City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Now we're on to item number 4, agenda additions or corrections. So I believe I had some minute corrections. So I would like to move the minutes out of the consent agenda to new business. Is that okay with everyone? Yes. Okay. Are there any other changes to the agenda that people would like to make? Hearing none, I'd be open to a motion.

Councillor Weber, I would make a motion for the approval of the consent agenda.

It will just be the agenda since we removed the consent agenda. Thank you. Could I get a second, please? Second. Okay. Councilor Rustin as the second. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Now we're going to go to public comment. I have the public comment sheets here. Just a reminder, please come up and state your name, resident, rural resident, non-resident. You have three minutes. Let me get my timer ready. The first name is Lisa Farrar.

Good evening, counselors. I'm here tonight as a Bryn Hill homeowner to share a brief update about our community. Last week, as you may know, the developer, Lennar, officially turned control over of the Brighill homeowners association to the homeowners themselves. We now have a homeowner elected board of directors. We are also retaining the current management company Rolling Rock that has worked closely with the developer to provide continuity as we move forward. We also understand that public restrooms are being installed in the area and will be managed by the city. We'd like to establish a good line of communication with the city so that any concerns regarding safety, Cleanliness or maintenance can be addressed together and promptly. Brynhild has welcomed many new families, young families to North Plains, bringing energy, experiences, and perspectives to our community. We know we're still new here, but we hope to become a welcomed and valued part of North Plains, to be good neighbors, to get involved, and to contribute to the community we now call home. Thank you.

Thank you, Lisa. The next name is Meredith Bach.

I'm Meredith Bach. I live on 309th, three blocks from here. And I live in the Jesse Mays Community Center. In June, I suggested we install a pictorial tribute to Jesse with her photographs so people would know that she was not a man. And I now have an exhibit that you can send around me with a rough draft of how that might work. And it is small. And as I've talked to various people, we've thought of everything from statuary to magnificent big pieces of art. But I spoke to Jesse's son, Elmer, who is 100 years old and counting. And he agreed with me that Jesse would be pleased if people could get a drink of water at the playground. And the size of that example, the exhibit is the size that we can afford, $500. And I suggest and Elmer agrees that it could easily be installed over the drinking fountains and people would be refreshed and informed. And I hope that this suggestion right now will arrive at the parks meeting next Monday if, in fact, that occurs. I've had trouble finding out when that group gets together. One suggestion was that you needed to advise them to get together. But in any case, my words will be recorded, I hope, and you provided. Thank you.

Thank you, Meredith. Next up, Russ Schill.

Russ Sheldon, resident. I'm here tonight because I care deeply about the future and the governance of the city. I want to address something bigger than any one counselor, issue, or political disagreement. Who is governing North Plains? And are voters being given the opportunity to make decision for themselves? Over the past several years, North Plains has experienced significant turnover in elected leadership and senior administration, including mayoral and council resignations, city manager turnover, and changes in department leadership. At the same time, more council positions have been filled by appointment rather than direct elections. Appointments may be legally permitted, but there is an important distinction between temporarily filling a vacancy and allowing appointments to become a continuing substitute for the voters' ability to choose their representatives. That is why I believe the council should be cautious about any action that further separates public office from direct voter accountability. That brings me to the recall process. Recall is an exercise of the voter's power. It is not a determination of guilt or a conviction, nor does it require voters to remove an official. It simply gives the people the opportunity to decide whether an elected official should continue serving. Once citizens have lawfully completed the recall process and submitted the required signatures, the ultimate decision should belong to the voters. Whether Councilor Mark DeForge should remain in office should not be decided by this council. It should be decided by the people. Regardless of where we stand on growth, development, audits, city finances, or individual councilors, I believe we can agree that government works best when it is transparent accountable and answerable to the people it serves. That means following the city charter, respecting county rules, maintaining appropriate boundaries between elected officials and city staff, and conducting public business openly when the law requires it. North Plains is at an important crossroads. We can continue on a path where residents question whether their voices matter, or we can restore trust by respecting the voters and respecting their voices, following the rules, and putting residents at the center of city government. Ultimately, the people, not the council, activists, special interests, or individual office holders should have the final say about who represents them. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

and stuff, which can.

