City Council - Regular Meeting

When the first city council meeting to order at 7 p.m. these rights for the pledge of allegiance. Well, I would say it's in there and you're a lot of it is a lot of it is all just as well. Well,

Did you, let's see here. I will add that to new business. Okay. That will be 7G. Everyone okay with that? Yeah. Okay. Are there any other changes or can I get a motion? Councilor Weber, a motion to approve the consent agenda. Do we have a second? Second. Councilor Rustin with a second. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion is approved. Moving forward to public comment. Please come forward. You have three minutes. State your name if you're a resident, rural resident, or non-resident. First up is Susan Brown.

Thank you, Sydney. Next up is Chris Armstrong.

Thank you, Laura. All the information. Up next is Russ Sheldon.

Last public comment and then I will go online is Cindy first.

Okay. Pauline, can we switch to online public comment? I received notice that Linda Dallas Merton had submitted a request by 3 p.m. Linda, are you online and can you unmute yourself?

Thank you, Linda. Okay, I think that was all the public comments I received. We're going to now move to the next agenda item, which is item six, staff reports. All you want to kick us off or staff reports the library's first I believe the library is for you.

Anything from those thank you for being a staff report. I'm here to answer any questions you may not.

I'm sure you guys have no questions. I just want to say thank you for this report and continuing to fill this role. I'm really impressed with your leadership thrown into this position. You've really made those to be a vision. And I'm really looking forward to the library presence at some of the community events as well. So thank you for continuing that. Thank you.

Councillor Weber, I was in the library numerous times this summer with my granddaughters. They always had a wonderful I was very appreciative of just the direction the staff took to encourage them to help them when they couldn't find the missing pictures. But I was also impressed just kind of the diversity of different people that were in using the library in different ways, getting help with language skills and computer skills. And so it's always been a joy. My granddaughters are always saying, let's grow the library. So thank you.

Thank you. Also want and I want to mention that in your report, you had some comments of how library staff has helped our city staff in training, etc. And I just wanted to call that out for transparency that the city staff is being assisted by your library staff and I appreciate that as I'm sure we all.

I attended the library board meeting, and I'm just not sure about the process question on this. One of the things that had come up was brought up, I believe, back in 2023, and that was a proclamation supporting banned books week, something that seemed to be very popular within the board meeting, had a lot of support. But when I looked into this. It required an official approval from the Library Board 2023. The actual week is October 5th, and so the Library Board will not be meeting before the week will be passed. So I wanted to know how we can get this on the agenda for October 5th to have a r

Paul, do you have any thoughts about a Proclamation from councilor Austin.

i think it would be preferred in person i'll i'll reach out to them and see if they can do a meeting yeah thank you thank you thank you okay all that stuff is the police report do you want to do the police departments next yes sir

I have a comment. I've read that you're starting education in providing police services to schools. probably a good idea. Can you talk a little bit more about that?

Good. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Ugartein. I just wanted to say welcome officially to North Plains. I think this is your first official Council meeting, correct me if I'm wrong. So I just wanted to say welcome aboard. And I also had a question regarding the school resource officer and kind of the framework, but I will wait until Chief is back to report on that. So thank you.

Thank you, Councillor. Any other comments or questions? Thank you. Welcome. Thank you, sir. Thank you. All next up is Public Works. Public Works is, yes.

Councilor Weber, it was mentioned in public testimony that there were some bids that were received on putting playground equipment in Wentz Park. Are you aware of bids being received on playground equipment?

You aren't aware there's ever been bids? No.

Also we're working. One question in your parks operation section that there's obviously a route going to be installed here soon. But you mentioned that the meeting that Jesse Mays will still be allowed is that true.

OK so reservations for Jesse Mays has been open.

Okay, just meetings, no parties. Okay, thank you.

Kathy, just a quick follow-up question. How do we solidify a date for the RIP installation? Paul has been working on that one.

The other questions. And you're serious about what's going on back there. I'm sure. Okay, let's see here. Next up is 3J.

Can we simply do that by consensus or do we need a motion? I think Paul is going to be looking for a motion.

I was looking for a comment at this point, but it sounds like there's consensus around the table that that was... Yes, sir. Yes, and there is a suggested motion in my report. Yep, I'm looking at that. Okay, I just want to check with the council. Are you guys ready for a motion? Councilor Ugarte, would you want to go ahead?

Councilor Ugarte, I move we direct the interim city manager to meet with 3-day consulting to develop a prioritized list of products to be completed this budget year and create a list and the cost for additional services that may be needed to report back at the October 5th City Council meeting.

Thank you, Councillor. Can I get a second? Councillor River, I would second that. Okay. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Is there anything else you need from us?

