and those around them. Absolutely. Um and then your office is really well equipped and experienced in handling these delicate situations. Yes. Thank you. I fully support the um the the the change in from council to DA Wentworth's office. Thank you. You did that very well. I almost think we never talk about this issue. You're like a prosecutor asking a witness question. I I sorry I just had to comment on that. Sorry, we got digress there. Commissioner Savis.

Yeah. Sorry for being a few minutes late here. um question I have overall in this civil commitment concern which is apparently no matter who you talk to everyone acknowledges there's a problem right and we need a fix and um you know obviously I'm interested in finding whatever remedies or fixes we can and John you and I have talked about this um and I don't know we've actually have identified what the overall plan is across the state and I know that's complicated because it's not one jurisdiction or two jurisdictions. It's it's a statewide issue.

So, you know, I don't want to put you on the spot, but um you know, how do we get to a solution? Wow. That's uh because if this ain't it, I I need to know what's next. Yeah. Right. I don't mean to be flippant. Um but the answer is political appetite. is is what now

political appetite. Um there is a challenge I think legislatively to really dive into this issue like it needs to be handled. Um, the Oregon District Attorneys Association, of which I'm president, has tried a lot to work in this area because the system for the mentally ill is broken on many, many levels. uh from those who are charged with crime and have uh difficulty aiding and assisting in their own defense to the civil commitment process to help those who uh aren't in the criminal system but need profound help. Um I I I personally have a friend who uh was killed by her son uh who was suffering from schizophrenia and to talk to um her husband who is at um a loss and not just personally but just intellectually on why the system failed on so many levels. Uh I I can't tell you that I have the solution. I have ideas. Um it goes everything it you know we can start at those of us who remember Damish and the capacity that Damish had. We don't have those beds anymore. That that the new hospital was intentionally built at 60% of the capacity of Damish with a recognition that the population would increase and therefore the expectation that um help would come uh would increase. Right? So that so not only do we lack capacity for beds, uh we face a system where just getting help for those who we love is also a a a a process mired in red tape and

challenges. But I want to add again to come back full circle, my office is equipped to handle those as a system exists. So I think there needs to be a work group. I think the governor needs to be involved in solving this crisis. I mean, I hate to seems to be the term of the day, but it's a crisis, not just in our state, but across the United States in helping the mentally ill.

And I just want to take one moment and just say that um first and foremost, thank you, Mr. Wentworth and Mr. Williams. and that we are very fortunate in this county to have really I I believe uh two leaders that that are very passionate about this issue that care about it and we've had lots of conversations about this. I'm optimistic. We have a great uh health, housing and human services uh organization here and these are the priorities that we are looking at. And so um for those watching and others that that I am optimistic that we can find better solutions and um address this population which has been really unfortunately overlooked for so many years and we can do better and um I know Mr. Williams, we've we've really talked about the the concept of bringing people together to really identify those solutions and I couldn't agree more with you and uh I I just want individuals to know we're very lucky to have both of you and I'm optimistic as we kind of move forward. That is a big priority of with all my colleagues on this issue and um I'm excited about what's ahead and and very optimistic. So uh with that, did you have anything else, Paul? I want to make sure I

Yeah. Yeah, I do. And that is um and you kind of touched on it. I was, you know, I somewhat concerned that, you know, granted, I mean, if this is the right move, I'm not questioning this is the right move to flip it back, but we're not taking it we're not taking the next step, right? And I'm I'm my nature is to be tenacious, right? We see a problem, want to fix it, and lacking um a solution or lacking a direction. Um I I I want I want what can we do to take the next step and not just have just not just retreat, not just lose a year and we we never got anywhere. We just did this exercise all for not and um and the problem still remains out there and we're saying all the right things but we're not doing a damn thing about it kind of a thing. I'm not that's not directed at you or anyone else but just us collectively. What can we do as a commission or our legislative staff to make an, you know, uh uh an impact to our state legislature in 2027 or whatnot? What can we do to get the wheels turning to make a difference?

I I get the sense that Mr. Williams wants to speak because he and I have been working on this issue for so long. Uh and I know he has uh thoughts about it as well.

Thanks, John. So before I took this position, um DA Wentworth and DA Barton from Washington County and DA Clarkson from Marian County were my clients on on the the aid and assist issue and the Mink Bowman litigation that's been going on for now what 23 years, almost 24 years. a year ago uh this month, there was a contempt hearing on a motion for contempt and and the state was in fact found in contempt uh by Judge Nelson and issued her order last June. And I think back to something that I filed on behalf of the district attorneys with their permission. Um, and I know the the state probably wasn't happy with it because it sounded like I was lecturing them, which I was, which is Oregon needs to step up at the state level and not just push this all to the counties, which is a lot of what happened with House Bill 2005, in my opinion. So there's the um I'll call it the trifecta of homelessness, substance abuse disorder, and mental illness that is that is crushing so many states, not just Oregon, but in particular Oregon. And in my view, what needs to happen is the state needs to step up and and take it on and and and work jointly with the counties to do this. And and that means you've got to increase capacity at the state level to deal with the various populations, the populations impacted in particular with mental illness. That's the way you fix it. And until they do that, it's not going to get fixed. This is what the state of Washington did um when they got tired of paying $110 million in contempt

fines. Same issue with the Aiden's population. And guess what? former Governor Ensley decided to start building hospital bed space. We need that in this state. And I know there's a tremendous push nationally against, you know, criminalizing mental illness. The the battlecry has been decriminalization of mental illness. That sounds really nice. It's just not very practical. We can all work on this together so that people who are suffering from mental illness are are taken care of instead of just living on the streets of Oregon. So that's my answer. All right. Thank you. Quick comment.

Very quick. In Oregon, it's very easy to subsist in your dysfunction. It's very easy to be mentally ill and not get the care you need. It's very easy to get high in Oregon. It's really hard to get treatment. It's really hard to get compassionate care that rescues you from that despair and that illness that you are facing. It is really difficult to become sober in this state and it's really difficult um to uh have a story that's triumphed over your significant behavioral health needs and that is by design in this state. I agree with DA Wentwward that there's not been the political will to and the urgency to address this um in the manner in which we morally should have as a state and it's taking too long. We can't just manage the decline of the state. We have to start to turn it around and to do bold things and show real leadership and to be honest about what has not worked and begin to do the opposite of those things. And so much of the status quo has failed this population. It's failed caregivers. It's put unnecessary stress on the system as a whole. And we have failed to modernize it. Um, and I've said in the past, if we keep looking at this um, and treating it um, in ways that are no longer evidence-based or highly ideological, then we truly won't turn the corner on this issue. This is a really deep conversation on just an administrative adjustment um, from one office to the other. Uh but with that said, we all care deeply about it in this county and um I have full confidence DA went in your office to help us manage this crisis in which we all want to see mitigated.

All right. Thank you. Well, we're behind schedule, so I need to kind of move on. So, we'll vote on this item at our uh business meeting this Thursday, March 12th. So, I'll now recess as the board of county commissioners convene as the housing authority of county. And I'll turn to Gary as to what do you have for us. Thank you, chair. Joining you online is housing resident commissioner an Linstra. Good morning, Commissioner Linstra. Good morning.

Thank you for being here. So again, this is another item for your business meeting this Thursday. We're giving you a preview today. If you have any questions, this is approval of a resolution authorizing development agreements for sale of housing authority properties to provide affordable home ownership opportunities. property sale gross revenue value is approximately $20,700,000. No county general funds are involved. Mary Rumba, director of health, housing, human services. Shannon Callahan, executive director of the housing authority will present. Go ahead, please.

Uh good morning, chair and commissioners. Um yeah, so even though this item has uh previously come uh in front of you, it was a great opportunity to remind you actually what the item is because it's actually really exciting. So, as part of housing authorities board approved public housing repositioning plan for its scattered site public housing properties, the housing authority is partnering with two community land trust providers, Dev Northwest and Proud Ground, to convert up to 75 scattered site properties into affordable home ownership opportunities for low and moderate income Clackamus families. And this aligns with one of your goals under your strategic plan. So here with me Sh is Shannon Callahan who's going to give you a little bit more detail.

Uh thank you Mary. Uh good morning. U so in 2024 uh the housing authorities uh uh board approved the scattered site sale disposition strategy. Um and then we subsequently received approval from HUD housing and urban development. Um and then last year the board approved the sale of these homes in line with that strategy. Um the just to remind you of what the uh the approved plan that this board approved was is that we would uh sell homes in three different categories. The first being sales to a community land trust for affordable home ownership opportunities. The second is a sale to community-based organizations to provide um uh a new opportunities for recovery oriented infrastructure in the county. And finally um public sale um at uh market value. Market value is actually a requirement from um HUD housing and urban development um as we dispose of these sites. Uh so prior to the start of our uh disposition um we had 145 scattered site homes throughout Clackamus County. Um we have uh set aside approximately 75 of those homes for affordable home ownership um which is the subject of the item before you today. Um we have reserved 10 for recovery oriented infrastructure and the remainder 60 um are being sold uh on the private market. To date we have sold uh 13 of those homes. Two of those homes have gone to our own existing residents. So, we've been able to move folks from being renters into um homeowners, which is very exciting. Um and the specific item today would provide us

authorization to enter into um what are considered uh development agreements, which ultimately just allows us to transfer these properties to two local community land trusts um which are Proud Ground and Dev Northwest. They will in turn prepare these homes for sale to incomequalified households um while keeping the land itself that the homes are on in a community land trust guaranteeing permanent affordability. Um so that when these homes are subsequently sold, they will also be sold to low and moderate income home buyers. Um as uh as I uh mentioned, these will be at fair market value sales. Um, and we um, if approved, uh, we would be authorized to provide seller financing to the community land trust to enable us to pass the homes over to them for them to be able to do the needed repairs and upgrades that may be required to sell them to homeowners. And then um, when the homes sell subsequently to the people that will live in them, the loans would ultimately be paid back to the housing authority. Um, you also will be hearing later this week on your consent agenda um a an item that would pair down payment assistance um through uh state resources for these homes to ensure that we're able to reach our affordability targets. Um so I think that generally sums up what the what we're requesting authorization to do and I'm happy to answer any other questions you might have.

All right, colleagues, any questions? All right, this is very exciting and um it sounds like we'll move this for a vote on our business meeting again Thursday, March 12th. If there's no questions, I will now adjourn as a housing authority board and convene as a water environment services board of directors. Gary, what's next? Thank you and thank you, Commissioner Listra, for joining us. You're now meeting as water environment services board. First up is recognition of an award Wes received, the American Council of Engineering Companies award for the upper Kellogg project. This is very impressive and Greg and I wanted to share that with you. So presenting Greg G, director of water environment services. Go ahead please.

Thank you Gary. Uh good morning directors. I am very excited about this project. Uh this is uh an award that our contractor OTAC uh won the design firm for their engineering excellence, but it's also a great example of the county working really well together. Uh this was a a linear project through a neighborhood. Uh a lot of properties involved. Um a lot of community engagement happening and local parks, things like that. And I wanted to thank DTD uh for their help and Carol Hagar in particular as well as Alexa Morris for all that wonderful outreach. We managed to get 17 HOA property owners, all 17 to agree to sell us a piece of land. So it was hard hard fought, I'm sure. Um so yeah, it's a good good project. was uh flooding known flooding area. So, we took care of that and also did stream enhancements and flood plane enhancements. And I'm pleased to say that um the day the video you're going to see um uh was shot uh I happen to be at at that location uh for other reasons, but to check on how it fared through the December rain events and it we did not have house housing flooding during those rain events. than we absolutely would have prior to this project. So proud of that.

Uh Andrew, you want to show the video?

In Clackamus County, Oregon, the upper Kellogg Creek face persistent challenges. Frequent flooding from undersized driveway crossings disrupted life for residents of the neighborhood multiple times every winter, threatening the health of the local wershed. Urban flooding and poor water quality were more than inconveniences. They impacted public safety, property, and the environment year after year. This has been a location that's experienced drainage problems for I would say almost 30 years. Um, and it's been something we haven't been able to solve until now. To address these issues, the county launched a project focused on reducing nuisance flooding by optimizing storm water conveyance and restoring the creek's natural conditions. The OTAAC team embraced a nature-based green infrastructure approach.

Everything is native plantings on this project. We tried to negotiate as much riparian width as we could along the creek through people's front yards so that we could get as much native riparian vegetation established along the creek as possible.

The path to success was complex. Most of the work took place on private property, requiring proactive engagement with local land owners to build trust and secure easements. For this one in particular, it was really trying to balance meeting the needs from an engineering perspective, but also recognizing that the majority of this work was done in somebody's front yard. The schedule was tight, driven by the need to allocate 2.4 million in grant funding before the end of 2024. The key to meeting the schedule was a lot of ongoing regular communication, a streamlined procurement process, and then we ended up with a really good contractor.

You know, the design had to happen really quickly. Originally had a 2-year inwater work period, and we were able to wrap up all of our inwater work in one year. What truly sets up our Kellogg apart is its impact, directly benefiting over 100 neighborhood properties. The project's visibility has sparked a public conversation and education about watershed health and the role of engineering in community resilience. We just had a very significant rain event and I'm just out here checking it out. It looks great. I'm really proud of the work that OTAAC did and and the West team. It looks like the project's a real success.

Thank you to our project partners whose collaborative spirit and commitment to improving the community made this possible. I also wanted to thank the board. I I forgot to mention these were ARPA dollars that the board allocated for this project and we were able to spend them on a very worthwhile project. Um yeah, so thank you. Fantastic. Well, great job to you and your staff and uh it doesn't look like um we have any action on this. I know we're going to step down take photos uh with you, but I want to go to our commissioners first. Commissioner Helm,

thank you. Thank you for the presentation, uh, Greg. I know you guys do a great job with, uh, water mitigation. I remember the Carly Creek project very well and, uh, it a beautiful job. Uh, who maintains all of this, uh, property since it is on private property? We built it. Uh, are the property owners responsible? We will maintain it. We will maintain it. Okay. All right. Thank you, Mr. Sal.

Yeah. just want to say uh it's uh I know that we have one more phase of this to complete which is the under the the water crossing. Um and I'm sure that uh Commissioner Helm when she was with uh on the on the on the board u the committee uh heard from a member or two about this particular flooding area. Um, it predates, you know, predates Greg because his predecessor and I and a number of the community members had a lot of challenges and issues to try to get attention dropped um drawn to this project. And you saw some of the pictures. Uh, it's those captured a bad day, but there were days that were worse than that where standing water would be there for for days on end. Um, people had to sandbag their homes. um here in urban Clacamus County. It's not like a people would think this is like in some rural area, but this is in urban Clacamus County. But I'm, you know, I'm glad it happened. Um you know, 15 years uh 15 16 years effort to make this happen. Um just goes to show that um you know, being tenacious and plugging away um and getting a response. And I I know that we had some difficult conversations over the years to try to make this happen. And I guess one good thing with the ARPA dollars is that this kind of gave us an avenue to to make a make a big difference.