David setting up. Is it on?

Did I cut something? Oh.

How's that? All right, don't worry. So it's okay. I got loud voice. Anyway, i'm here tonight morning guys. hey. Well, we try don't get. All right. Okay. All right. Well, anyway, but you can all live on. I live on Lenox Street right here, about a block and a half from right here from City Hall Blender for 51 years. Anyway, I'm here to support Sidney Hearst tonight for mayor. This is the first time that I can remember in 44 years that we've had this appointment by so many people sitting here on city council. They should all be elected. That's what we have a government for and gives everybody a chance to hear for themselves, not just a few people that are concerned to be sitting here tonight. So all you city councilors are, this is a pivotal point for North Plains, I feel. We need somebody in here. I have nothing against Mark as maybe running the city, but I think he could move over Let's sit and sit down. Let's all learn from experience. That's what you're all missing that I can see. It takes time. Usually we get one or two come in on a, on a quorum of seven counselors. So nobody ever steps right into a mayor position. And like I said, I think you guys need, that's what you're lacking is the experience. And you four or five times, you never took that stuff in the pointers. And, uh, Why don't you guys want to, I mean, what, you're scared to death of us or what? I mean, we're not going to chew your head off. We want to help you. And that's what we're here for. So that's my role. Cindy can do that. I've been with her and her husband. We were on city council for almost 40 years. Her husband, her. Sat right here and we had fun. And I want you guys to have fun. So take my advice, please. Thank you so much. Thank you, sir.

That concludes public comment. Is there anyone that is online that submitted a request? Yeah.

Council, I submitted a request at 10.30 this morning. Linda Gallus-Merton from Strong Towns.

Go ahead, Linda. Thank you.

So good evening, councillors. My name is Linda Gallus Merton, representing Strong Towns North Plains with members throughout 97133. Typically, cities pass specific municipal codes that explicitly adopt their logo or seal, prohibit unauthorized commercial or political use, and establish fines or legal penalties for misuse. We have not been able to find any adoption of such a policy in North Plains, nor can we find any council approved policy governing the use of the city's logo. As a result, if you stop by the North Plains Senior Center, a private nonprofit, you will see this recently installed sign on the front door. As you can see, it bears the distinct logo for the City of North Plains. Seeing a city logo on a building is supposed to mean that the structure belongs to or is operated by the local municipal government. This is not the case for the North Plains Senior Center. So this raises a number of questions. One, who among city staff authorized the use of the logo for this purpose? If no one, then who at the senior center authorized its use? Did public works install the sign, as reported by eyewitnesses? If yes, who gave the work order to public works? And who paid for the sign? Since there seems to be no codes that would forbid this type of use, there may be nothing to be done in this particular case other than to ask nicely for the sign to be taken down. However, the council can adopt policy around the use and abuse of the city's logo, and we urge you to do so with some urgency and to make the policy retroactive. Thank you very much for your consideration.

Thank you, Linda. Is there anyone else online that submitted public comment requests by 3 p.m.? Hearing none, I'm going to move on. That includes public comment. On our agenda next is consent agenda which we have moved to new business. So now moved to new business. Awarding contract for new roof on the Jesse means to use them.

There are no city council you have for you a report recommending a contract to fix the roof here at the Navy Center. Public works has received 3 bids for the work they've evaluated them and we're recommending that you adopt resolution 2349. I'm sorry, you in 26 you adopted resolution 2349 allocating $100,000 out of the general fund contingency with the new roof. Our recommendation is that SA roofing be selected to replace the current roof at the maze center. with a metal roof and amount not to exceed $59,950 and authorize the city manager to enter into a contract with the SAA.

Thank you, sir. I'll just add to that quick recap. So there is a budget committee meeting where this was discussed and the funds were allocated in a resolution that the funds. So now they've selected a contractor and they're looking for feedback or approval from us to proceed. Now, are you looking for a motion from us or just a kind of way? You can move the recommendation. Okay. So first, can we have some discussion? What do you guys think about the new roof and its vendor?