Unless there were any questions on our staff report. Councillor River, just a question. It came up once, you know, I walk around a lot and I saw where the The Main Street project was going on between commercial and Pacific, right? So they did the engineering. It looked like they dug up the street. They did a lot of things. And then that has since come to a close. Can you explain what are the steps then that need to happen to get that moving again?

Okay. Also, I just for transparency, I've been asked several times regarding the work that's being done on Northwest West Union. So people are asking me, what is that, what's going on? So I just want to make it a part of the record that of course it's for Frank's Excavation. They are the owners of that building site and the construction is for that business. Can you clarify how long that will be in process?

Um, just for clarity, I'm just going to tell people 2 or 3 years, because usually that's about how long it takes if it's more or less than that around where the ballpark get back to me.

Any other questions. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. Thanks, Brian. Let's see here. Paul, next up is finance. So Amanda is online?

Can I jump in with... So I think you've given us some good feedback before on the state of our city audits, which I think our next one is tentatively planned for around January ish timeframe 2027. I don't think I've ever gotten an update on our URA audits. Do you have any insight to how those are progressing?

Yeah, understood. However, just for clarification. So you're saying that the city is not contracted with any of us since 2018.

Hi Amanda, Councilor Ugarte. I just wanted to follow up to ask if you had a specific timeline of when you'll be bringing a supplemental budget to Council for some of the overages in the recent expenditures?

Okay. So March of next year. And at that point, are we, I'm assuming that we're projecting to be well over the 66% of the biennial budget that we are right now?

Councilman, any other questions? Okay, Paul. I think we're going to... Thank you, Amanda. Appreciate it. We're going to move to new business. 78 is City Council interview candidates and vote to select a person to fill the vacancy. So let's review the rules. Previously, we have interviewed all candidates. I assume that we would want to interview all candidates. In the last two councilor selections, we've had Either someone make a presentation like we did with Council arrested or with Council going to be asked questions from the application. You guys, I think we chose with Council arrested. We h

I want to say you're you're asking if we should just ask each applicant or questions in a time manner.

I believe we had a 10 minute block that ask questions from the application totally up to you guys on this telling you what we've done before. River.

If you can say I hear before we discuss the logistic I didn't want to us. something we heard during public comment regarding all of the applicants being listed for the community to review as well. And I was curious, I had looked at this previously, I want to say yesterday, and I did not see any updates. Looking on the website now, I do see all three applicants listed. And I was just curious, Paul, if you could provide maybe a timeline of how that unfolded and have we actually given keep the community time to review this and provide their testimony.

Okay, so just to make sure I'm understanding correctly, I was aware that the application deadline was Saturday, but for public transparency, all applications were not visible until today, September 21st.

So thank you for clarifying. And I think given that, you know, that was five hours ago. And after the deadline to submit public testimony online as well. You know, I would just like to visit and have a discussion regarding that. Do we need to make a decision tonight regarding a City Council applicant? Just given that this is all fresh information. And I know we were running against a tight deadline, but also in the sake of public transparency and trust, I think it's important that we vet this decision and don't rush into it.

Councilor Rustin, can you tell us when the preliminary agenda was published and Mike Schurk was listed. I'm assuming at the time of publication we have not received other applications? That's correct. Can you tell us when the other two applications were?

Councillor Warnken, is there a deadline for us to publish them to make it official so that the residents have time to react. Is there a deadline for that or was the 3.30 to 4 o'clock timeline today a legal, approved legal thing?

Is there a timeline that we went over is there any ordinance or anything that tells us we have to have them posted on the website by Thursday or Friday or is there a timeline for that for posting them?

Council Weber? Council Weber I would agree I think it's unfortunate they weren't able to be out earlier but I would I don't think it's reason to not proceed tonight. I think we should start proceeding process.

I would vote for proceeding as well. What would you guys think? Councilor Ugarte.

Councilor Ugarte, I appreciate everyone providing their insight. I would be curious if this council feels that we have truly heard the voice of the people that we represent. on whatever side of the table they are on, right? Because five hours is not enough time for me to feel like we've given the public an opportunity to provide their feedback. And I know we've discussed this in the past where sitting on this dais, it's never an easy decision on how or who to appoint to a position. And we would love to change the charter and make it through a voting process, et cetera. So I'm curious how this

Councillor Rustin, Councillor Warrington.

Any thoughts? I'm not quite sure exactly what to say. I guess I feel it was unfortunate that the application, two applications came in later than the Friday deadline for releasing the agenda. So that was one issue. And then to the weekend, we didn't have city staff available to post them until Monday. And then the four o'clock thing was another delay. But I don't I didn't hear any legal ramifications to stop the process. So My recommendation is to proceed because we don't have any legal obligation not to.

Councilor Rustin? OK, Councilor Rustin, I'm a little torn on this. In one last council meeting, I suggested that we postpone the appointment of mayor. Sorry, am I not talking into?