But uh appreciate the the work and I had no idea this would turn out to be a uh a moment of celebration, if you will, from a standpoint of the people that worked on the project. Um but I'm I I hope the homeowners are happy. I'm sure they are. Yes. All right. Well, awardwinning West staff, come on up. Let's get a picture with everybody. Come on, you guys. Yes.

Yeah. very impressive.

Three, two, one. One more. Three, two, one. Give me just a second. Thank you. I'm doing one more. Somebody close your eyes. Come on.

I'm gonna blame Greg. Three, two, one. All right. Thank you everybody. All right. Once again, congratulations to our west staff. Keep up the great work. And uh Gary, what do you have next for us? You are still meeting as the water environment services board. Next is advisory board appointments. Andrew, go ahead, please.

Mr. Chair, the Water Environment Services Advisory Committee has five open positions. Recruitment opened in October of 2025 and closed in December of 2025. Six applications were received. There were no qualified applicants for the seat reserved to represent the development community specifically. So, recruitment will be open soon to fill this specific seat. Four applicants are recommended for appointment and the recommendation is as follows. Neil Schulman to a second term ending December of 2028. Anthony Fields to a fourth term ending December of 2028. Marshall Pilowski to a first term ending December of 2028. And Jeff Dodd to a first term ending December 2028. The board could select other candidates or require further recruitment. Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Andrew. Do Excuse me. Any of my colleagues have any questions? If not, may I have a motion? Chair, I move to appoint Neil Schulman, Anthony Fields, Marshall Palaskki, and Jeff Dodd to the Water Environment Services Advisory Committee. I'll second. All right. Excuse me. Director Helm has moved to appoint Neil Schulman, Anthony Fields, Marshelle Paloski, and Jeff Dodd to the West Advisory Committee. Director West has seconded that. Any further discussion? Seeing none, clerk, would you please call the poll for us? Director Savis, I. Director West, I. Director Helm, I. Mr. Chair,

I. Motion passes four to zero. Mr. Chair, I will now adjourn as water environment services board of directors and reconvene as a board of county commissioners. Gary,

thank you. Next is legislative update. Presenting is Tony Holawki, director of public and government affairs. Morning, commissioners. Um, so we went into the legislative short session with the priority of securing $5 million in funding for the recovery campus. And I'm pleased to say that we were successful in reaching this goal, but not without the support and advocacy of the Clackamus Caucus, especially Representative Dobson and Senator Meek. To be clear, the governor has yet to sign the bill. Um, but before I turn to my request, I would also like to recognize our government affairs team, uh, especially Trent Wilson for their accomplishments. So, commissioners, I um I'm here this morning to ask for your approval uh to of a letter of appreciation to our state legislators representing Clackamus County for their support of the Clackamus Recovery Campus Project and that letter is in your packet.

All right, colleagues, questions, comments? Go ahead, Commissioner West. on the screen. Can you scroll up a little bit so we can see? Um, is this right now just drafted to be only signed by the chair? Correct. I would like to offer that all of us sign this letter.

Um, this is really impressive what we accomplished in the last few months in Clackamus County. We went from a very inspirational, innovative recovery infrastructure idea of a campus to help people address the needs around substance use disorder and homelessness and behavioral health needs to being severely underfunded and having to braid funding, hobble things together, limp it along. We were told that we were not going to get $10 million from the governor when we were counting on that. I'm pretty sure we were going to get it. Commissioner Savas and I did some lobbying along with others to the governor. She uh I remember the text message I got the morning that she said, "Congratulations, commissioner. I worked hard. Your advocacy and commissioner's office's advocacy,

I'm paraphrasing a little bit meant a lot and we're going to get you the $10 million." Then we continue to work with our Clacamus caucus um the legislation in Clacamus which by the way I think we have a fantastic bipartisan relationship with that's very pragmatic and principled in the approaches that we take and the things we fight for um and April Dobson Representative Dobson and Senator Meeks really stepped up to the plate um and they helped reallocate an additional $5 million we were not expecting the recovery campus for the first two phases is I believe fully funded So, it's a 180 turnaround from what we were facing. I don't believe anything like this exists in the region or the metro area to address this crisis. Um, it is exciting to be able to see this come to fruition. I am ecstatic um and incredibly thankful for our our legislative partners. a lot of things didn't get funded or are getting cut and are having difficulties moving forward, but this investment um was needed and prioritized and it was it's exciting to see that. So, I would like to have all five of us sign on to this letter to thank them. Um and I don't know and this is just specifically to Representative Dobson, Senator Meeks,

or is there No, this is to the entire caucus. Oh, the entire caucus. Perfect. That was what I was gonna make sure because I you had kind of said I wanted to just just

give them a specific shout out. Agreed. Thank you. Um so this is fantastic and this is what we've needed to be able to be effective at the local level for this capital investment. Just a couple years ago we we had like nothing. We didn't have any infrastructure to deal with this. And we were kind of reeling and figuring out like what we were going to do. when we've accomplished in just a few years as a county is outstanding and kudos to the staff and everybody and your team for helping make it. Trent, I see you over there. Thank you so much for your work. Honestly, it's heartfelt. Thank you. This means a lot. So, I'll yield back to this exciting. We'll take the money. The answer is yes.

Commissioner Hill, um the only I I agree that this is I would love to be able to sign it as well. Well, um, chair, I know that, you know, I'm sure you don't have a problem with that, and I'm probably being nitpicky here, but can I can we say dear Clacamus County Caucus? Um, I just because people bring up to me, is Clackamus a city? I mean, if there's just just a little word there, I would say Clacamus County Caucus. Agree. Thank you. That's it.

I I agree with Commissioner West and Helm. I think it's wonderful to have everybody sign this. I think it just shows a tremendous support uh uh that we all appreciate. And uh and I did want to give a shout out there. There's all these people that work behind the scenes that often times don't get recognized. And I will tell you that's Trent in the back of the room here today. Yeah, I'm going to pick on you. And um so many times in the last minute things come up in these short sessions and everything and who who do I get on the phone to? It's like Trent, help Mayday

and um and helping us put things together. It's very last minute and um just uh I can't say enough. He helped me on the farm bill on some stuff and uh just the recovery. It just the list goes on and on. And so it's just one of those people behind the scene that is constantly an advocate for this county and the citizens. And I couldn't be more honored to be working with uh Trent on many of these complicated issues. And I know I know that my colleagues feel that same way. So, thank you, Trent, and we appreciate you. So, with that, I'm going to ask if uh I could have a motion.

Chair, I move to approve the letter of appreciation uh with the change of having all of the um board of county commissioners sign it. I'll second. Right. Commissioner Helm has moved to approve the letter of appreciation with an addition of uh signature lines for all of the commissioners. Commissioner uh West has seconded that motion. Any further discussion? All right. Seeing none, please call the poll. Commissioner Savis, I. Commissioner West, I. Commissioner Helm, I. Mr. Chair, I. Motion passes four to zero. Mr. Chair, thank you, Tanya. And to you and your staff. All right, Gary. What's next?

Thank you. Next is recovery campus monthly update. Sydney Becker from camp administration project coordinator will present. We're not on TV, Cindy.

Good morning everyone. Um, so I'm happy to give this great update. Um, we are we are just full steam ahead. So just quickly, I'm in your packet. Um, we're still working with Shipo uh State Historic Preservation Office. Um, and u, we're working through that process. uh in terms of the funding. Um, so we're very obviously very excited um about the $5 million. And so when I just want to be clear when we talk about being fully funded, um, we still will be taking out a loan, but the loan amount has been reduced significantly because, uh, in addition to the $10 million in the governor, the $5 million from the um, uh, legislature, we also the $2.5 million from on the federal earmark. So, we're looking at, you know, $17.5 million in really like in the last four weeks. So, that's pretty incredible. Um, but, uh, we do still have to take out a loan. Um, the good news is it's it's about half of what we thought it would be and that money that we don't have to put into the loan will stay in the prevention arena. So, we're really it's really a two for win. So, not only are we getting this project, but we're also able to continue the great work that's being done in the community um with those opioid dollars. So, um and we are braiding um we have we have quite a string of funding sources that we're braiding together for this project, but they all work. So, that's that's really great. So, we're we're very excited about that. Um there was a meeting with staff with Kaiser last week and um they want to want to figure out ways to continue to collaborate with us and and work together with their contacts in the community. So it wasn't financial but that's okay. Um they still want to really kind of step up the work that they're doing with us. And so we appreciate I know the overture that um

Commissioner West and Chair Roberts made when you met with them. So I think this is really kind of a followup to that. Um, in terms of communication, we have two things planned. We're planning the groundbreaking um for the site on uh July 29th, and then our goal is to have a community meeting either it's going to be June 3rd or 4th. We're just kind of figuring it out with your schedules. But the community meeting will be the invitation will be to a wide birth of people um in the area, businesses and residents and it'll be in the evening where we want to have it before the school gets demolished. We thought that would be a nice idea. So um we don't expect it to be demolished obviously at that time. So that's where we plan on holding it. And then we will um the architects will be there and we will have our the so the community project team the developers will be there as well to answer any specific questions and obviously all of you um we made it sure that you would be u available for that meeting. So we're very excited about that and um we've talked with the good neighbor group about ideas and things that we could do to make sure that we address um individual concerns and issues. We know that safety is a very big concern and we will um absolutely address that during the meeting as well. Um and if you have any things that you want us to make sure that we include in the meeting, please um hopefully you'll be able to chat um or give a a welcoming um at the beginning of the meeting. And other than that, we we're rolling. Yesterday I met with uh the um architects and project team to pick out colors and materials. That was really fun. Um, so it's I mean it's just looking terrific and today we had a meeting with um design review as part of DTD. So we're going through that process and so um we're just moving ahead.

Fantastic. Commissioner Savis has a question. Yeah. Um thanks Cindy for the update. Um just want to go back a little bit. You mentioned the loan and I know that as we started out with only having enough funds and a method to get to first phase, now we're in a different place. That's all good. And you mentioned the loan. So can you just for sake of the board and the audience um um tell us how that mechanism is to pay those funds back?

Sure. The initially we were thinking that the loan would need to be about $14 million and we're now looking at um around seven and the the repayment of that loan will be through the opioid dollars, the opioid settlements. Those are not federal dollars. Those are private dollars or settlements with the with the various um drug companies that all those settlements have come across the country and and this is our quote unquote portion of that. So those funds um the reason we we um need a loan is really cash flow because the opioid dollars come in over a period of 8 to 10 years. We can't wait 8 to 10 years to pay our bills. So, we will take out a loan to be able to pay for the construction and then as those opioid dollars come in that that will be making the payments.

Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner West.

Uh that was one of my questions, but I'll jump to a different one because uh Commissioner Sus just uh asked a important question there. um it frees up additional money for prevention and also something very much lacking in our care continuum that we haven't quite built is um appropriate shelter, low barrier shelter um in Clackamus County. So I support uh us um going into that next phase also to help people get off the streets into that low barrier shelter so they can go through the care containment step by step. But that first step often for many is low barrier. Um, so can you I know we have a plan for that now. I was wondering if you could speak to it again. We have spoke to it previously. I think it's important to bring it up again.

Um, and then uh when do we get to start talking about phase three? I thought you going to talk about the dog shelter. We are we and so hopefully is Mary here?

So Mary can talk about the shelter. I that's un and and financially how that is beneficial because we're going to be moving away from hoteling um which when I first got elected we have the big debate and this hearing room was full of people wanting us to purchase a hotel. We we had a project turnkey. It um infamously did not pass the board. We don't need to revisit that. But we did shift and move right away into building out the care contin is is such an improvement from where we were. But I would like to kind of speak to now that we don't have to pay market rate any longer potentially for hotel rooms and how that also will shift some of that financial burden that we've had. We've had that's been quite costly and we're moving away from that now and everything's kind of lining up. So those are my two questions I hope we could speak to.

So Mayor, you want to talk about

Sure. Hello, Mary Rumba, H3S director. So, um, so Commissioner West, I think really what you're reminding us of is that very long session we had where we really had somewhat three distinct conversations, but they were all married together. And so, as a reminder, um, we we were successful in getting Metro Administration dollars specific for a low barrier shelter, overnight shelter, which we do not have in this county, which is absolutely needed as part of our continuum. So, that's 7 million. I think to speak again to what Cindy is talking about, the infusion of additional dollars that we did not expect really does free up then the dependency on the opioid settlement uh funds. And you had heard us in that presentation just talk about the tension about investing those in treatment and then potentially losing the ability for that upstream uh prevention intervention work. And so this really does give us some breathing room. I think we'll know more over time as we settle with, you know, again, once until the dollars are in our bank, right? We I mean, we can count on them, but they're not there yet. Then we'll be able to do the analysis on the exact amount for the loan, what the interest rate is, what the payback schedule will be, and then we'll be able to come back and sort of say, okay, this will be committed to recovery campus. This is this these are the remaining dollars which you you all direct us to do around opioid settlement and then we will be coming back to you here in the near future to really talk about the shelter model as well.

And we will also bring back um now that we we've been waiting till um the end of session to find out if we were able to um get the 5 million and then we will be meeting with our external finance team to figure out okay what's the what's the best way to get it? Do we do a loan? Do we do a bond? what you know revenue bond what do we do on that? So now that we know the numbers we will um meet with them and then they will um advise us on on the best direction to go which will um the best financial direction to go. I

I think it's important to note that that 5 million was allocated originally in a previous session towards the Happy Valley Community Center. The voters decided not to move forward with the Happy Valley Community Center, but this recovery campus is in the ugma of Happy Valley. Um, and so it still is within the community being utilized and I think a great in a in a priority that is essential to address as we all know. Uh, so just a little history for the public that's listening is that that $5 million is still staying within the community was originally dedicated to. We're just going to use it to help people with behavioral health needs. Thank you. I just also wanted to um respond to your question about where's phase three?

Yes, let's go. And um so one of my goals has been um focus focus on this project, make sure we have the funding for it, make sure that we can move forward. Um and you know, as Gary also often reminds us, not until you have the money in the bank and you count it. So um so assuming all that goes well, we can certainly have conversations. We we started a conversation a while back which was, you know, as I mentioned, there's really no wrong answer here. Um, but the reality is it does come down to money. So, um, we'll we can brainstorm and do that again, but I think it's going to be a question of, okay, where's the money going to come from? So, um, but once we have this incredible um, recovery campus all built and everyone can see it, I think the money will just pour in.

I agree. Thank you, Commissioner Helm.

Thank you. And thank you for the presentation, Cindy. Um, I I'm so excited for this project. Number one, I mean, we all talk about it. I'm thrilled that we got the funding from the state and the two and a half million from the federal money. Um, I have a concern that we have a date for groundbreaking. July 29th. Is that what you say? Right. That's groundbreaking. Yet, we don't yet have that community meeting on the schedule yet. I know it's being talked about May, June. Um, I think that needs to be made a priority. I would hate to see, you know, that happen so close to groundbreaking without the community getting the ability to give us some feedback prior to ground breaking. Um, I think earlier is better for that. I I'm hearing from the community there's some concerns and I think we need to address them as soon as possible. So, we're excited. We see the benefit of this, but I think our citizens also need to to they they need to buy in. And I I think we need to address the concerns sooner than later. So, if we can get the groundbreaking on the calendar, we can certainly get the uh community meeting on the calendar, too.