Councilor Warrington, I just wanted to call out to the three contractors Gail Levy, Ph.D.: puzzles one from ideal ripping I did some Ai Google searching I have no conflict of interest I didn't communicate with these people I just. Gail Levy, Ph.D.: researched them a little bit ideal ripping has a 4.9 out of five stars jt does a 4.6 out of five stars and essay the one they're recommending has a five out of five stars, so I just want to say good job on in ripping choices.

Councilor Rustin, I do have a question. If we're being asked to approve an amount of $59,950, not to exceed that, it says right here that the cost, all bids included in the case of the need to replace what portions of the structures, there will be an additional cost. I watch a lot of public shows, there's always additional costs.

What happens then? As $100,000 is allocated in the budget for this project, I like the concept that they do not exceed, but the contract will require them to come to us and say, hey, we're going to go beyond budget. We'll need this extra money. So that's what will happen. The big concern is the wood structure around the roof. All right. Thank you.

One more question. Councilor Warrington, is there any scheduling constraints around any of these?

So will the contractor be able to move forward quickly as we approach the rainy season?

That is our hope. We understand that the rainy season is coming. We want to get this work in and done before it gets heavy and rain.

Councilor Weber, do we have clarity? Does this building get shut down throughout the entire process?

We think it might have limited use. It will depend on the status of the weather as well as the work in progress.

Okay. Thank you for compiling this report. I did want to just reiterate if we can align that All of the bids that we receive, we do, because we are using taxpayer funds, need to select the lowest bid, correct? Right. Okay. The other part I wanted to touch on is what the timeline looks like, and it sounds like there's still some question marks there, but I think, as we all know, this space is slated to be used for some community events that are really near and dear to our heart. So I would just be curious if later on you could provide an update of a timeline and any disruptions to the space.

Yeah, we'll be meeting next week with the contractor to work all those details out. We'll also have a copy of the schedule of potential uses and see how we can adjust work schedules so some of those events can take place.

Okay, thank you.

So I prepped ahead of time in case you wanted a motion. I'll just toss this motion out for your guidance consideration. The council authorizes the interim city manager to award a contract to SA Roofing with authority to spend up to $59,950. Does that sound like an acceptable motion to you? Yes, it does. Okay. Is there any more discussion that you guys would like to have? I got to say, I really appreciate, I believe it was Cody who, who moved this forward. We asked for this work, I think it was maybe in the May, June timeframe. And I really appreciate him stepping up and moving this forward. So at this point, are you guys comfortable with moving forward on a motion? Yes. Okay. So the motion again was that council authorizes the interim city manager toward a contract to SA Roofing with authority to spend up to $59,950. I get a council whoever so moved. Thank you, sir. I I'm looking for a second. Council are working with a second. So we have an active motion. Is there any discussion guys would like to have before we vote on this. Okay, all in favor of this motion, say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed. Motion carries. Now I'm going to move to agenda 7B, which is authorization to seek bids to contract for city manager search.

Mayor and City Council, as you know from my contract, I will be here through February of 27. I think the high on your priority list would be the selection process for a permanent city manager. I'm recommending that you authorize me to seek proposals from search firms that bring those recommendations to council on October 26. I included in my report a rough schedule. The marketplace for finding permanent city managers is really tough. It takes more time than you would think. But October, for us to contract with a firm, review and update the manager job description, which would be your job. In November, begin recruitment and seeking applicants. In December, review the applicants, selecting five or six finalists, conduct the interviews in town, select the final candidate, and hopefully in January or early February, start the new manager. Now, that schedule will firm up once we get it firm, but I'm recommending that you authorize me to seek proposals from search firms and bring that recommendation back to you in October this year.

Okay. So you're looking for an authorization to begin the search. You're not going to make choices or spend money or brings us. So the council still has the ability to shake the process. Good question, Mary. No, this is something that you have to do. Yeah. Okay.