Sorry, talking to Michael. I figure that was really more for the recall process to go through. In this scenario, I do feel that while I appreciate that the public should be able to comment, I don't know that the folks that are applying are exactly unknown entities within the city. As a matter of fact, I would say that they're all fairly well-known. So let's say, I could go either way on this one. I don't know that it would necessarily hurt anything to wait two weeks, but I'm not entirely sure that we're going to get a lot more public comment about the individuals than we did today. I mean, I p

So I don't really have a strong opinion on it. So, Councillor Ugarte, I'm going to proceed unless there's a motion to table that it's a second and a majority vote. Would you like to comment?

Councillor Ugarte, I make a motion to postpone this City Council appointment until our next Regularly scheduled meeting. Motion? Do I have a second?

Sure, I'll second it. Okay, we've got a motion and a second to postpone the counselor selection. All those in favor of postponing, say aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed? Nay. Mays win at 3.10 to the motion The agenda item will proceed. All right. So let's see here. We've talked about interviewing all the candidates. I don't think we've solidified on the types of questions. Did you guys want to follow Councillor Warrington's selection or Councillor Rustin? Go ahead, Councillor Rustin.

Councillor Rustin, given the fact that we haven't, yeah, I don't think this now is the time to sit here and decide. what questions we're going to ask, I would be in favor of allowing a five-minute window for each candidate to stay there, make their case.

Five-minute window to make their case. What's the council's consensus on this?

Thank you, Councilor Ugarte. I would like to follow a somewhat standardized procedure and follow the same list of questions that we have previously asked in the past with the option for Council to ask follow-up questions if necessary.

Councillor Webber? I question Councillor Ugarte. Were the standard ones we used the ones they had already filled out?

You know, I'm actually looking through my email right now to reference that. I think they are similar, if not the same, but I don't know for sure.

I went back and I checked Councillor Warrington's interview and it was the application questions. So the two things that I outlined for you guys at the beginning, there's the Councillor Ruston process and the Councillor Warrington process. So I'm hearing... Both ideas being brought forward, Councilor Weber.

Councilor Weber, I'm saying I would favor, as Councilor Ugarte said, go with the same questions before we kind of took turns asking questions.

Okay, yeah, I'll go with that. It's fine.

Councilor Rustin, are you okay with that?

I think I'm the odd person out on that, so yeah. Okay, so it looks like we're landing on, we're going to ask the interview questions. I recommend that we, so I would start at one end and then the next applicant, I'll start at the other end. And before we've had a 10 minute time limit, do you guys want to continue to time box it?

Yes, the packet being interviewed. Okay. And we can't ask follow-up questions? I believe... follow-up questions were allowed previously. Are you guys okay with follow-up questions?

Is that after each question we can ask a follow-up question, or do we need to go through all four and then ask the follow-up questions?

I think after each question you can ask a follow-up question. All right, thank you. Okay, and after that, a counselor can make a nomination or a second, but can't do both. Everyone understand that?

For the sake of transparency, would you mind reading the email that was provided from BEH regarding the council rules and how we proceed with making a motion voting for this procedure?

I'm also looking for that. I was hoping you might have it. But again, just making sure that we are all on the same page as we've had new people join council. I want to make sure that we're all clear. So I'll continue to look for this.

I'll do the 10-second summary off the top of my head. So you can make the nomination. You can make a second. You can't do both. Any candidate that comes up and receives a nomination and a second will be part of the voting process. We will receive a paper ballot from Colleen. Do we have paper ballots ready? OK. We will be provided a paper ballot. We will write down our preferred candidate and send it back to Colleen, who will then record the results. Okay. I believe the procedure two was to go in alphabetical order. So I'm going to review, create R candidates R. So in alphabetical order. Oh, th

I do want to clarify my memory doesn't recall. Did we discuss if the interim council president is considered a voting member for this decision?

Okay. Councillor Regan-Garnett, would you like to read the first question?

Councilor, would you like to read the first question?

Can you please share why you would like to serve on the City Council?

Councilor Russell, follow up question. I was appointed. just like four of the other people here who said that breeds just trust by nature, you would be an appointee. So I guess the question is, how would appointing you help establish trust that the other appointees have not?

Ask another follow-up question. Sure. There's a lot going on in social media, Facebook. I've got my opinions on it. I just wanted to get what your take is on just the level of discourse.

Sir, I'm for one. It's hard after you have any special interests or qualifications that you could bring to cancel. I

Sure. Have you previously served on a board or committee any city or organization.

You know we've got some divisions in the city you're on council about bridge building, how would you build bridges to connect sides.

One we do have to acknowledge both sides.

Councillor Ugarte. Just about our time, so we'll go to the last question.