Well, we have the the community meeting will either be June 3rd or 4th. Oh, okay. Well, we have just May or June on our on our thing here, so this was firmed up a couple days ago. It is firmed. Okay. Okay. So, June 3rd, it'll be June 3rd or 4th. Yes. Okay. Very good. Thank you. I appreciate that. Great. Commissioners. Yeah. And just to build on that and then get to my other thing I wanted to raise is that

when we did discuss that, I I think it was um I I was hoping that my colleagues, Mr. Commissioner West, at the very minimum would be one of those people prior to the June 30 meeting or so kind of knocking on doors and talking to community members. I think that more like Martha and I did with uh in the past. So, I'm hoping that, you know, one or maybe Commissioner Helm or Commissioner uh um Roberts would, you know, step up and do that and experience the the concern, hear them firsthand. You know, I think it's it's valuable.

Um that said, I want to go back to the question that Commissioner West asked, but there was one element of it that wasn't clear to me what the response was. And I I do remember that day, that long conversation with yourselves and Vahed up here, and we were talking about that, and this issue came up with um the $3 million we're paying annually for hotel rooms that the turnkey project would alleviated us, but now we are paying you know three a million or so. So exactly how or when how and when will that capacity be built um in which those that cost is down and we are recovering or we're not spending those dollars any longer like we are today. turn. I'm going to turn that over to Fahed Brown if that's okay.

Thank you, Commissioner Savas. Yeah,

Chair Roberts, Commissioners, Fahed Brown, Housing and Community Development. Um, Commissioner Savis, a brief update on how and when. Um, so we have engaged Collers as our broker to identify a suitable property for the development of a village. as we we spoke with this board. Um there was there are two tracks we were going to pursue. Um that's the first track is to identify property. So I've already met with them uh discussed the parameters of what we're looking for. Uh that was last week and I was told in a 10 days we would see a first list. So we are pretty close to being able to come back to the board with some options uh potentially in an executive session if that's uh if that's an opportunity in the near future. Um, so that's kind of the first question to answer is do we have a suitable property identified that the board is is enthusiastic about and then I think the timeline would would be dependent on the nature of the property whether it's one with an existing facility that can be quickly converted to shelter or it's one in which we're going to build a new village. So um there is some still some uncertainty about timeline but we are well underway.

Okay. Thank you. So yeah, it'd be nice to kind of get an assessment of that because you know, you know, back when that turnkey opportunity was before us, we would have had that building for nothing really, you know, contribution from the state. Yeah. So to use some resources to build something new is still going to cost us some money. So there's still going to be capital capital outlay that otherwise would not have been required. But I was just hoping that the sooner we get to um somewhat get defrain or moving away from that annual expenditure uh the better. Agreed. Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner West.

Just a couple thoughts on this. Um if are we looking at a property that is available and then kind of planning around a property that's available? So, let's say we have a property that would allow um a number of people overnight to sleep on mats and be supervised. I just toured um a church that opens up at sanctuary in Portland with Mayor Wilson and they would lay out these mats and there would be people there kind of overseeing it and the inflow and outflow of the building and that it's safe and clean for everybody, which it was, was very impressive. um versus maybe you can help more people that way versus a village which can be a little costly when you set up all the little we just did a Clackamus village and it wasn't cheap to do it. It's fantastic but it was expensive. Um, are we looking do we have a preference and and are we I preferably would like I maybe getting the card ahead anyways but um closer to the populated area or closer to the Portland line I think is it would be beneficial too. So, and then cuz some of these people, they don't know whether or not as they push their belongings on 82nd across Duke Street, they don't know what county they're in, but you know, we're all taking care of each other regionally. So, being able to use this as potentially a regional asset, too, um for the I think we build goodwill also with our neighboring jurisdictions. So, are we like strategizing like how we do this is based on what property is available or are we preferring one of those models over the other and why? Yeah, I think that the um Thank you, Commissioner West. I think that the the preference of of the board and and what I'm hearing, and I think we're on the same page um in how we're approaching this with the brokers at this point, is is both the the um the ideal opportunity would be a property that would allow for the construction of a village and um a congregate setting for the the mats and

so forth as you're talking about. Um that is a need in in our continuum. It's also a need in in in severe weather. We kind of have to dance around all of our our weather emergencies. We do a good job, but having a resource dedicated to that purpose would be fantastic. Um, so that's the that's the ideal that we're searching for. And the the areas closer to the the county line are within the parameters that Collier is searching.

Okay. Yeah. I hope ideally this is a good asset that we can build up that potentially could have regional supporters. between this is a regional issue and we've been a little bit siloed and we've getting closer and closer to what we talk about as functional zero but we all can't be healthy and move forward as a region if Portland's not healthy and moves forward as a region. So how do we like take care of Clackmus County residents prioritize that with our funding but also start to look at that regional support model um I think is important but thank you for I think that's innovative that we're talking about kind of both in a colloccated area I think is fantastic. Thank you. Yeah.

All right. I I just had one question and it had to do with um Cindy, maybe you can address this shifting back um to the recovery center and you said that u we'll be using opioid dollars for this uh repayment alone is my understanding correct and is that right?

Yes, we have some opioid dollars that were that is part of the braiding period and then we have some that will pay repay the loan. Yes. So, so my question is um some of those opioid dollars are being used for some variety of services now and so are those services going to be cut? Is it split? Maybe you can talk about that. Just educate me on that. So I what we're going to be doing um now that we know the numbers have kind of stopped moving, we will we will come back to you and present you know all the funding sources and and you know what's going where and so there will certainly be um more dollars available and Mary can speak to whether anything will be cut. I'm thinking not but go ahead.

Yeah, correct. Um so at from that session uh last uh winter uh there was a commitment from this board to go ahead and fund the current both internal and external uh services at the same level. So we've extended all of those contracts into this next fiscal year. But beyond that we will need to come back and we'll have a much better sense now because of the additional dollars that we received um the the proposal or ask of this board to continue to invest in in prevention and intervention. So no cuts at this point. We're able to stay status quo. No expansion um because at that time we really could only commit for another year of funding.

Right. And so I understand Washington County does use their funds for it and um we've used it for some other things. So just want to be cognitive that there's some other services and what those are, what the impact might be. So yeah, everyone's being very creative on how they're using the opioid dollars. So it's a good thing. Right. Well, thank you both very much. So, uh, this is information only and we'll go ahead and move on. Thank you both very much, Gary. Thank you. Next is support of housing services comment letter to Metro. As you had requested, Emily Cleer, policy senior policy adviser for the board's office will present. Go ahead, please.

Good morning, commissioners. Uh, as you know, you all have been deeply engaged with Metro over the last few years as they look at reforming the supportive housing services program. Um, just in the last two weeks, Metro Council has brought forward a resolution looking at the new oversight body. Um, that's very loud. Looking at the new oversight body, their priorities, agenda, things like that. But um within the resolution, one of the items that they are contemplating is um taking the regional investment fund dollars that the c that has originally and always um been within the budgets of the counties and they would like to bring it into um Metro's purview. So I think I spoke to you all about this previously. um was uh under some other with some other considerations, but there is a letter in front of you today. I I um am concerned that this is moving quickly. The like I said, the resolution was just heard two weeks ago on February 24th and they are scheduled to take action on Thursday. So the letter is in front of you today and asking for a delay in the vote until the counties can more proactively engage in this discussion.

Thank you Emily. Commissioner West. Uh thank you Emily. Is it my understanding is it correct that Chair Jessica Vega Peterson of County already submitted letter in opposition to this effort? She did yesterday. Yes. And has Washington County taken a an action yet? I believe they're going to submit something today.

Okay. Um, I've had conversations at least with um, Chair Roberts about this. Uh, Metro, in my opinion, did not adequately collaborate with county leadership or mute or us electeds on this effort. They moved forward autonomously from us. This money was never there. I don't know what they're talking about clawing back since it was always designated to the county. So, how can you claw back something that was never uh, allotted to you through the IG? Um, this is, I think, a threat to the IGA. Um, and there's a lot more conversations that need to happen with counties. I think Metro doesn't have a full understanding about what we are doing with this funding for a regional response to this crisis and we are focused on on on figuring out a regional response moving forward. I've talked about it from the DIS over the last few months. I've met with Mayor Keith Wilson and toured some of their facilities about a regional support for Portland. I know Chair Roberts, I think you have some meetings scheduled to help um get a better understanding of the mayor's request. uh this seems a little premature and there needs to be further conversations regarding the riff funding and um I I do support the effort of the other counties in the greater Portland area to put a pause or push back or need further clarification. Um, and I think that we need to have uh maybe an opportunity to speak with councelor Lewis about where the county is on this. Um, and potentially incoming president Juan Carlos on how we feel this is going. So, that's where I'm at. Uh, but I I think that this is a little fast and doesn't really honor the IG that's in place now.

Thank you. comments.

So, Emily, uh, what's your recommendation on this? I'm putting you on the spot as usual.

Uh, my recommendation is to delay the vote for now. It this process just moves so quickly without any real um, county conversation. I think it'd be useful, as Commissioner West just said, to meet with the counselors, help them understand what we are using the regional investment fund for and help them understand that we are lifting up the region with these dollars, not just our own individual county programs. So, uh, I think a delay in the vote would at least help them understand that, then they can continue on. The the overall resolution is useful. There are interesting and useful components of it. We stand ready to support the new oversight body when they are ready to get up and running in a couple of months. Um, we certainly don't want to delay that really important reform work that they've just begun, but they do need to understand what's what the consequences are if they move forward this way.

Trying to understand where you two are on this. I kind of heard Ben's thoughts. Yeah, I'm fine to approve the letter. I I think it needs to be delayed as well. I think a a lot more conversation needs to happen. Yeah. Like we do a lot of things. Um you know, we have our assignments and you know, one or two of us maybe take the take the helm of one or another, right?

Um and so this has been something in in Commissioner Westhouse as well as um you know, Commissioner Roberts. So, you know, I you know, I look to you guys to make sure this try, you know, comes out or um shapes into something that we all can agree on and so forth. And um it's difficult for me because I was there in the beginning and you know, we've identified, you know, staff and I you know, ourselves, we've identified some challenges with this. So, I have a pretty good understanding what's at risk. So, I concur with the letter. I concur with everything that that um staff has said here today and I support the letter and so you know uh it's just unfortunate that we're not collaborating a little bit better um you know regionally um and it's also unfortunate maybe that some of the progress between the city of Portland and Multma County is not in a better place today otherwise it maybe some of these pressures wouldn't be

you know showing up in this manner if you will So therefore, I I I move to accept the letter, send the letter, and with all our signatures on it as well. Second. All right. Um, Commissioner Savis has moved to approve the letter as presented. Commissioner West has seconded it. Any further discussion? My lights on. I have Do you have a comment? I'm sorry. Oh, you said further discussion. I just point out my lights on, but I can whenever you want to take. Yeah. Yeah. So, go ahead. you go first.

Um I just my quick question is is as we know Washington County is having this discussion today, Jessica Vega Peterson, was it just her office that put forward her letter or did their entire board also sign on? And I'm kind of are is there some congruency in our concerns and kind of you know from the same song book a little bit? Yes. My uh the letter I saw was from the multi county chair's office only. Office only. Okay. And all three, I understand, are asking for the same thing, which is a delay in the vote. Okay. Not an opposition, just a delay so that we can have further conversations. So there's congruency and how or Okay, perfect. That's Thank you.

Okay. Why you looking at me like that? Yeah, I know. I know. I mean, strategically just trying to kind of understand the best way. And I I really do believe what Emily Clipper has to say about this. So, thank you. Um so, um I agree with that. So, with that, I'll turn to the clerk and call a poll unless there's any other comments. Commissioner West, I. Commissioner Helm, I. Commissioner Savis, I. Mr. Chair, I. Motion passes four to zero. Mr. Chair,

thank you, Emily. Gary, what's next? Thank you. Next is American Medical Response Northwest contract progress update. Commissioners, you asked for an update every six months on the status of the updated American Medical Response contract. You will hear that today from Mary Ramba, director of Health, Housing, and Human Services, and Kim Lacroy, public health division director. Go ahead, please.

Good morning again, uh, Chair Roberts and Commissioners. Um so we are here today to provide a progress update on the new performancebased uh ambulance franchise agreement with American medical uh response AMR which the board executed on July 31st 2025 after a very long period of time. Uh in your packet is the memo we sent to you in February. So overall implementation is progressive pro progressing appropriately for a contract of this complexity. This contract represents a significant shift from the previous agreement, moving towards stronger accountability, clinical performance measurement, financial incentives, and increased transparency. This long-term performance-based contract has multiple new operational compliance and clinical requirements, which means full imple implementation is occurring in phases. As with any contract of this scope and complexity, there is an initial ramp up uh period to build data systems, align deployment models, and validate reporting infrastructure. Staff are working actively with AMR to operationalize every provision and ensure the board's intent is fully realized. I am uh joined here today with Kim Lroy, a public health division director, who's going to provide a quick summary of the six-month status report memo. And we also have Bill Conway in the audience who is our public health emergency services manager who is available to answer any technical questions that might come up. Kim. All right. Um thank you Mary. Good morning commissioners. Um like Mary said here to provide a high level update of the contract progress to date and then answer your questions. Um so I'll start with the AMR response time compliance because I know this has been an issue in the past and is something that does um garner media attention. So, um, AMR met response time standards in all zones and codes except code three, which is the lights and sirens in urban and suburban areas in January with compliance at

86.75% and 89% respectively. Um, we do now have February data and it is showing some improvement um, with the urban code 3 missing the standard by only 2.6% in all other codes and zones meeting the 90% requirement. Um the new contract measures both response time and um clinical quality. So you may recall that the clinical quality measures are called key performance indicators and those are going to be used to determine incentive credits under the new contract and those may offset um liquidated damages incurred um for not meeting response times. Um per the contract the KPI process must be operational within nine months of the contract execution which is May 1st. Um and we are on track to meet that deadline. Um staff are starting with the development of the heart attack KPI and then the KPI for cardiac arrest, stroke and advanced airway will follow. Um we're under the underlying data and the measurement methods um have to be validated and function as intended before we can apply those incentives. Um patient rates is another complicated issue and really is indicative of financial pressures across all sectors. Um the contract allows AMR to request up to a 15% increase to address address um rising operational expenses. On January 1st, 2026, patient transport rates increased 15% from $3,480 to $4,02. Uh mileage also increased from 15 also increased 15% from $72.90 per mile to $83.84 per mile. The next opportunity for patient rate increases is in July 2026 and will occur annually beginning January 1st 2027. Um, one trend we are seeing is an increase in total calls and transport

volume. Uh, which it increased slightly for the first six months of the new contract compared to the same period one year ago. Um, this increase may be due to the primary care shortage which can lead to longer time wait times for appointments and in some cases people calling 911 because they can't access timely care. Um, our call volume would likely be higher without the nurse navigation program. Um the contract does require AMR to maintain funding for nurse navigation services which provide an appropriate resource to meet the caller's unique health care needs such as self-care instructions, ride to share to urgent or medical appointments or virtual care. Um the program does reduce the strain on the EMS system and in January alone um SECOM reported receiving 131 nurse navigation calls and 83 of those so about 63% were diverted. meaning they remained out of the EMS response system and this is a 30% increase um from this time last year. Another change in the contract was the addition of the basic life support units. Um AMR has added one BLS to their fleet. They did that in December. Um and those BLS units are sent to lower acuity incidents preserving the advanced life support units for um really serious events like a trauma or a heart attack. And then um the Hierrox River Rescue Program was implemented under the previous AMR ambulance agreement and it runs from Memorial Day to Labor Day. Uh per the new contract, this program was discontinued in September 2025. Um there have been stakeholder meetings and discussions are still in process to identify and diversify revenue to sustain this program. Um, based on our meetings, the program will likely take a riskbased approach to pay for swiftwater lifeguards on holidays and high heat index days where there's a higher risk for drowning or substance related health emergencies.