Just quick. Kind of to piggyback off of Councillor Weber's question, how would you plan on representing all community members, regardless of what position or viewpoint they have?

Thank you, Tom. That's your 10 minutes. I really appreciate you coming up here. I know this isn't easy and you did a great job. So thank you. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Schertz. Good evening, Councilors. Hey, Councilor Weber, we're going to start at your side. Can you ask the first question?

Mike, why would you like to serve on the City Council?

Councilor Rustin, what do you think are the most important issues now facing North Plains?

Oh. Sir, go ahead. Same question that I asked earlier. We talked about the lack of trust. You would be another appointee. So therefore, according to the definition that's been thrown out there, you know, we would have to build trust. How would you go about doing that?

Thank you. How will you represent the people that are not within the majority of North Plains residents?

Councillor Warren? Mr. Schertz, do you have any special interests or qualifications that you would bring to City Council?

I'll ask the next question. Have you previously served on a board or committee for any city or organization?

Thank you, sir. Are there any other follow-up questions?

Thank you, Councilor Gartage. I just want to say thank you to both candidates for applying. It's never easy being in the hot seat and raising your hand to volunteer to be in these hot seats, right? So I want to say thank you to both of you. I did want to follow up as in the past there have been public comments directed at the council in that seat you're sitting in right now that have lacked professionalism and courtesy. And so I'm curious, how will you remain professional and composed when sitting in the hot seat on the dais, if appointed?

So, if you'd like to have a discussion. Oh. Councillor Ugarte.

Sure, I'll go ahead and kick off the discussion. And just to make sure we're discussing pros and cons of each candidate, is that the direction you're looking for?

Yes, any discussion you guys would like to have followed, I'm hoping it's going to be followed by a motion.

Yeah, again, you know, I want to say thank you to both candidates. It is never easy to be in this spot and to be grilled, especially. And it's also hard to hear sometimes the feedback that comes across this dais. That being said, you know, I think for Mr. Murdoch, I really appreciated his calm approach. Brings a lot of experience from the military sector and also for Intel. So a lot of things that can go, translate into this position. The part that I am concerned about is the lack of governmental experience for both candidates. And that is the nature of the game that we're in, right, of appoin

Who would like to provide some more feedback? Councillor Ruston.

Okay, Councillor Ruston. So having been sitting there, what, two and a half months ago, you know, I applaud you guys for raising your hand. And, you know, the challenge I think that either of you are going to run into is what I'm running into is, A lot of times, you don't even know what you don't know. I had no previous government experience. I've served on boards and things like that. And I agree that you are never going to please all people all the time. I don't think that that's a realistic expectation that anyone should set. how are you going to work with the other side? You work with them

Councilor Weber. Councilor Weber, two very well qualified gentlemen. I'm very grateful for your courage. I've done that before and it's not easy to sit up there. I was just very impressed with both of your backgrounds. I think Tom Murdock here, the military background is wonderful. I think all your experience in leadership, My nephew is also in leadership in the military. The only humorous thing he tells me that when he goes home with his wife, she clarifies that that moment no longer exists. Now it sounds like you've already adapted 10 years. But again, I think that's a real strength you brin

Thank you, Councilman. Councilor Warrington, do you want to send in?

I don't really have a lot to say. Both candidates are very good. One seems to have a huge military background in leading and decision making. The other one is more into our town and growth and helping our community and has that background here in volunteerism. So it's a tough call because both candidates are very good.

Thank you, Councilor. Are there more discussion comments? Would anyone like to make a nomination if you guys are ready?

Councilor Weber, I would make a motion to nominate Mike Schurz. As a nomination, is there a second?

I'll second that. There's a second. Councillor Ugarte, Councillor Rusty.

Yeah, I'll go ahead and make a motion to nominate Mr. Murdoch.

Okay. So, Colleen. Leave the next point is, can we have ballots. So write your name on it as a counselor. And right there. First candidate and then returning home.

Okay, the results are three to two in favor of Mike Schurz. Congratulations, and thank you both of you for participating.

All right, let's have an order. Okay, we're now going to move to 7B, swearing in of the new appointed city councillor. I mean, can you administer. You want to use my federal as well. Yep. My can come up here. So usually we go right up there. So just that way. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. So, so most important is don't trip over wires. I think right about there is where we usually put it. And Colleen, come on over there. Let's go see how's the camera working. I think you're on the camera. Okay, go ahead, guys.

You can now take a seat on the news. Okay, looking for my next agenda item. We're now on to Seventh Seat Authorization. Authorization to hire for position of programs and communications supervisor. Paul.

Are there any questions for Paul? Let's see here. Paul, are you looking for a motion from us? Yes. Okay.