And then another program is the reach and treat the rat wilderness medical program. And under the new contract um that program um only goes through April 30th, 2026. Um, and we are collaborating with stakeholders to evaluate options for the program's future. There's lots of great ideas being generated, um, including search and rescue organizations potentially expanding capacity to provide advanced life support services in the field. And then finally, um, a grant application was submitted to the county's tourism department to support paying for the reach and treat program. Um, but our application was denied. Um, so thank you for the opportunity to provide progress and I'm happy to take questions. Right, Commissioner West.

Uh, is it correct that the High Rocks Park where there was an ambulance that would basically be parked there in case of emergency, that's a that's a Gladstone city park? Correct. Yep, that's correct. Is Gladstone looking to step up to provide that service in their own city at their own park? um they are a part of our stakeholder conversations and in those conversations are they looking to take on that additional um uh service with AMR or to fund something that provides that service? Yeah, I mean we're kind of early on in our conversations um but we are looking to um collectively find a solution to um sustain a version of the program. So they haven't agreed to it at this point?

They haven't agreed to it at this point. That's correct. Um, and I know that there would be an ambulance literally parked there and like for like nothing would ever happen, right? And so it was just a very expensive resource to provide to the to the city of Gladstone. Um, and then the the other question I have, well, I'm I'm really this has come a long ways in the last two or three years. Um the fact that we are leading the region in nurse navigation to deal with triaging and provide better care to patients that call in to 911 and then we are able to get them the appropriate care for the issue that they have. our pilot program with community paramedics and to fund those things moving forward and prioritize downstream preventions for people to have relationship and have some have eyes on them in the community to make sure that they're healthy, their healthcare needs are being met and they're not util overly utilizing 911 has helped with this. And that we changed our entire focus from not just what are the call times, but what are the clinical outcomes and being outcomebased in our approach and how and being accountable for our interventions with people that need medical care. um I think is really innovative and smart and is replicatable and it took a lot of work to get to this point. And as we see increased volume, not only are we now meeting call times or we're exceeding where we thought we were going to be, we're being much more targeted, much more surgical, much more efficient, much more patient centered in our approach. Um, and so I'm really proud of the work that Mary your team did and the decisions that this board made and it was laborious and it took a lot of meetings and it drugg on and on but um, we got there and I think AMR as a partner with us right now is ecstatic because we did that work together in good faith and honestly and productively and pragmatically we um, kind of cracked a nut that not everybody in this region's been able to do

and I'm really proud of that work. That's such good local governance. Like when you um have 911 or firsthand responders and you need them, that is an essential function of local government that we have to provide and provide. Well, this contract and the structure of it and your team, Mary, are helping us deliver that to our constituents. As a nurse and seeing how this is modeled, it's it's a 10. It's fantastic. Um and uh I know Philip was a big part of this on your team. I know not your whole team's not here, but a shout out to all of them and good good pragmatic smart local work and um I'm hearing from the firstand responders across the board. They're so happy that we took this approach and it is um all too often not done, but we did it here in Clackamus. So, thank you for that. And I hope we find resolution to the high rocks issues and the res search and rescue. there's an answer out there that is efficient and more appropriate than what we how we were utilizing the service. So, we're being good stewards of the taxpayers's dollars while finding those solutions with our partners. Um, but I think we're doing a pretty good job striking that balance with the direction we're going in. So, thank you for those continued conversations and I look forward to those updates when we find those solutions. Thank you,

Commissioner Savis. Yeah. Um, my iPad's on the fritz or it's not cooperating today. So, I'm not as prepared as I would be, but maybe um Andrew could help find this or you can direct him where. Can you show me the slide that uh best displays the uh KPIs or I guess I'll call it the outcomes versus the response times? like is it should we stay focused on response times as much as KPIs um or or what best displays that in this report?

Yeah. Well, um they're both important and the response times is in on the in the memo you have. It's the first um chart. Um I don't if you want to pull that up. Um so, you know, that shows the um response times for the different codes and for the different zones. um the KPIs um per the contract we have nine months um to develop those. So those are not um fully operational quite yet. So um when those are operational we will definitely um share both the response times and the um measurements of meeting the KPIs.

Okay. Um, and I I don't know if anyone in the room can speak to this, but I was speaking to some of our emergency responders here last week. Um, and you know, I I think I was guess I guess I was partially, you know, informed correctly that over the last several years, um, our first responders are responding to a lot of drug overdoses and things like that. And I I I had the impression that that was primarily a lot of um either house population and so forth. But I also learned um that with the changes with how opioids are distributed now and that is much harder for for just normal people that suffering through whatever it may be to even get a prescription for opioids. So now household populations, middle class, you know, it's not a class issue any longer that there's now people that are seeking out illicit medications because there's not a practical way of getting them. and um and some and so now as I'm again I'm talking to some folks um out on the west side of the region uh in particular that the um uh demands uh are again not just the houseless but also that new population for that. So would I want to look at from that standpoint and knowing that there's a number of remedies for that a naron and in all these different remedies how is that how do you foresee that being displayed in a measurement that is either saving dollars or getting responses um if or if or if not there's adequate response time. I mean, I guess I'm looking at the intersection between response times and u and maybe who the provider is. Is there, you know, when that is displayed? You mentioned nine months. So, um uh I I'd love to

understand that intersection a little bit better. Yeah, I mean I we're in the process of developing those KPIs. So I think that is definitely something that we can consider um how to address um the intersection of opioid use and um response times um and um we can keep you updated but we can make an effort to definitely um consider that in the development of those KPIs. Okay. You know I noticed in in the like it's actually right here on this page actually there it is. you know, we are have a probably a rightful focus to have for heart attack and cardiac arrest and those are immediate needs, but obviously if someone is having an o overdoses um that's you know Ben, you live that world.

Um you know that's something that has to be treated ASAP or or we lose people. I just to chime in I do I don't know if that would also fall under advanced airway because often what's happening when you have the opioid you're you're stop it stops you from breathing and so that's the issue. So, I don't know if that is also kind of covered in the um KPI priorities. Yeah, I think I will defer that one to Bill, our expert. You want to come up? I'll I'll

guess I will be looking forward to nine or three months from now or six months from now when we get that next report, you know, when those KPIs are, you know, in place. So, uh, Bill Conway, Office of Public Health Emergency Services. Um, nice to see you. Uh, so the the KPI we developed, we worked with our, uh, EMS medical directors to develop the the KPI that were um I don't want to say most meaningful, but the most um u give us the most bang for our buck, the ones that were complex that really would uh affect patient outcomes. Uh, so those are the four that we chose. again with EMS medical direction choosing those um the the intersection I'm not quite sure I understand your question completely but the intersection with opioids um uh I guess yeah I guess I'm I'm going to ask a little more clarification on what you mean by the intersection between the KPI and

well I guess when I said mention intersection if I misspoke I'm sorry but the intersection between um you know the the KPI and the response times you know is is that the right you you know, which one would we look at in in that category of opioid overdose or something like that? Um, is that different than it's going to be for cardiac arrest? You know, I don't know, right? Um, knowing that Narcan is carried by um a number of people, whereas if you have cardiac cardiac arrest, you need to be transported at which is a different so to speak an intersection in my terms today here contextually.

Yeah, that makes sense. So, the uh the way we're set up now, so I'll back up just a second. So data shows that ambulance response times don't affect patient outcomes except for a a small subsection of EMS calls. What does affect patient outcomes is getting a paramedic on scene regardless of the piece of equipment they're on. Right.

That's why we partner with our first responders who the majority of the fire departments we have in Clakamus County are advanced life support. That's why we partner with them to get an a paramedic on scene as quickly as possible. So, um, so they carry Narcan, right? We we public access Narcan. We work on that from a lot of different fronts as far as the opioid issue goes and opioid response. Um, but it's that that isn't really a KPI. Yes, it's important to get an ambulance there if they need to be transported. When if we're just talking opioids, but what's really important is to get get an ALS paramedic there on scene to give the Narcan, control the airway and and take care of the patient.

That answer your question. Sort of. Yeah, sort of. I I'll have more come, you know, when when we have the plan fully developed. I guess it sounds like three to six months, right? Yeah. Yeah. All right. Thank you, Commissioner. One question or provide some clarification for me. And this is was my understanding I think in some of the earlier conversations is that when you look at the arrival time when they arrive on scene right which we're looking at um that if and maybe you can talk about this is if fire arrives first that's considered the time then right no it's not so it's actually the time AMR arrives on scene the ambulance arrives and the wheel stop. Okay. Okay. Wanted to be clear on that. So

um thank you on that. And then the other point I wanted to make kind of following up on Commissioner West's comment on the other side of the river is Oregon City. Um, and so I know uh, Mayor McGriff, we've had conversations about it too and um, wanting to do that, but I also want to kind of speak out to the unincorporated part of the county and during hot summer times uh, you know, we had two to 300 people going down the river at one particular spot. They'd start from Barton into Carver. they wouldn't even make it to High Rocks, right? So, I would just say a shout out to that. Uh the entire river is very busy. Um that is one portion and uh uh we often forget how often fire and AMR responds in the other areas as well. So, I know we're having those conversations as we move forward. So, again, thank you both for your hard work. This is very informative and uh we appreciate uh you coming today. So, with that, we'll go ahead and move on. Gary, what's next?

Thank you. Thank you. Next is another preview of your business meeting for this Thursday. Public land corner fee public hearing preview. Jeff, assistant county council will present.

Yes. Hello. What we have on for the business meeting is a ordinance, a first reading of an ordinance to amend an ordinance that was first adopted in 1997 when the legislature passed a bill that would allow for us to charge for a fee and for the creation of the public land corner preservation fund. This is basically maintenance when work to restore, find, locate, and to preserve these survey markers essentially. And so by statute, this fee has been set at $10 since 1997. And the recent amendments in 2025 and HB 3175 allowed the board to set that fee by resolution, which is how we set our fees across the county every year. So this this first reading of the a of the ordinance would amend the 1997 ordinance to allow the fee to be set by resolution. also added in an emergency clause because the second reading we have tenatively scheduled for this is on April 2nd and so 90 days after that would be July 1st which is when the new fees need to be effective and those fees will be presented to you then in June for all the different county departments. So pretty simple change to the ordinance but if happy to answer any questions. Any questions? Seeing none, it looks like this will be on our public hearing a vote on our business meeting this Thursday, March 12th. Correct.

Correct. All right. Uh well, with that, we'll go ahead and move on. And thank you, Mr. Muns. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Next. Advisory Board and Commission appointments. Andrew, go ahead, please. Mr. Chair, the Community Health Council staffed by the Health, Housing, and Human Services Department has one open position due to a term expiration. The applicant fills a seat specifically reserved for health centers services consumer representation. The recommendation is as follows. Jerome Donz to a second term ending February of 2028. The board could select other candidates or require further recruitment. Mr. Chair. Thank you, Andrew. Any questions or comments? See none. May I have a motion?

I move to appoint Jerome Dalmas to the community health council. Second. All right. Commissioner Helm has moved to appoint Jerome Dnas to the community health council. Commissioner Savas is seconded. Any further discussion? Seeing none, clerk, would you please call the poll? Commissioner West. I. Commissioner Helm, I. Commissioner Savis, I. Mr. Chair, I. Motion passes four to zero. Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Andrew. Gary, what's next? Next review of your board business meeting agenda for this Thursday, March 12th, 2026 at 10 a.m. You will have a full agenda, public communication, housing authority consent agenda that you preview today. Two presentations. The first on the Metro Supportive Housing Services fiscal year 2025 regional report. You have this every year and these are your representatives on that committee that will present to you. And a business spotlight video this time on Stumptown Coffee. You'll have two public hearings. The first is on the public land corner that you just heard about. And the second is on the county internal audit code changes that you had a policy session about last week. You have a consent agenda for the board of county commissioners and the development agency. If you have any questions on any of these items, if you'll please let me know and I'll answer them for you or have staff in the room Thursday to answer them for you. The final item today is commissioner communications chair.

All right. Thank you, Gary. and we're going to be back here, Ministry of Issues and Updates at 1:30. Um, so we're going to be back here pretty quick. So, I'll turn it over if you have a maybe a short comment. I'll start with you, Commissioner Sabis.

Uh, no comment in particular. Um, considering Syd um is now behind us. Um and just uh reflecting back on the last two some odd three two three years of work trying to get some things across the finish line. Some of which we did, some of which we have not. And um challenges that are facing the region. Um recent discussions about economic development have have reached um uh all corners of the state. it seems at least from a governmental standpoint from the governor's office all the way down to our region um where you know whether it's C4 or whether it is um at at metro level or you know uh regionally I know that commissioner Helm and I have both been in involved in conversations about economic development. So, I expect that to be a big deal going forward as as well as um which gives me some pause. Land use uh issues or bills that'll be before us that uh um in 2027 that um give me concern and that is that you know I think I mentioned this before 15 years ago I was schooled that you know thou shalt not bring anything land use to the state legislature. Sorry, we don't do land use and now we're doing land use. So, it's not that we didn't do it 15 years ago. So much that is that what I have seen thus far has been um absent deep thought strategy funding to make it successful. And our staff are seem to be responding, our community seems to be responding to not well-baked, wellthoughtout policies that are funded, that are functional. And I think sometimes they're presumed that you know that that infrastructure will just be there you know and I just want to remind just one simple example just one reminder and that is that um whether

you're a water district or you're a utility or you're a city county and we use we use um Portland State University's um uh growth rate to calculate out what capacities we need far as roads, water, sewer. So we have an expectation and we plan it. We spend millions of dollars collectively on all these plans that are calculating when we need water capacity, when we need more of this based on those those growth rates. And now we're in a world where might as well just throw that all out the window. Now it's artificial growth rates that are being, you know, mandated down because of the housing emergency. So now we're seeing mandates to build housing in areas that was not foreseen maybe for 30 years. we be at a level of maybe building that much. So, we're stressing um our systems are stressed all over and our communities and some of the cities that lost their um independence via their their charter and home rule now can't um you know adequately calculate or continue to build or maintain the city they once thought would be you know on land use zoning that we'll do this here, we'll do that there and now everything's going to be kind of mixed together. And again, the pipes were p put to the ground years ago um in anticipation that they won't need any more pipes because the homes are there. Um so all to say, it's a long-winded uh kind of a long-winded um observation that um we're going to have a very difficult year next year, I think, on on talking this through. And I think the better prepared we are as counties and cities to tackle this, the better off we are. And again, I I think there's for the most part, you know, uh an overwhelming amount of support to build housing. I want to make sure that's clear and to meet the demand. But we need to find a way how it's going to be all going to be funded. And we can't forget that the pipes in the ground and the infrastructure is a critical part.