Can I get a motion? Sure, Councillor Raulston. I move to authorize the hiring of Perry Rovell. Rovell? Roll bell. This is a new program to a communications supervisor and authorize the interim city manager to negotiate starting salary.

Second is from Councillor Warrington. All those in favor?

You know, Sergeant Nate is, do we have one? I do not. Okay.

Thank you guys. We're going to move to the next agenda item. This is a 7D discussion and action on organ support 8 and 9, adopting a figure that calls in weeds analysis. Paul, is our city attorney online?

Emily, if you are online, can you unmute? I believe she asked us to give her a little pep talk. So I will attempt I don't believe she is online. So how about a Mac that we cover? Well, I would, would you guys be open to me trying to get Emily and then we transition to counselor Warrington? Would that be okay with you guys? Sure. Okay. Councillor Warrington, can you start in your presentation? So my two cents about what I would like this data center BAM, this is just my two cents, is Councillor Warrington is going to share some information. I'm looking for there to be a discussion where you guy

If you have my son's money. I think they're on the agenda. So while calling is getting the agenda I the deck up on the screen. I want to thank everyone for reviewing this important data and I want to explain there are no decisions that will may be made tonight about the data center ban. Instead, we will learn a bit more about them and determine if we want to proceed with next steps and what those might be. The first slide that will be pulled up is a slide I pulled from this Hillsborough City Council reference material, which is dated 7-1-26. So just a few months ago, the Hillsborough City Coun

Thank you, Councillor. That was a great presentation. Open to, Councilor, feedback, comments, questions?

Yeah, Councilor Russ, I think that there are still so many questions that are unanswered, starting with what exactly is a data center? I agree, I don't want a data center backing up to my neighborhood. But I think it's naive just to say no data centers, right? Because we don't have a good working definition of it. We don't know what, I've worked with companies where they host their own large language models. And is that technically a data center? So are we going to end up banning other types of businesses that are like a data center? I don't think that we've consulted the planning commission o

Okay. And Councilor Warrington, I, When I started this, I mentioned we're not here to propose we're banning data centers today. We are here discussing next steps to see if we want to discuss how we're going to do it and if that's something we want to look into further. So all of the questions you just said are things that we want to look at. And we do have a template that Emily Waldron gave us Ordinance 501 saying designated data centers and non-permitted, all of this. She gave us this template. I think we've all seen Ordinance 501 come through. So it's something that I think we should explore

Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Warrington for presenting all of this information. I do have a few questions. The first question I have is, have we consulted with the Planning Commission regarding this?

No, I have not done any preliminary work. That's what this meeting is for, is to have proceed.

Okay. The other You know, statement I would like to say is contrary to maybe social media belief. I also don't want a data center. My backyard literally looks over to the East side expansion potential. And I think all the time about how I am going to miss waking up to Cloverfields and seeing the coyotes as crazy as that is. I'm going to miss that. And I know that's, that's inevitable that something will likely be in the future. Um, but I just want to say, I don't want that as centers either, but I also have seen both sides to this scenario. And as I discussed at previous meeting, we have, and

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Webberman and Councillor Schertz. What can I do, guys?

Councillor Webber, I would like to You know, I do agree. It makes sense to proceed with the banning of the data centers. I do think the process is very important, though. We've got to have the planning commission, let them have input to it, more people from the city, some sort of joint meeting. But I think it definitely makes sense to me to be proactive in this. The idea that someday we'll grow, then we should make this. I think we do it ahead of time. I think we use the information we already have. Emily Waldron has given us some excellent information. We need to use that, show it to the atto

Thank you, Counselor. I'll toss in my two cents as a counselor. So I would like to see our employment land used for creating jobs in the community. I don't feel like data centers do that. And I'm concerned about impact to citizen utility rates in both water and electricity. And I would say I'm concerned about chemicals next to schools. Those are three basic things that I'm kind of concerned about. And I feel like based on the conversation tonight, I've heard a general consensus. What I would suggest to the team, and I'm open to feedback here, is it is 9.11 p.m. So... Do you think would it be o

Thank you. Is everyone okay with us moving forward like that?

All of you want a motion from us or are you good? No, I'm good. I have direction. Okay. Thank you, sir. I'd like to move Emily, are you are you online. And.

Just real quick, I just want to touch base of all you have the ordinance 501 or do you need a copy I do not have that okay, thank you start go ahead.

Okay, thank you come for working. We are now on we had to do a little switch up so we just finished a conversation on data centers. Now we'd like to move to our agenda items. I believe it's 7D discussion and action on 489, adopting updated housing needs analysis. And Paul, is there anything you want to say before Emily kicks us off?

Councilor Rustin. Thank you, Councilor Rustin. Yeah, I guess we might as well kick this off. I feel like I'm on a roll over the last couple sessions. I think this falls under one of those, I don't necessarily know what I don't know on this. I don't have the history on it. But as I understand this, and maybe Emily, you can give me some clarification on this. My concern is that if this is not adopted, the housing needs analysis goes away. That was, and the housing needs analysis was done, I think, by Portland State University, is that correct? The original one? Right, right, but I don't remember

HNC, which is basically going to guarantee a change in mandating high density housing in North Plains. Is that correct? Am I understanding this properly?

Thank you, Councillor Ugarte. Thank you for being here tonight, Emily. I know it's getting late. I have three things coming to mind. One, we're about 10 minutes away from council rolls ending at 9.30 p.m., so I would like to ask Council President DeForge, if he's looking for consensus to continue past 930 or tonight's meeting.

I would like to continue past 930 if we need this for the H&E. Yes.

Agree. I'm good. Okay. Thank you. And then the other question I had, Emily, we just appointed a new city councillor tonight. And as you can imagine, there's a ton of data and acronyms. And I'm curious, Is tonight's newly appointed city councillor able to vote on this particular topic, given that there's so much history and background? I don't know if anyone would feel prepared to vote, but I'm just curious if that person is eligible to vote.

Okay, thank you. And then just the last thing I wanted to touch on just to make sure we're all understanding correctly, So if we do not do anything with the HNA and we move forward, I'm sorry, let me back up. If we adopt the HNA as it is currently stands based on the old PSU population forecast, that essentially locks us in to the density requirements that allow lower density for the city of North Plains. Is that correct? So lower density, we don't adopt it. We have to, anytime we want to expand the UGB, we have to do an OHNA and then that is subject to the state's higher density requirements,

Yes. So we, if we make no action tonight, we do not adopt ordinance 489. We, if we ever want to expand even an acre within the city, we would be subject to the state's rules for density, i.e. high density housing, middle, not middle housing, but multifamily housing, et cetera. Is that correct? That's correct. Okay. And then the other question I have is if we do nothing with Ordinance 489, do we or we are still subject to that higher density at a future date either way, right? So if we make no action, we're going to be subject to the higher density. But if we at least adopt the ordinance, we ca

All right, jump in here. So can I argue a little bit with you, Emily and Councillor DuVerte? My understanding instead of a binary choice of do we adopt, readopt our original HNA or look at an alternative is I don't think my understanding of DLCD rules is that we don't have a viable path anymore under our old HNA because DLCD is going to require us to go through Washington County DLCD approval with the UGB expansion by January 1st, 2027. And we don't have from my map, from DLCD's map, a viable path to getting there. Is that an accurate summary?

Thank you. Any other questions? Councilor Weber, can you clarify what you're saying? So I'm hearing these contradictory things. So what you're saying is even if we pass 489, it's not going to end up being valid? Correct. And is that correct, Emily?

As the law stands now, as the regulations stand now from the appropriate entity, they've said 489 would not go forward. We would have to appeal it or do legal action or do something.

Emily, I have a question. And I'm going to put you on the spot a little bit. But there's been a lot of money invested in Ordinance 489. I'm not a risk taker. I don't like the idea of risking potentially submitting something after January 1st and being able to maybe defend it. So I'm curious, one, do we know how much we've already spent on the existing HNA? And then I can ask you my follow-up questions now or later regarding expenses and what that's gonna look like for either trajectory.

No, I appreciate it. I think it's more so, you know, what have we already spent? What would it cost to appeal it potentially or argue it if we did adopt 489 versus what would it take financially to scrap this whole thing and start over and start from ground zero. So I'm just trying to weigh cost comparison between those two existing options.

Councilor Rustin. Yeah, Councilor Rustin. Regarding the DLCD's interpretation, is North Plains the only city, do you know, that is running up against this particular... I mean, are we the only small town that is sort of caught, sounds like, between a rock and a hard spot on this?

So Emily, you gave us three choices. I would suggest a fourth choice. So you challenge DLCD, continue like normal, new HCNA, new HCAA, I would say option number four is you let the old HNA lapse, withdraw, whatever the proper verb is, and focus on infill so you don't have a new UGB requirement, so you would not proceed with a new HNA or new HCA for potential years.

Let me just check around or get you can be working. That's where we're going to work for you. I mean I'm still taking it in.

I mean the key thing I'm hearing here is. What I have to rely on his information I have so currently the other TV says we have no not forward for 49. That's what I'm hearing right we could consider litigation but as it stands now for 89 is going away. So, you know, my instinct is going to be I don't want to jump into a huge fiscal, I don't want to spend $100,000 or $50,000 on something I could easily lose. I did see some of the numbers that Councilor Church referred to. I think at some point the city providing some housing for the working middle class that live in our city that can't afford $5

I've got to say, I love the Highland Park community. I think they're very nice.