That's just not building the house or the apartment or the cottage cluster. It's all of it combined. So, Chair, that's all I have for today. All right. Thank you, Commissioner West. Um, thank you, chair. Uh, I just just a little reflection as we've come through two legislative sessions. We had a long session, we just finished the short session. Uh, I think Clackamus County fared very well actually in both those sessions.

One of the things that we haven't talked about in a while, but if you reflect just as like it was like yesterday is tolling was looming over this county. Um, we've heard from businesses of all sizes and community members. um across the spectrum about how tolling would have devastated our local communities and economy, especially right here on I205. And there was an aggressive scheme to um to all the existing it seems highways and byways in the state and spec es especially in the metro area. And there have been some some standout um electeds in the region that said no to tolling in an unwaveringly way. They just were steadfast in its no. You know, we do talk a lot about how this board stepped up with its local communities to um fight that tolling scheme and but this board did not always have a principal stance on it. It wasn't that long ago and we were facing HB3055 in 2021 that the majority of the Clackamus County Commissioners voted to support that horrendous piece of legislation that actually put tolling in concrete statute so they could move forward. Um and then it a lot of heroics had to happen a lot as we know now uh to remove that language from statute and it was a big local fight and I want to just thank Commissioner Savas because he was always the spearhead of that fight um and with the cities and his collaboration and uh we may not be having the same conversation around that David and Goliath moment if it wasn't for Commissioner Savas's leadership. I know I campaigned against it and I was always steadfast in that. I never took any votes that were even remotely close to tolling though the pressure was intense. But I do want to and I know Commissioner Helm, even as a citizen, you were very

much like absolutely not. I mean, you knew as a business owner the impact it would have on the region. Um, and so I just want to just have that that reflect on that legislative win. But that didn't happen without Clacamus County at the forefront and with pragmatic leaders that even at times knew when to stand up against his own board to say no, this is this is ridiculous. You can go back and watch the video. It's a little bit of a clown car how that vote went down to support 3055. But the majority of that board did support it and it was to the detriment of Clacamus County and the transportation infrastructure moving forward here and to our local communities and businesses and we shouldn't forget that. So, I also say that because today they're going to hear legal arguments on the states um at the state on the no gas tax. Now, we call it the nose gas tax because it's a little simpler to say than no gas tax, no payroll tax, and no vehicle registration fee increases. But the transportation packs are kind of now titled the no gas tax. Um, but uh right now as of the 12th, you have to be able to have your opposition or your support statement into the Secretary of State. Now, I don't know how or you have to pay a $1,200 fee. You know, you had to gather 500 signatures, get them verified, and or pay a $1,200 fee to be able to constitutionally speak your mind in the voter pamphlet to get that statement in. Unfortunately, the legislature blew through its own timeline in that given by the Secretary of State and now that constitutionally protected speech has been um thorted. You can't do that now. There is no time. And so we are they're hearing and there's other issues around the the it being referred to the May ballot and not to the November ballot. There's constitutional concerns, but that big issue is being heard right now. My

concern is is there's so much animosity and ill will towards any taxes right now, specifically because of how this gas tax has been handled by the legislature and the governor, that we are not the only local government facing the fact that essential levies and bonds and referendums at the local level may go down in defeat because of this sentiment of the voters and how they're just feeling a little bit marginalized and overt taxed. and that could have a ripple effect that impacts local communities and they pushed it once again back on the local guys like us because it wasn't politically convenient for them. So, it's gonna and then there's a federal court being heard this week, too. So, there's two lawsuits that we all know about. So, we'll be watching those closely um to see how that impacts like our own police levy, which is a major force of our funding for law enforcement, which we prioritize here. But some of that fight also regarding how we're doing the that transportation bill and the and those fees and costs and taxes pushed on to businesses and hardworking families. A lot of that fight once again came from the local level. Um and a lot of that fight came from Clakamus County and our own legislators and our partnership with the legislators. So there's more to watch, but I I I think we've had a lot of wins. We've got essential funding for important recovery infrastructure. Um, we have heard over and over again how Clackamus County through the even the legislative session has really been a pragmatic, stable, respected governing body in the region and with the legislature and with the governor's office. Um, we've been principled, but we've been professional. We've worked well together. Uh, so I I just I just think that like when we do as die, it's good to kind of take stock of how we got to this point, but a lot has happened. I know commissioner's office was like, "Oh my gosh, in 5 years, can you believe what we've accomplished if you just if you just do the ticker? It's a lot." Um, and so I just wanted to take a second as

in our comments today to reflect on that and then um really thank those of us elected officials. Um, I don't need to thank myself, but everyone else and including our mayors and our cities that said, you know, the mayor of West Lynn was an absolute stud in that fight. Mayor Joe Buck was not just that fight, but Mayor Joe Buck on the housing and homelessness and recovery infrastructure and and supporting us moving forward. Mayor Ellis, we have um uh the other cities, Oregon City also was a good partner. So, um and and and all the rest, but I just want to take a minute to give them all a shout out and just say, you know, we've done really good local work here for our community. I hope I hope they see that.

All right. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner H.

Um thank you. I um I want to say too that uh I want to thank our PGA team for uh their help and especially Trent uh for um the farm it was called the farm stand bill. It's now the farm store bill. Um because this piece of legislation actually gives a playbook to our our egg uh business owners. Um, and when I testified, I did say that it's it's not a perfect bill, but it's a good starting point and we can tweak it as we go along. But it was done um with everybody at the table, which made me feel really good that it was it was uh a good buy in. I know it was controversial, but I'm really pleased that it that it passed kind of at the very last minute. Um, as to land use, um, yes, it's been a real touchy subject and as you know, um, we say this a lot, time is money and we we have to address a very severe problem in our state about land use. Um, our our state land use laws are antiquated. Um, they were great 50 years ago. right now they're hindering um uh all of us in our ability to build when we need to build and how we need to build. And I hear from builders constantly that that is one of the biggest problems. Um the second one they bring up too is um the permitting pro process. So um that is also something I'm working on, but we need to be able to pivot faster. You know, government runs so slow as as Commissioner West said. you know, one we we kick the can down the road a lot, but we we we learned to pivot quickly during co so we know it can be done. So, um I think we need to work on these things to kind of get things done faster. I know it's one of the biggest frustrations about government is how long things

take, but I think we need to press and um the faster we get these homes built, the the quicker it will level out th those prices so people can actually afford to move into a home. So, um a lot of things good things we're working on. Um I'm late for my 11:30 meeting, so I'll quit talking now, but I'll I'll uh I'll go back to you. I I did get to sneak away and see my granddaughter this weekend. So, that was that was a highlight of my weekend.

Uh my comments are going to be pretty short. I just want to say um just tell you a little story and and and it kind of comes back to seniors and um anyway um a senior who's 96 years old u recently passed away this last week and his wife who's also 96 and I thought this was a very touching story that um every day he would give his wife four kisses on the forehead for giving him four kids. Oh. And um anyway, uh she gave him four kisses on his foreheads shortly before he passed. Wow.

And the thing that kind of uh constantly I hear, you know, and now this family's in a need for some assistance as far as uh helping with a spouse, right? And inh home care, whatever that. And I just want to reiterate that that our population is aging and I really believe it's incumbent on upon us to kind of help guide some of these seniors that are looking for that service that they need. I I passed on the information that we have for aging uh seniors and um but um I I really feel that that's such an important service, you know, to make sure that we're helping uh our our seniors as they age. So that's just one of my uh big hopes that we continue to do that. Um so this will conclude our administrator issues and updates. Thanks everyone for joining us this morning and we'll be right back here at 1:30 for our policy session.

Well, good afternoon everyone and welcome to this afternoon session of the board of county commissioners. It's March 10th, 2026. County Administrator Gary Schmidt, would you please call the role? Yes. Online, Commissioner Savis, you're muted. Commissioner here. Thank you. In the room, Commissioner Helm here. Chair Roberts here. All right. Thank you, Gary. Want to introduce our first item for today.

Thank you. You do have a quorum present. The other two commissioners will be here shortly. The first policy session today is file ZDO-293 minor comprehensive plan and ZDO amendments update. Presenting is the team from transportation and development, Dan, director. Jennifer Hughes, planning division director. Go ahead, please.

Uh thank you so much, uh Chair Roberts and commissioners. Um as a part of our annual work program with the planning department, our long range planning department, uh we bring forward uh this package of minor amendments uh that we're looking to advance forward. Uh we came to the board on December of 2nd of 2025. Um at that time at that policy session you gave us guidance to move forward with the amendments. There was a request I believe it was from Commissioner Savas uh to come back one more time uh before these were advanced. So we are here to kind of one refresh you on these topics number one and then answer any additional questions you might have. So with that I'll Jennifer Hughes our planning director take it over from there. Thanks. Hi.

Good morning. Good afternoon. Yes, I'm Jennifer Hughes again to to repeat what Gary already said. I'm the planning director and um we when we talked to you in December, we explained that um these minor and time-sensitive amendments fell into kind of three broad categories related to state mandates. So obviously we don't have a lot of choice on those, but we do need to update our code to be consistent with state law. Some staff recommended changes and one request from the public. The current schedule for moving forward uh would be to send notice in early April to have a planning commission hearing on May 11th and then we don't have a board hearing scheduled yet, but we're hoping potentially for June. So after today, assuming nothing changes, we would move forward with uh trying to schedule that. I do want to be clear that the package of draft code amendments that you have today is not the full scope of what you'll see in a hearing packet. um we tend to come forward with a whole lot of paper with these types of minor amendments because we have to make a lot of kind of small changes to multiple sections of the code. So what we've tried to give you today are the substantive provisions that reflect the discussion items that you had at your last policy session. Uh let's see. Um the items that really led to board of county commissioners discussion last time related to the Wamtt River Greenway proposal the uh climate and friendly equitable communities off streetet parking requirement and uh requirements and then there was a question regarding some changes that staff wanted to make regarding setbacks and so I'll kind of focus my discussion um on those three. First, with regard to setbacks, uh I think the question we got last time really related to whether we were talking about changing minimum setbacks from property lines and um in considering this package, no, we've decided not to move forward with changes to actual distances. We do think that ultimately uh in a subsequent package of amendments, we probably will need to

make some changes in that regard. you know, kind of spoiler alert, there's going to be another package coming later in 2026 to deal with some state um housing legislation and really some code cleanup that we need to make to to make our code function better. But as part of this project, we're focused on um something that's a little more um technical, I guess, than the actual distances. And that really is how do we figure out where the property lines are for purposes of measuring setbacks. That seems like it would be really easy. uh it is if it's a straightforward kind of rectangular lot, but as many of you know, a lot of our lots don't look like that anymore. And so with a lot of the infill, unusual shapes, private access, fire turnarounds, flag lots, all of those things, it's sometimes harder than it should be to figure out where the front property line is. And we spend a lot of time that isn't very well spent, frankly, trying to figure that out. And applicants struggle with it. So the idea here is to really just clear that up which would be done through a bunch of changes to our definition section and we have given you kind of our first draft. There will continue to be a little bit of cleanup done to that before we actually um bring it forward for hearing. So that's with regard to setbacks. Uh the second issue that you discussed last time related to the Wammer River Greenway, there are two proposals related to that um overlay zone that we have. One relates to docks. Um, some of you will remember that our dock provisions currently pre actually prohibit docks in two specific sections of the river. As this the worksheet discusses, um, our staff did some analysis and concluded there's almost no impact to removing that prohibition because 38 out of 41 lots um that have houses on them already have docks. So, we're really prohibiting three people from doing what all their neighbors have already been able to do. So that would be our proposal is to remove that prohibition. In addition, you had a request from Wamut View to remove the 35- foot height limit in the highdensity residential zone within the greenway.

And so staff is proposing to advance that. And then finally, with regard to the climate friendly and equitable communities parking standards, this is something that the board has had a lot of concern about over the last couple of years, and that is that the state is requiring that we change the way we deal with uh off streetet parking requirements in the urban area. There are a couple of approaches that are provided, but the only one that really proved realistic for the county was to remove the uh minimum off- streetet parking requirements in the urban growth boundary. We have been applying that automatically out of state law for some time now which creates really some administrative difficulties for our staff and for our customers. So the proposal is to actually update our code to be consistent with state law in that regard. And with that I'd be happy to take any questions.

All right. Any questions? I see Commissioner West.

Oh my or my mic. Uh thank you chair. Um, when I look at like, can we go scroll? Can you Andrew? Can you scroll back up to where we're talking about flag lot? It's a 1980 lot. Thank you. When I look at this, um, according to the packet in 1980 when I was a toddler, um, it, uh, looks like it was much more uniform in how we would do things. Lot sizes were probably also larger in the county. And some of the feedback I hear back from citizens, I know we need to be flexible and that I think that gets us here, but some of the feedback I hear is that, and I've seen this in the neighborhood I grew up in, Portland, is that it has just become so dense. Um, and any lot you can build almost anything on to have some type of little like um row houses that all kind of look the same or kind of stack people on top of each other. Um, is are we running a little bit of risk of becoming too dense and our and how we and not allowing people just to have a little space, a little breathing room within reason. Does this make us start to look a little bit more like the neighborhoods in Portland, which the character has changed in North Portland from where I grew up? And I know Clackamus County is not North Portland. Um, but by making almost any lot buildable, I know we have a housing crisis, too, but where's that balance? I don't know, with allowing us to make sure that in this county, I feel like people want to have just a little elbow room and are we kind of making it harder for that to happen moving forward by our um zoning? Okay. So, um, sorry, that's kind of a big question and I guess I will say with regard to this package specifically, I don't think what we're proposing to do is going to change that balance. Um, but your point about the fact that we need

to make these setback changes because of the changes in, you know, lot design and infill. I mean, yes, there has been a movement over the years to be more flex flexible in terms of what we permit. I think the county is pretty restricted now in our ability to kind of roll that back. um the the um politics of the moment anyway coming from the state are moving in the direction of being denser with all of the allowances for middle housing and the county doesn't have a choice, right? We're allowing duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, s single room occupancies and more and more of that comes with every piece of legislation that they pass. So, um yeah, I think

well, we look at this also in the city of Wilsonville when they passed House Bill 2001. Wilsonville already has more multi-unit um housing than single family residents. More than 50% of Wilsonville is apartments, attached housing, middle housing, things like that. Um and far exceeding the state's goals, but the the state said, "We still know better than local government." And took the ability for local communities to plan accordingly as they see fit where they live. and they centralize that decision away within state statute, taking it away from cities here in Clackamus County. We're never having the conversation though about let's modernize our restrictive land use laws that contribute to supply and demand and restrictive urban growth boundaries and making sure that, you know, future generations have the ability to maybe have a little breathing room of their own. We are land rich. That's the truth. We're not land poor. And so I mean I don't really want to look at this because it's kind of going down the same pathway that's tonedeaf to voters around wanting to be able to have more access to more land all housing types, but we're kind of starting to double down on policies that make us look a little bit like the neighborhood I grew up in that doesn't any longer look like the neighborhood I grew up in. It just looks a little bit stack them and pack them. So, I don't know. Like, I want I want us to deal with the housing crisis, but we're like nibbling around the edges here and skirting around these these edges. We're not actually dealing with core issues. And let's be honest, that's the state legislature working with local governments to modernize our land use. That's that's what it is. Um, and I think that also makes us more attractive to real estate investors. You know, we all know we rank 80th out of 81 in urban cities, in urban areas right now. That's, you know, unfortunate. when we 10 10 years ago we were number we're in

the top 10. So this is just ID this is just like fundamentally going in the the same direction. Um now practically does it do we have to do this and do that at the same time? I don't know where I'm going to fall on this but I am concerned that this is still just doing the same old thing without actually solving the problem.

All right and we have Commissioner Savis. Go ahead. Yeah. Well, um this parking issue uh is where off- streetet parking uh in order to get into compliance with the state is going to be the requirement is going to reduce the requirement. So therefore, there'll likely be less parking, less off- streetet parking, and um as a consequence, um there will be um less future spaces for people to charge their vehicles, for electric chargers. There'll be less space for people to park their cars. Um, and I would say that there's a number of conflicting policies, state level policies. Um, and locally, um, a lot of these things are predicated that there's this robust transit system in place,

right? And there is not a robust transit system in place. And here we are, we have a, you know, the largest transit agency in the state which is contracting and not expanding. Uh there have been some of these highdensity facilities built and guess what the transit's not showing up. So what do we do about that? I mean we can't just add it back later, right? if so I I I don't know what we do about that other than say um you know put a provision in there knowing it's probably not going to align with state law and then um try to defend it or do we take the state on and say this is not practical. There needs to be a a a whether it's a threshold requirement or an established baseline amount of transit that's guaranteed. Uh we can't build communities that don't work. And there's a number of areas where you drive down the street, all you see are parked cars. No way, no way can anyone charge their cars because there's no charging stations. We're just conflicted. So I I struggle with this one. Um because I I don't think we're being honest with ourselves. I mean, obviously we're talking about it, but when I say we're being honest with ourselves, put a plan in place that we know isn't can come to fruition. This is where I struggle. So, I don't know. I don't know who to put on the spot. Not that I want to put anyone on the spot, but is there should we just not comply and deal with the deal with that challenge from the state

or should we take this head on and you know uh um ramp up that concern into the 2027 legislative session? I need help here. That's the question. You just answered your own question. It's a discussion to have at the 2027 legislative session. um these have been these have been adopted and the difficult position that we're placed in

and I and I hear the passion and I hear the concern and you and I have had a lot of talks about this. This is really awkward when you're not in the room. It's like we're having this discussion. Um um but the the dialogue is around the fact that we are mandated by the state to do these changes and we talked about all the pros and cons of the other options that were there that really weren't feasible and now we're to the point where we have put we have put our staff in a position where our code conflicts with state law. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Correct.

Um, which we which essentially creates a position where state law supersedes this our local requirement and makes makes it difficult for not only staff but it also makes it difficult for the citizens we serve from a development perspective. If there is a change that needs to be made, it needs to be a part of a legislated effort to revise or amend those those requirements.

Well, yeah. Well, thanks for that and I you know I you know I don't have heart burger with any of you. You all we all understand what the situation is. So there's no hard feelings uh you know anywhere in the room here. Um it's it's just really what what do we do? I don't want to say you know approve this and and align perfectly with state law knowing it's not going to work. um uh because first of all it doesn't give us any motivation to fix it other than you know if there is direction from the board to fix it but at the same token is um uh I I don't want to have to go back and change it um to unwind something that we already did. I think to me I think we would be responsible in a way in a in a in a different way if we allowed that to happen and everything came true. There's no transit. It doesn't work. there's not enough parking, there's upset people. We created a community that doesn't work. And I I I feel responsible for that. So, I I don't want to, you know, whether I I put a stake in the ground or I don't vote for this today because of this particular issue, um or we all not vote for it because of this particular issue, but somehow if we don't take the initiative, um and and point this out, um I think we're doing a disservice to our community.

All right. Thank you, uh Commissioner Helm. Um, I agree with both commissioners West and uh, Savas. I I am inclined to push back um, because I think it might take push back for the legislature to become aware of how contradictory some of their laws are for our communities. Um when cottage clusters uh the first cottage cluster I will call it experiment happened in Happen Happy Valley. Um these ended up being $1,000 a square foot. These little tiny buildings were $1,000 a square foot crammed onto this one lot with no parking. Uh even on the street there was no parking. Um and it's not affordable homes for sure. It's they're they're they're not targeting uh an affordable home clientele. So I what we're creating and I was see I was at the bank the other day nice young man teller that's helping me and asked what I did. We started chatting and he says can't they just build a good starter home somewhere like we started in when we were younger that has a backyard that has a place for us to grow and I don't want to live in a big box. He goes, "You know, everything that is considered affordable now is just a big box." And I get it, right? They're they're just starting out. They're young families. And um I agree. Our state land use laws need to be uh updated a lot and quickly.

Um this is this is really kind of been the biggest um thing that I think we have to we have to push back on. So, I'm inclined to uh not get on board with this just because I I want there to be a wakeup call at the state level and maybe it takes us breaking the rules in order to bring it to their attention. You see what I mean? I I don't I don't like to break the law, but I also Yeah. Go ahead. No, I know. I know.

Um we've got council in the room. I want to make sure we're clear. We we are mandated by state law to implement that and there are decisions I mean we can have a broader discussion around how we do and do do not do this but we are implementing these standards although that's a different discussion than revising our code right um and that's separate so that's the kind of we're trying to bring our code the code is just aligning with state laws which we don't agree with correct well it appears to be that which we don't agree with right okay so where does that put us all right Martha has a comment

which was going to be my question what do Do we have any legal options to push back on this Billy in terms of saying, "Well, this isn't going to work for our communities. I mean, they probably have to write them. You're probably going to have to put them into effect with I suspect, right?" But or at least get them down on paper, but can we as a commission somehow push back and legally and say this isn't going to work? That's something I would want uh one of the lawyers who specializes in land use to look at. I mean beyond voting which is probably the most viable push back but how you go about doing that whether it's here at the

disor you're you're these are great questions that I ask myself about just every subject that falls under the jurisdiction of the state of Oregon but I don't mean to be a complete pessimist um but that's something we can look at do some research church at least at least have a push back. I mean, do we is this essential that we vote on this today folks in order for you to move forward? We just have you move forward and then we write I don't know and you're not voting today. This is just just to look at it again. Okay. Okay. Right. So, we have time to push back in terms of correct.

And I guess I want to play out just briefly just so you're aware I'm not Caleb. Um yeah. Um but how this would play out is essentially let's say we got direction from our board to ignore state law and apply our current standards. We would we would essentially apply those that decision would get appealed here. Prior to either our hearings officer or to LUBA then LUBA would Oh, Caleb just walk in the room. Hey, somebody speaking.

Um if I get this wrong, Caleb, come on up. Um uh essentially what would happen then is it would get appealed to to to use Board of Appeals. Board of Appeals would look at state statute and state requirements, look at our code, find out that our code was inconsistent with state law. They would overturn it, remand it back to us to make sure it was done consistent with state law. And that's kind of that difficult circle that we're kind of in. It's it's just a challenge on uh and there's a complexity associated with it. Not like I said, not only for staff, but also for the citizens that look at our code. So, all right. Um Caleb, we have a hot seat over here next to Mr. Williams, if you'd come on up. And well, he's coming up. You know, one of the things I just kind of want to comment on it. I think that um boy, I talk about a hot topic with parking and how it can really um cause a lot of problems down the road. And um and I'm just going to use an example kind of again, I kind of unfortunately go back to my sheriff's office days and there was one particular area in Wilsonville that everybody was upset over. uh a huge development, no off- streetet parking, people would park in every imaginable way. And then it suddenly turned into like an enforcement action because they and it was it still is to this day. I even the traffic getting through there. And so um I I you know I understand the idea of using transit, but there a lot of times they're just flat isn't that availability. And so, um, I I, uh, with my colleagues do have concerns about, um, uh, putting in a a a development with not adequate parking and what it would do to the surrounding community. And so, I'm just like you said, I saw this word in here, which you've said, Dan, it said mandated by various legislation, which to me, as I interpret the law, usually says you must do it. But that's why Caleb's here. So,

um, maybe kind of giving us some guidance on maybe the best way to move forward. One of the the questions is is, you know, adopting this, um, and and really kind of putting us in a corner that we can't make these changes. Um, so I guess that's I'm looking at you to kind of get some help.

Um, I Dan may have covered some of it. I was in transit when he was talking. Um there's a state statute that says when the legislature amends uh the land use statutes or when the state land use agency adopts or amends rules related to land use we have to uh adopt them into our code and if we don't adopt them into our code uh they apply anyways and if we apply our own code without those provisions adopted in and it gets appealed to Luba Luba can remand it saying you were required to apply these state law provisions even though you didn't adopt them into your code or if Luba determines that we applying our code without the state standards did not have jurisdiction did not have discretion to deny the application or whatever it is uh luba can slap us with attorney fee awards uh for the applicant in the applicant's favor if it relates to housing and we didn't have discretion to deny it applying state standards in addition if we don't comply with that state statute saying local governments shall uh adopt state land use statutes and LCDC rules into their codes. Uh LCDC can begin uh an enforcement proceeding uh and at the end of that proceeding could issue an enforcement order and the result of that enforcement order could be withholding state shared revenues from the county until we adopt state law into our local codes.

State law is structured such that we don't have discretion to say thank you state, we're not going to do that. Uh so we're going to council's opinion is is to go with staff's recommendation on this. Okay. Uh, Commissioner West, you're next. Um, is this an unfunded mandate? Um, I don't think it's un it's not really an unfunded mandate in the sense that it doesn't cost us anything to remove the parking requirements other than just the legislative action. It's not mandating that we sort of provide new services or just the quality of life, but it's a it's a mandate. Just the quality of life of Clinus County residents. Exactly. That's what it's about. That seems like a giant cost.

Yeah. Um, this is so Portland, right? Like this le this this this policy is so Portland. Um, it's also ripe with propaganda and buzzwords like climate friendly equitable communities. I'd like to know for who. Um, you know, it it does nothing to address any climate issues. the parking in Milwaukee. Um, it is just ideologically driven without pragmatism and balance for the people who have to live through this policy and it's mandated from the the marble palace down in Salem. Um, I find it infuriating uh that they know how to build um our local communities better than we do and taking that local control away and they don't have the same skin in the game um in Portland and across the state or up and down, you know, the all the different regions of the state than we do and they don't know our neighbors better than we do. And um uh to sit here and look at I mean this language is almost Orwellian, you know, to make you feel good about a bad policy that makes your community less livable. And it's the same crap that has gotten Portland and Oregon where it is today. It's the same garbage. And I thank you, Caleb, for your your legal counsel. I have the right as a commissioner whether to get to accept or not accept it. I'm voting no on this out of principle. Um, and I think we should look for a legislative fix with other partners in the region and speak to AOC to see if we can have some more local control back on this and make something more reasonable and maybe something buys us a little time. And I'm just not going to be threatened to be able to abdicate my role as somebody who cares about my community more than the the legislature does. So, it's a no. We know it's bad

policy. I'm not going to be pushed into something that is bad for Clakamus and this is all right. Thank you. The staff have light on just one other detail. Oh, go ahead. I'm sorry. I wanted to mention is that when these CFC rules were adopted, the county participated in a in a legal challenge to those rules with a number of other jurisdictions. We had our day in court as to whether or not those rules were valid and the court said all but just a few of them were valid and LCDC has since amended the ones that weren't valid. So that we we had that day in court argued these were no good and the court said you got to do it anyways. That's all I can say. Interesting. So Commissioner Shrader's up next.

Yeah. Well, first of all, I'm impressed you mentioned Orwell 1984 the book. I know you did.

You don't do that in school anymore, but I had to read it. as a librarian, I must say I'm very impressed with George Orwell. Um, so yeah, we have a dilemma. It seems to me that one of the solutions is that we're going to really have to start dogging land use uh as one of our legislative priorities, I would say. Uh, because I think these kind of went under the radar screen. I don't think we did I don't think we did have it as a priority of tracking land use changes this short session but it may be that we get a little more proactive particularly when these kinds of things are coming down and and um think about having our PGA staff start tracking uh what's been happening. Um what you've said Caleb is that during the rule making that's when we get our chance to do the push back. We did the push back. We got a few things but not everything. Um, is there a time frame the state puts on this for us to implement or change it?

Is there like like by this drop dead date you're toast kind of a thing going on? Yeah, the they did it was phased in. It's already all completely in effect. So, we're not requiring parking now because we can't. Yeah. It's just our code is inconsistent with what we're actually doing, which is what's creating the confusion. Yeah.

And we are finding just, you know, as I guess an FYI, that people are still providing parking, but potentially not as much as they would have in every case. And of course, it doesn't mean that they will continue to do that. So, I can't I can't certainly promise that that's going to continue to be the case. And then the other push back would be from folks like the homebuilders or realtors who want to sell homes and build homes and maybe the parking isn't as big a concern. Do you see what I'm saying here too? You're going to have to balance that tension between folks who say, "Well, hey, I don't have to put this much parking in." So, you know, yeah, it's going to impact the livability, but it's going to make the cheaper for people to, you know, it's it's it's a real morass we're in. So I would strongly suggest that during a long legislative session we add land use is something that we take a look at the bills and have more knowledge at least. I don't know if we can fix this. I doesn't sound like we can either we can be recalcitrant and you'll probably have to implement it anyway and we just say we're not going to put in our code right now. But you know that's not going to matter is it? You still have to follow.