So we're working. I'm sitting here hearing all of this and then wonder, even though I'm appointed, what our residential people want, what our residents would want, right? Would they want us to do an HNA or push the HNA, I guess I should say, into litigation and see if our city attorneys could win? Because that's what it would take. If we kept the H&A the way it is, we can't get it done by January. So it would go into litigation and we would spend money trying to push that through. Would the citizens want that? Or would the citizens want us to use that litigation money and make an HCA that incl

Might toss an idea out there. So I think the UGB associated with this HMA was around the 160 acres, which would be about 50% increase into the size of the city. And I think it's a, this is inconsistent with the referendum and the 2024 election is my interpretation. That's where you are.

Thank you, Councilor Ugarte. I'm going to, I'm going to make a motion and I want to have some, some thoughtful discussion regarding this. So please refrain from pitchforks quite yet. But Councilor Ugarte, I move to adopt ordinance 489. So I have a second.

Second. Okay. I've got a motion, active motion and a second. Is there any discussion before you guys would like to vote?

Councilor Russell. Yeah, Councilor Rustin, based on one of Emily's earlier comments, I am actually very concerned, is probably the right word, with the process of going through an HCA. I think that we are going to eventually have to do a UGB. You are going to have to have this. And what she had said, and Emily, correct me if I'm wrong, there is a low-cost option to appeal the DLCD. Did I get that right? DLCD. you know, ruling. And it just seems to me if there's a low-cost option to go through the appeal and we don't have to have everything done by January 1st, 2027, it doesn't make a lot of se

Thank you, Counselor Ugarte. So I want to discuss this a little bit more. So Emily, I know you had mentioned that we're not clear on numbers of how much we've already spent. But my understanding, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, is that we've already invested, I'm just going to throw out tens of thousands of dollars, in the H&A. And The risk is that if we move forward with adopting ordinance 489, that Luba or DLCD will contest it and we will have to fight that. And that cost of BEH fighting it is 10,000, 20,000. I mean, if you could ballpark above or below 50,000 or something like thi

Okay, so... Would you, again, I don't want to put numbers in your mouth, but if we proceeded forward with 489 and most of the work is already done, is it what, another 10% worth of work that needs to be done to bring us to the finish line versus starting back over at zero if we don't adopt 489?

Okay, so we're like hovering over the finish line as we're currently projecting for 489. However, if we don't adopt 489, we've just shot ourselves in the foot and we are all the way back at the starting line and we have to figure out how we're going to pay for a new study and going through that entire process and time as well. Does that capture that correctly?

Okay, so at any point in the next, and I'm just going to throw out 20 years because that's what we're revisioning, any time in the next 20 years we ever want to expand the UGB, even by an acre, we would need to pay those tens of thousands of dollars to start this process over again. Is that right?

Okay. Thank you for clarifying. So I think there's so much information here and I know this is such a sensitive topic. I think, again, I've spoken my piece. I don't want data centers. I don't want my backyard to turn into high density. On the other side, I also want us to have affordable housing and I want my own children to be able to afford living in North Plains. So I don't want to discredit any of those statements. However, taking a step back and removing the emotions from this, logically, if we're already 90% to the finish line, to me, and who does not like risk, it is worth taking the ri

Councillor Webber, then Councillor Ruston. Clarification. Does the current HNA require us if we grow to grow with a certain number of acres of houses? Are we locked into housing growth?

Yeah, I just want to make a clarification on this. I am not necessarily in love with ordinance 49. I don't know enough one way or the other. I think just going down the same trail of logic as Council Ugarte to go ahead and take the, we can always go ahead and amend the ordinance down the road. We can go ahead and challenge the DLCD and it's a relatively low cost compared to restarting. But we're going to lose the if we decide that we want to do an HCA down the road that the new state laws are zoning is in the best interest of North Plains for the sake of affordability. We can still do that. My

I'll toss in my final two cents is I appreciate all your thoughtful feedback. Um, to me, the low risk approach is recognizing that, uh, unfortunately, North Plains does not live in a vacuum when it comes to housing. The state of Oregon and its agencies like DLCD have a lot of control over the types of plans that we can make. And their temporary rule in July of 26 was unfavorable to the city. That was not anything that anyone in this council did. But the reality is that we now are in a position where we're being asked to take a litigation strategy against a rule published by a government agency

AGAIN, I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF RISK EITHER. HOWEVER, I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF NOT HAVING OPTIONS. AND WE ARE GOING TOWARDS SOME FISCAL cliffs within our city that we'll visit in the coming years. And so the idea of we'll just throw this away for now and we'll deal with it in the future, knowing that that is a huge financial burden that we would need to take on if we ever want to expand and we don't have a plan for it. So for me, I, yes, I don't want to spend taxpayer money, but I also don't want us to let the idea of 10 or $20,000, if I'm quoting Emily correctly, to get in the way of us havin