Not from a practical standpoint but it's just really hard to Yeah. It makes it hard. It'd be a a grand, you know, it'd be us saying no, but with no outcome at this point that would affect what again the livability of the neighborhoods. That's the dilemma we're facing. So, all right, we have um staff and then uh Paul,

thank thank you. There were there were two clarifications I wanted to make. The first is um to say that these CFC rules did they were not LCDC did not engage in that rulemaking process as a result of legislation. it engaged in that process as a result as a result of an executive order by then Governor Kate Brown. So in the case of these particular rules, there was no legislative opportunity for us to there was a rule making process without legislation from the governor's office. That's that's just another wrinkle. The second clarification I wanted to to add is that in terms of

well we could just not add it to our code apply it anyways no harm no foul no practical effect but that I want to remind the commission that LCDC can issue an enforcement order and if we don't comply withhold state shared revenues for not amending our code even if we weren't going to apply it you know even if we we were going to apply the state law directly anyways we have to amend our code to avoid that result that enforcement order from LCDC it's so there is No, there is no we can just not do it. Apply the state law anyways and and all be good. There there's a risk there.

Yeah. Well, who's going to tell him? Caleb, you're not. I'm not talking to him. I mean, kidding, but right. Hey, we just decided not to do this. Go away now. Yeah. I don't think that Right. Commissioner Savis, you're on. Yeah. I I just you know I'm sure some of you have not all of you know this but you know there have been some of these developments that have taken place and they're not in some areas they're not selling right. So the other challenge is you know the result is it's it's it's antithetical to the governor's past or present uh goal to build more housing.

Yeah. if if you don't build something the market wants um and it doesn't sell, I mean, that ought to be a red flag. So, I just just want to point out that, you know, uh there are a two of them that I that I can certainly say I know of that they're just not selling and therefore people are going to look or buy something else for that for for for those dollars. And and um you know, this is just a big waste of time. Um, and you just think about all all the jurisdictions that are forced to make these changes and and the cost of that and yet we could actually be doing better work uh with those resources than we're doing now. So, um, we got time, I guess it sounds like, cuz cuz, uh, Dan, you're not suggesting we have to do something today. Uh, but Caleb, you know, what is our time frame to to be in compliance or not? As I understand it, at this point, because these rules have taken effect and we haven't implemented them into our local land use legislation, anyone can petition LCDC for an enforcement order. Uh, I would have to go back and look at the statute to see if there's a grace period in there. You have to implement it within a certain amount of time. But, but if there is that period, it's it's now

it's gonna it's going to be a quick one. Okay. Well, that's all I have. All right. Thank you. Yeah. So, I think I'm just hearing from my colleagues and come to you just a second, commissioner. Um, hearing from council, it's not like we have a lot of options. I understand it. And as I see mandated, I mean, that's like you will.

It's not like if or may. And so whether we approve it or not, it's we're being held accountable to that standard. So I would turn to Gary and kind of as we move forward, what are some of those options to uh maybe address it? I know legislatively is it any any other suggestions you have that we might be able to kind of make sure our voices heard on this?

Yes, staff has given you the consequences of non-compliance, but that it hasn't stopped this or prior boards from saying let's be a test. So you could have refused to adopt it. You could challenge the state from taking away your authority as a county local government. You could fight this. We'll probably lose, but you have every right to fight it every step of the way if that's what you direct staff to do. It's do you want to be a test model for the state of Oregon? Would But would that be internal or it' be Caleb, right? Or we would have to get external. I mean, again, I'm thinking you always say what's it going to cost? That's there there's there's a phys there's a literal and figurative cost for you to do that. Uh but right again there's no decision today. Staff's just updating you.

If you direct us later not to move forward on this then you heard the ramifications of that but you ultimately make the call. So yes there's you could try a legislative fix. We tried this by the way back in 2022. I remember in addition to the rulemaking there was no desire for the legislature to change this legislative action. You could try again. You could work with legislators. You could try you could try multiple steps. But again, there's there's repercussions.

Well, maybe we should have a conversation with our Clackmus delegation colleagues is what I would suggest. Um, and have something where we can get them all together and really clarify what we're seeing is some of the consequences of this kind of legislation and what our concerns are. Um because evidently um we haven't like I said I'm not sure we've prioritized land use as one of our uh things that we've been looking at closely as things roll through the Well again you said though this was the governor's call. So the governor can do anything too, right? Because they're the head honcho. The governor adopted an executive order telling LCDC to adopt these rules and the courts concluded that LCDC could because it has general legislation that was adopted a long time ago saying it can generally adopt rules to implement the state's land use planning program. It's so even though there was no specific legislation that said LCDC adopt these specific rules, it had legislation that was broad enough to allow it to implement the governor's executive order.

Okay. So that's so really it's the executive order piece that just basically came down from on high that well we should still let our delegation know that we're not amused. I mean you know they do they do have to work with the governor and they could certainly be a voice. All right, Commissioner West. Well, it might just be a test of an overly broad executive that is pretending like she's still in the legislature anyway.

Um wait, am I right? This is this is due to an executive order from the governor looking at past I write past statute that was broad and so she implemented very specific orders based on that that look to my opinion maybe more like legislation than that should go through the legislature not through the executive branch. I think the court in that case held that LCDC had authority to adopt these rules. It didn't hinge on the governor's executive order. The governor's executive order is what prompted LCDC to do this rulemaking. But the court said that LCDC's existing statutes were broad enough to authorize this. Anyways,

I understand that. I I just think if we walked in my neighborhood and in Wilsonville and we showed them this executive order, my neighbors would lose their minds if I walked through many which I've been to many of these doors. if they knew this kind of wonky um manu or how we're gonna manufacture and dictate how your community is from Salem and how we would like it to look and not how you would like it to look and how this impacts people's everyday lives. If they truly knew about this, people would lose their minds. And um I I don't know if we need to we need to be prudent and accept this today, but we should absolutely make a legislative priority from the board of county commissioners to address this issue. And maybe our neighbors would like us to say something a little louder on their behalf because some of this stuff is just crammed down on top of them in a way that like they're not appreciative of. I know specific issues that are rocking the city of Wilsonville right now and are changing the dynamic within the city of Wilsonville politically and it relates to stuff like this. Um, and it's going to impact local elections. It's going to impact how the community is built out there. It's it's um people are really really concerned across the political spectrum and uh th this I don't know this is like you know I I just think it's it's wrong on on so many efforts and so I don't know if you know we're also I mean this is a decision we may not make today about are we putting the county at risk because council's made a compelling case that this has been pretty well decided and there's some case there and we can be mad as we want But I don't I just don't want us to look like we're not advocating and giving up for our residents that and us who clearly don't like it. So as we like publicly hash out our options here,

maybe it is practically we have to swallow this this this pill and we don't want to. But then what is the future planning of this board to build a coalition to clap back at this pretty hard um and to try to change this and get some legislative fixes and then long session coming next year um in working with our caucus. I think Commissioner Schrader is right there. I just am clearly upset that this really poor policy has um negatively is going to negatively impact our communities. Um, and by the way, who's clamoring to bring that LCDC lawsuit that are we being I mean, it sounds a little bit like alarmism. I don't know any builders that are clamoring to necessarily adhere to this. It hasn't happened yet. I know it could, but it also sounds like some of the builders are still going as status quo. It's we haven't lost as much parking as we thought we were going to lose. It's also expensive and they don't necessarily want to go through that process either. So, who's the the developer, builder, investor that's clamoring to like do this at the same time, I guess, is another thought. What's the real risk and practicality,

right? Thank you. Um, couple questions for Gary. I'll turn it over to him and then I'll kind of go to the rest of my colleagues here. Is um what are some of your recommendations uh going forward and is there any way to maybe pull that one subsection out? Um

yes, thank you. So the immediate next step as is in your staff report is the planning commission will hear all of this including the parking discussion. So you could let them hear it first. Let the public know to testify to the planning commission to express their concerns. See what the planning commission does. That's one option. Or Dan was when I whispering you could just pull this section out entirely for further review and discussion by staff to bring back to you. Um just to be clear you're already we're already out of compliance with this. A legislative fix would potentially would not be till 2027 session. A reminder, we tried this already. A legislative fix. I forgot when it was 23 or 25. It failed. Legislature hasn't changed that much. So, we can try again. But all all to say is either my advice wait for the planning commission to see how they address this and or we can pull this section out. Is that right, Dan?

And not take it to the planning commission yet. I think Kylie, one thing real quick. Can you go back down to that August 22nd 20 or 2022 date? Keep going down down down down down. Oh, maybe it's up top. We and we there we are.

have had the pleasure of being at this dis since 2022 hearing how you feel about this. We clearly understand how you feel about this. We clearly have opinions about this as well. I want to share that out loud and publicly. the concern and the concern that we have and the reason we're bringing it forward, I just want to be clear, is around the risk and the liability associated with it. And I wanted to say that out loud. This is the one thing we got back up here and we're talking today. It's like we had to bring parking back again because we know I mean we know the concerns and the comments associated with it. So like like Gary so eloquently articulated, there's two paths for it. We're not asking for a vote today. It basically can go forward to the planning commission. there can be some public engagement regarding that. It can come back. Um it might uh there might be some pol or community concerns about that right now. Um that expressed through that process and there's a decision from the board if they just want to kind of put a pause on that if at now or at a future date. Um but I just want to echo the fact oh we hear you crystal clear. Um but there we have tried every avenue that's been afforded us um legally, politically, whatever we could do to try to get an adjustment in that and um that wasn't successful. So I just want to share that. So, I think um just a quick comment and I think Commissioner Savis has something to say, but I think a lot of times we don't necessarily approve of all the different laws that are out there, but they are the laws and we're um have to abide by them as much as we don't maybe agree with all of them. And I think if you don't like the law, then you work to change it. So, I don't want this county to be in litigation or in uh legal issues uh for not following that because at least from what I heard today, um that is a standard. And so, uh whether we like it or not, that's the way it is.

And so, therefore, I think having a game plan to make whatever steps we need to take to change it is kind of the direction we'll need to go. Um, and I agree with all my colleagues, but the the law is the law. So, with that, I'll turn it over to Commissioner Savis as a comment. Actually, I I didn't have a comment. So, I I am listening, but I don't have anything to add at this point. Okay. Thank you. So, all right. This has been quite theformational update only. So, uh we'll uh uh look forward to the next session on this. Thank you both very much. Thanks for your direction.

Well, yes. So, do you want to pull this from the planning commission May 11th or keep it in and see what the planning commission advises you? I I suggest we get input from the planning commission and that we let people know that if they're finding this as disturbing as we are that they testify. Is there a way to reach out to the public to like ring the bell to say, "Hey, come and come and look at this. This is going to impact your your quality of life." you to push out something to the neighborhoods and to the communities to say come testify, pay attention or say this this could significantly I wouldn't y this could affect neighborhood livability and we want you to be aware of it so you're aware and and take a look and then and just encourage people to testify but let's not like

let's not have them come in with pikes and you know so I think what we just need is a nod is okay to go ahead and go to the planning commission let them that step next I I'm okay with that but I know you You've gotten the constituent letters about how this is changing entire communities, right, neighborhoods. Does the planning commission know that? Do they have these letters that they hear from the citizens? I I don't Do we get the same information? I don't know. Right. I don't think we do. No.

And we're the ones getting hit with the letters that say, "What in the world are you allowing in our neighborhood?" We're not allowing it. It's the state law that is allowing it. Right. we get we're taking the tomatoes as as Martha often says, but I don't know that the planning commission knows this part of it that we are trying to save these communities and these neighborhoods and and the fabric of these neighborhoods are being destroyed. So, um I here's what's going to happen. People are just going to move. If they can't have what they want to live in, they're already moving. But why? I mean, why are we trying? it's just going to make matters so much worse. So, I agree we need to follow state law, but I also agree that we need to push back at some point. Uh because they're not listening. They're not listening.

I agree with the push back. All right. Uh Mr. Savis, Mr. Savis, go ahead. Um I I don't know if I have a light. I didn't turn a light on, so I I haven't raised my hand, so I don't know. So, Commissioner, your hand is raised. I'm looking at the screen. So, we'll uh Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I will. Okay. Lower hand. I think we have a nod to let we have staff direction. We can make We can send the board emails on this. We can make sure the planning commission gets it. So, we'll do that. All right. We'll finally let you two go. Thank you. Oh, I'm not I'm not going anywhere. Oh, that's right. You got all afternoon with me. Yeah. So, that was the easiest policy session.

Exactly. That was the easiest one of the day. All right. The next policy session is travel options action plan also presented by transportation and development Dan Johnson director and Kieran Bureick long range planning manager. Go ahead. I just want to take a second just kind of compose ours just take a deep breath you know just a little meditation

little zen zen heart. One of the things that I I really want to emphasize as we get into this discussion around this next topic is the fact that you know um there are requirements that we have uh for different plans that we have to to develop those and there are objectives within some of those plans and essentially what this what this effort is that's being shared with you today you know regarding this travel options action plan is more about kind of the education and the opportunities that are out there. Okay. And so I just want to put a pin in that. Um we know all the issues that are going on with our our various transit providers that are out there. Um and this is kind of that that next step. It's not the shuttle, it's not that. It's just kind of educating and connecting people to those services if and when they're available. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to and and it does I just want to highlight there. Um it does support, you know, the strong infrastructure, which is more than just the roads. It's the it's the services that use those roads and it also has a focus on some of the transit efforts that you have as a part of your strategic plan. So with that, I'm going to hand it over to Karen Bureig that's going to speak much more eloquently than I am. So there you go.

Wonderful. Good afternoon um chair board of commissioners. My name is Karen Bureig and I'm the long range planning manager at DTD. Um I did want to note that today with us today is Scott Holshire who is the project manager of the travel options action plan as well as Anthony Dimote who is the transportation planner that really supported this effort. Um both of them were very instrumental in completing this plan and thank you for the opportunity for us to come forward and talk to you about this travel option options action plan. At the end of the presentation, we'll be here to request that you direct staff to submit the travel options action plan as presented for approval on a consent agenda of one of your next business meetings. So, that's at the end of the presentation, we'll be asking that. So, um the travel options action plan was a three-year project that was funded by Metro's regional travel options grant program. Um it was undertaken um to examine several different things. So we wanted to look at expanding awareness and action and access for different ways to travel um in the county. We wanted to identify specific strategies that would help reduce congestion on the roadways by supporting alternative um modes of transportation. Um as a part of the project we defined we identified and implemented a pilot program to kind of test one of these strategies. And then we also we were doing this so that we are in compliance with some of the state's requirements about um travel options planning that is included in the uh transportation planning rule and um and it will actually some of this information we're hoping to then implement when we update our transportation system plan. So slide two before we go much further I really want to take a moment to explain um what is meant by travel option strategies. So,

travel option strategies, you might also um hear it referred to as travel demand management strategies. Both of those terms are used within uh this plan. And basically, travel option strategies are tools that support people uh to use other u modes of transportation. Those other modes of transportation are walking and biking and using transit. They are not big infrastructure investments, but instead they're kind of actions that help us reduce the pressure on our roadway network by supporting people to choose other alternatives for getting around. Uh, for example, for people to use um resources to access car pooling, maybe the reduced transit pass um costs um education about how to use our transit system. Um it's about marketing of alternatives and it's also other um uh programs that would support pedestrian and bicycle things such as wayfinding and education. So next slide. Oh, you're you're there. Sorry. Um so basically what have we done over the um past two years? Well, first of all, we really um had a very robust engagement and outreach program. There was a steering committee that met three times and that provided um guidance into the engagement strategies and the vision and goals and they helped identify priority strategies there. We had a a whole suite of me members from throughout the region. We did outreach to stakeholder groups such as the Clackamus County aging services as well as the community advisory board. We hosted an online survey where there were over 200 respondents and then there was a focus group that was a subset of those service respon uh survey respondents that really helped us kind of dig a little deeper into what would be most effective for our residents in Clakamus County. So a couple of next slide some of the key takeaways that we learned from this engagement. We learned lessons

about messaging. It's really important to emphasize choice when promoting travel options and we need to make sure that there's communication about what the plan offers. Um the travel modes that were of highest interest to people were actually taking the bus or max but as well as ebikes. People really had an interest in ebikes. Some of the most useful programs were a $5 daily employer paid benefit um that people would get if they didn't use um the well to use a mode other than driving. Um things like secure bike parking were also really important as well as real-time arrival. So people wanted to learn about more about the shuttle program that's out there. Car pooling, ebikes, as well as free ride share programs. Um and a few barriers that people have. People of course are concerned about safety. there's a lack of education um just transit availability in general and then control over their the schedule um that transit has. So next slide. So the vision that was used to guide the plan really focused on this is is basically they wanted every person in Clackamus County to have the information and confidence and experience they need to choose these alternative modes of transportation and so they can get around safely, affordably and reliable reliably. And so there was also Can you go back one just I'm not quite yet to leave that. Thanks. Um so there were three goals um education and encouragement, safety uh and accessibility. and efficiency and sustainability. And so they've worked together to be able to um put together this plan. So next slide. And really the core of this action plan has to do with strategies. There are 10 different strategies included in this plan that fall into four main categories. Those categories are uh travel demand market uh travel demand management marketing

marketing uh transit subsidies car pooling van pulling and then the bike program. So and then on this slide you can see all of the details uh with regards to the strategies and and the core within your the packet that you had today are on uh the PDF pages 15 through 36. There's a lot of detail about each of those strategies and that really is the core of what the action plan is. So, next slide. One of the things I I wanted to highlight again, it was a part of the project. It was testing out one of the strategies. Um the steering committee helped us define what that um pilot project was and that was to implement real time arrival signage at the Clakammus Community College. And this was to support our CLAC co shuttles. And there were a variety of actions that were needed to take to make that happen. You could say, "Oh, we want real-time arrival." But we actually had to identify locations where they would be um would be placed, work with the folks at Clackamus um community college on on doing the placement. There were um other items that we talked about. We also did a various um outreach to be able to let folks know that these are coming available. So, if you could do the next slide. So, the goal of the pilot program really was to increase awareness. Um it included data um surveying data collection and it then it implemented this real-time arrival and signage information. The type of supports that are also in included within these travel option strategies is um there were posters on bulletin boards. There were sandwich boards around the campus to promote the shuttles. Um there was a a blurb in the newsletter. There was some branding that went on. There was a lot of different elements that really went into supporting this. And I want to say that marketing does make a difference.

Uh, one of the surveys, uh, found that the posters and the flyers and the QR codes, there were little QR codes placed around the campus, um, that were on the sandwich boards located near the shuttle stops were the most effective at promotional strategy uh, for the shuttle because through the survey, they were able to understand that this particular strategy influenced 42% of the respondents to actually ride the shuttle. They saw it like, oh, we're going to go ahead and ride the shuttle. So and it was also most noticed among non-riters. So um I think we really were able to see the impact of this kind of strategy. So continuing this type of work is an important aspect of supporting transit writership as well as support for other modes. So that's the end of my slideshow today. Um and again what the next steps here are is is that we are asking the board to approve the travel options action plan at a business meeting as a consent agenda item. I did also want to note that there are a couple of things that were going to be going on in the future. Uh we are hoping to apply for a regional travel options um additional funding to be able to implement more of these strategies into the future. So you'll be see hearing about that when we come back for a um kind of a a life cycle form approval to apply. And then finally we'll be doing some small edits as a part of our transportation system plan update project that will update policies, but that's not at this time right now. We're just looking for moving approval onto a business meeting agenda.

Wow. Thank you very much. Commissioner Shder has a comment. Yeah, I just have a question about eB bikes. Um, I had a situation in my neighborhood where two young people were riding down uh on an eback bike together and um I heard crying and screaming and moaning and one of the youngsters that she had a helmet on, they were going too fast, went around the corner, got thrown off the bike and um AMR had to come and she had a serious head injury. So, my concern with that with ebikes is I'm not sure how they mesh with onroad, off-road, and then the safety considerations. And that that will stick with me for the rest of my life because you could you could hear this child and the whole neighborhood was out.

So, uh what what was the what was the reason why people like so much? you know what what I think as a part of this action plan really is about education right I think other people have that same experience you have just had

um as well as there aren't you know what are the rules of the road you know how can we actually support this use that's happening out there but educate people about what rules there are about that and how can um people use these um these bikes that are available to people in the most safe way possible. So, so that's how it's included is this acknowledgement that there are supports that are necessary to make this more safer. Um, and education is definitely needed um for all different ages about this um mode. Yeah, they're neither fish nor foul. That's how I see ebikes. Just not like they're almost like small motorcycles

and they are very popular. I know they are. My nephew may have been in that posi that you saw riding in your neighborhood, but we've had long discussions around the safety and going in our roads and what we do and how we do it. And yeah, I will never forget it. And that's what my big worry is that um again, I don't like the the our word, the regulatory word, but this is a different kind of hybrid and I'm not sure we fully vetted again if there's education fully vetted the safety issues. All right. Thank you, Martha. presenting us. Uh, Commissioner Savis, go ahead.

Yeah. Um, Karen, thank you for the presentation. You know, uh, we've, uh, we've worked together on a number of things for many, many years. Um, and I know as we try to bring more transit to Clacamus County, um, and, uh, do it in such a way that people have access to it and it's all reasonable. Um, you know, it's it's a challenge here in Clacamus. Um, all to say that at the same time, I know that, you know, Metro and to meet our our federal requirements, we have a lot we have to have a lot of plans in place. This is one of them that gets us to compliance, if you will. And so, you know, I I just want to say that while I appreciate all the work we're doing, I know it's required to do a lot of this stuff, and, you know, I'm I'm fine with taking whatever actions it is to move this to advance this. It's just it's just a shame based on the conversation we just had um that you know we are you know we haven't been able to really move the needle in my opinion in Clackamus County um because our our transit provider um uh is uh I I I don't know I'm not going to go there but it it's very it's very painful to know that we have all these goals. We know that to achieve them, we have to have transit in place for a number of reasons. We count on transit to accomplish those things, but yet uh we're contracting. We're not expanding. So, I thank you for your work. Um but I just wanted to point out that um sometimes it feels like an exercise of futility, but but I don't want to diminish your work and and and your positive energy. So, just thank you for your time and and I just wanted to just verbalize, you know, my my my concerns that um we are we're in just in a state of time where um it doesn't does not

feel as though we're able to achieve any of our goals any anytime soon. Thank you, Commissioner H. Um yeah, it's my understanding uh and correct me if I'm wrong that each city implements their own ebike uh rules. Um, it's not it. And does the county have one in place for unincorporated Clackamus County?

So, I don't know the answer to that question. And the the reason I bring it up is because I know the city of Happy Valley just instituted some pretty restrictive I mean there's a lot of hills in Happy Valley and kids have been flying down these hills at extreme speeds, some with uh helmets, some with no helmets and they had to put some pretty restrictive measures in place. Um, if you've ever been on one, they're fun and I I like to drive fast and I like to ride fast, but they're so p they're so powerful. It's just scary how fast they can go with very little effort. So, um I would encourage part of the education is to try to get us same some information on what um rules are in place in the cities and then we should have our own in place for uh the unincorporated areas of Clakamus County as well. So, um I I'm not opposed to them at all. I think they're a great uh economical way to get around, but um the people I see riding them don't respect the road. They don't respect drivers. Not all of them. I'm saying that that's just been my my take on them is that they seem to be a toy versus a a mode of transportation. So,

so I I appreciate the question and I think it's something we should do some research on and we can get that information back to you. My assumption is it falls under motor vehicle operation laws and requirements of that nature, but let us do a deeper dive into that and get back to you. And age also they put an age restriction too. I know in Happy Valley they put an age restriction on it too was when it's okay to ride. Is it younger and over? I was going to say. Yeah. Yeah. Um yeah. But they're they're very fun. If you've never ridden one. Wow. They're great. All right. Commissioner West.

Well, as a nurse, I have cared for patients in the neuro unit who did not wear their helmet. Um, and those are pretty catastrophic cases. My son, if he was listening to this right now, would be laughing at me and telling me to stop. Uh, but if it has wheels, wear a helmet. Um, and I I I think that those are important for the overall public safety and health of the community. I don't I think that's good education. Um, you'd be you'd be surprised how what little speed and how fragile your skull is when it hits the edge of a curb. Uh, please wear your helmet. That is the advice of this nurse. Um, I mean, I I really what Commissioner Savas said really resonated with me and the tone in which he took. Uh, thank you for your hard work. You guys are often tasked with things and then have to do all this hard work and then listen to us squawk about it up here, have these different thoughts or opinions on I know things that you all spent a lot of time on and that were mandated. I saw in the report here that this is another statewide mandate which I clearly love. Um I'm being sarcastic. Uh so but this seems again to be a theme of ideology over practicality like we have real geographic realities in in uh Clackamus County. Transit is contracting not expanding. We have real issues with try. I will also follow Commissioner's Office's lead and not go down that sad rabbit hole. Um, but I, you know, it doesn't really seem to deal with the real concerns we have for connectivity for our population here. I think there's things we can take away from this in this work. It's there are things of

value there. And um you know it's it probably takes just over an hour for try to arrive at Clackinus Community College. Like it's not a su it's like it's so infrequent that it's not and then where does it go? Does it actually get the student home in Oregon City in Wilsonville in Westland in Damascus? Do they have a real route that's connected that allows that student in an affordable way to get to their classes and get home from their classes? Or do they have to wait every hour and 20 minutes with very few options just to get to school? You know, we're concerned about the transit line on Highway 43 into Westland that serves many seniors and many people that rely on that line and that's contracting potentially. We're trying to fight and claw and scrap for what little bit we have though we pay a lot in Clackamus and you know I know some of the things like let's put a leaderboard so people know what time the bus is coming infrequently right um it's but we can feel good about that so it's a lot of virtue signaling it's a lot of um uh you know I I'm just also very proud of our local transit Wilsonville Smart is spectacular we have one on Cami and with these little transit communities that are figuring it out in a way to to try to provide some services. Um, but I just think this is a little bit more of that we're not being practical. It's more ideologically driven often about we just don't want you to be in your car. Well, we don't have a lot of options in Clackamus County and Clackamus County residents tend to need their vehicles. Um, so I don't know. I uh I I I mean I I appreciate the update and everything and I think it's a little bit of a mixed bag for me and um I just also want to make sure I I really appreciate what Commissioner SA said and echo those concerns too.

All right, I I think we're at a point for a motion. Is somebody a motion? I move to direct staff to submit the travel options plan as presented for approval at a future business meeting. I'll second that. All right. Commissioner Helm has moved to direct staff to submit the travel option planned as presented for approval at a future business meeting. Commissioner Shrader has seconded that. Any further discussion? Seeing none, clerk, would you please call the poll for us? Commissioner Savis, I. Commissioner West, I. Commissioner Shrader, I. Commissioner Helm, I. Mr. Chair, I. Motion passes 5 to zero. Mr. Chair, thank you, Andrew and Gary, one more.

Thank you. One more. Yes, road use elicit discharge code amendments. This is also transportation and development. Dan staying at the table, the director of the department and Mike Bezner, assistant director of the department. Go ahead. We are here to not talk about transit. with this topic. Um, you've already got kind of an intro to this topic with some of the other revisions we've done about erosion control, but with there are some adjust additional adjustments that I'm going to hand over to Mike Bzner to kind of run through the specifics on and we'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Good afternoon. And yes, I'm here to talk about a state and federal mandate that requires us to change our county code. Let's just get that out of the way right up front. State and federal.

And federal. Yeah, I'm going to one up everybody else. Hot seat. Here we go.

So, uh, Clackamus County along with many, many other jurisdictions nationwide, we have a what's called a municipal separate storm sewer system, MS4, allows us to operate a storm system that eventually the water ends up in a water with the state or a federal federal water. Uh when we last renewed the permit, DEQ had a condition in there that basically requires the permit holder to implement a program to reduce the discharge of pollutants into the storm system. This board recently adopted some code amendments as Dan just mentioned regarding erosion control standards and this is kind of a partner to that. Um, in addition to what you already did, we also have to be able to pursue enforcement where pollutants could discharge into the waters of the state through our public storm system and it has to be codified. So, we're really checking a box here. If currently this was an issue, we'd be going out, we'd be investigating, we'd be dealing with the differences. Since it's not in our code, we can't use code enforcement. instead we'd have to call the sheriff's office in the end if we needed assistance. But this is it's really something that we're already able to do. It's just not in our code, which is what DEEQ requires. So to comply with the DEEQ requirements and and again federal because it's clean water act, um we need a new county code section that we're proposing to regulate to discharge into the county sewer system, storm sewer system. There are exemptions and there's a long list. Uh they include things like watering your own lawn, washing your car, charity car washes, things things like that. Um but really this is this is meant to get really um operations that are unnecessarily polluting public water. So here to ask uh for your direction to

schedule the first required public hearing on the addition of a new section to our county code called elicit discharge. Welcome to take questions. Just one more thing to add on real quick because you t Mike um was specific around that storm system. I mean, you got to think about some of the elements we've adopted. That system starts on the property, put erosion control measures there. The system then may go through facilities that are under our control. So, ditches, road ditches, culverts, things like that. It may go into systems that are outside of our control. So what you're seeing is this these conditions on this permit to make sure we've got certain levels of control at every aspect of that system that's there. So this is basically filling that gap for our system, our portion of that system. So happy to answer any questions you might have.

All right. Thank you. Any questions? All right. How about a motion? Chair, I move to direct staff to schedule the first required public hearing on the addition of section 7.03.250 2550 elicit discharge to county code. Second. All right. Thank you. Commissioner West has moved to direct staff to schedule the first required public hearing on the addition of section 7.03.250 elicit discharge of county code. Commissioner Trader is second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, clerk, would you please call the poll for us? Commissioner Savis, I. Commissioner Helm I.

Commissioner Shrader I. Commissioner West I. Mr. Chair I. Motion passes five to zero. Mr. Chair. So it's clear to start with that disclaimer going forward. We like clean water. Thank you. Thank you so much. Very nice. Gary, do we need anything else from us finished business for the day? Yes. All right. Well, it's been a long day. Thank you everyone. And this concludes our business meeting for the day. On behalf of the board, thank you for joining us and have a great rest of your day. We're journed.