Thank you, counselor. Not to discourage discussion, but would you guys like to vote or would you like to continue this discussion? I'm comfortable with the vote. Okay. So just to remind people, we had a council mistake last time on voting. I just want to pause a little bit since this is so important. If you vote aye, that would be to... Move the HNA forward. Everyone agree with that summary? I'm trying to be impartial here. Ordinance 489. Thank you. If you vote nay, you are voting against moving that vote. Is that a good impartial summary? So at this point, I'll do the vote. Quick question. Ye

Councilor Ugarte, are we able to explain our reasoning for our vote before placing our vote, because I'm sure that we're probably going to do a verbal roll call with those. I'm just curious, this council's thought process and why they're voting a certain way, whether it's for or against.

I'm open to possibilities. Would you like to do a roll call vote and then have people explain their, is that what you're asking, Board of Councilors, regarding this?

That's what I'm proposing. But again, I'm open to hearing feedback and thoughts with the rest of the board.

Councilor Walton, I think it's probably up to the individual to determine how they want to cancel their vote and explain it.

Okay. Councilor Weber, I think you'd have to do voluntary because it's not traditional and you're required to explain a vote. Certainly, we are shaking ground to do that.

Okay. Councilor Hurtado, are you okay with that?

Again, I'm fine if that's the will of the council. Again, I'm basically seeking transparency amongst my peers for the community because I think us stating our reasoning really helps squash the rumor mill that happens. And so take your stance, make your vote, and stand behind it and share why. So again, I'm not forcing anyone to do anything, but I want to think through the lens of transparency for the constituents that we represent. Thank you, council.

I am going to vote may because I'm hearing 10 to 20,000 30,000 and all of these numbers I'm hearing are actual there I'm not sure maybe this amount and I

There's no facts behind any of that. The fiscal risks that I'm hearing about, again, there's no data behind that. So that to me isn't legitimate either. So I'm voting nay because there's no need to spend the litigation money on something that it's like running up to a brick wall and trying to climb it. And we might make it over and we might not, but we're going to spend all of this money for litigation that isn't ours, it's our, the townspeople money. And I need to be responsible for that.

Aye, and I think I've explained my reasoning.

Councillor Webber, I would, I'm going to take the mic and I would vote nay against, my thought would be, In the past, we have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars pushing through growth plans unsuccessfully. I want to respect the fact that as it stands now, 489 is dead. It's not moving forward. We have an option, which is risky, to appeal, to litigate, to do everything. I just think we have to accept where we are at, and I think we have to move forward from that point without doing anything more expensive, more risky. So I would say admit the fact that DLC is spoken, 49 is no longer active.

Again name. I believe that. The LCD in their temporary ruling has not given us a viable path to move or each and every one And it's inconsistent with the referendum in 2004 lecture. The motion fails, 4-2. Okay, moving on to the next agenda item. So it is, do a time check here. It is 9.55 p.m. Paul, is there anything that we could postpone to our next meeting? I want to get people out of here now.

Thank you, sir. So I'll move to item 7F, MACC cable television agreement. Are you looking for a motion from us? Yes. Okay.

I think that's really quick, Councilor Weber. On the MAC, there's like 15 entities a part of the MAC. They've created the experts a 10-year agreement with Comcast that they need all of the entities to approve. They've asked us to get them to approve each of us by the end of September. It is a complicated thing they were doing, but the experts did it. Again, MAC is a massive organization. There's 15 entities. Everybody is on board. I attended the meeting, so I'm looking for us. I realize that we're rushing it, but all the information is here. But they need from us this month official approval o

We would appreciate some new microphones. That's what you heard earlier today.

Yeah. I also have clarification. I think we receive approximately 15,000 a year as part of this agreement. There is a cash benefit to the city of New Orleans.

We've the council team received a public comment on the citizen and it was basically complaining that some parts of the city didn't have the same access to Internet or types of service providers that other parts of the city. It is this something that your organization could help us with and help us understand bring additional services to our community.

Yeah, I think I've heard from the community that they'd be interested in. What other questions do we have?

HAB-Jacques Juilland- Okay, would you guys like to make a motion.

I would make a motion that we approve the cable television agreement with Comcast or the Mac. Okay.

Is there a second? Second. Second from Councillor Rustin. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. I really appreciate your time. Thank you for your time. Thank you. We were wondering about Okay, guys. So is there any chance that I could apologize to staff and could we wrap this up?

Okay. So everyone's okay. What you guys are? If there's any further business, and if there isn't, I'm going to adjourn. Is there any further business before I adjourn? Okay. Meeting is adjourned at 10 o'clock.