Any discussion you guys would like to have? Excellent idea. Do we need a resolution or just the consensus support? Paul, would you like a motion from us on this?

I'd like a motion adopting the recommendation. Okay, so if I were to, I saw Councillor Ugarte, would you like to?

Sure, Councillor Ugarte, I move to authorize the interim city manager to seek proposals from search firms and bring a recommendation to council in October 2026. Do I have a second? Second.

Second from Councillor Warrington. Any further discussion before you guys vote on this? Okay. All those in favor of the motion, say aye. Thank you that's motion carries. Moving to the agenda item 7 C resolution number 2370 authorization to proceed with state grant.

Remember the City Council as you well know the city's been working for several years to clean up the Glencoe property. We've been working with outback as well as Tom hold but together an application for a state grant to assist in that process. There are several several sources that have offered to assist the city in the cleanup. And we want to take advantage of that and the schedule for the grant applications is later on this month so we need to move fairly quickly. There is no known budget impact to you at this time, but I would ask you to adopt a resolution authorizing the application for a state grant. Okay, thank you, sir.

Is there any discussion? What is, if we receive the grant, how long before we would actually have the funds?

According to Tom and CalPAC on their schedule of anticipation, It's shortly after the 1st of next year to get moving on putting up that property.

Counselor want and again just for transparency of people been asking me what the statuses on what's happening. So from what I understand this grant is supplemental funding for the structure removal at the same time. A soil amendment paperwork is going to be worked on. Bids for soil removal will be happening. The soil is then removed. Clean soil is added. And then the developmental steps occur from there. Just a recap.

That is correct, Councilwoman.

Thank you.

I'll chime in. I really appreciate the staff for moving this forward. I think this is a big opportunity for the city. Love to clean up that property. And I love their willingness to get the grants. Is this Bailey and Eric and who else was participating on that? Tom Holt. Tom Holt. Yes. I appreciate the initiative.

This sounds like a good idea. I should point out, Mayor and Council, that lots of the work that I do is driven by the priorities. The fact that we have a free commitment for the money that this is a high priority for the council to get done means that we've got to throw stuff together to get it this far. What Tom's waiting for is the signed resolution and then that's what the state will want to know too. Where's the resolution from the city? I should also mention that a gentleman contacted me the other day. He claims he has a contract to take down the barn on that property. I haven't found the contract yet, I need to find that, research it, and double check with the attorneys to make sure that can be done.

I know there's been concern about salvaging kind of nice material. I think Ross's feedback to us was he felt that structure was unsafe, and so I would just, whatever we can do to keep employees safe and contractors safe as we demo it, but try and preserve as much of it as possible. Are there any other comments from Council?

I would hope if there was a contract that person could also produce the contract. There is one. I'm hoping that, yes.

Okay. If there's So, uh, calling I've used a roll call votes on resolutions. Do you have a list of counselors? Okay. Are you guys okay with the roll call vote?

Thank you. Counselor Ugarte, I move to approve resolution number 2370, authorizing the city manager to apply for a state grant in support of the Glenville project.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. So that concludes item number C. Now we're going to go to item number B.

which is action to select a mayor for the city. There are two applicants, myself and Susan Peirce. And since I have recused myself, I'm going to now turn it over to our Presiding Officer for this action.

Thank you, Mark Torch. Just as a quick overview of this process, This process is defined in our Charter Section 33 and North Plains Municipal Code 3337. In that Municipal Code 3337, we may hold interviews, but it's not required. However, we've all decided, of course, to interview both applicants. The vacancy has to be posted in a newspaper, which it was. The vacancy is posted for two weeks, which it was. There is not a tiebreaker vote. And we all have a set of questions. OK. As a presiding officer, is there anyone here on the council that wants to recluse themselves from this process? And Mark walked away. He's holding his hand up over there. So I need to ask the council for a consensus vote for him to recluse himself from this process. So just consensus, say aye if you approve.

Aye.

Any nay? OK. That means there are now four councillors and four votes. So if a tie occurs, we need to go into deliberations because there is no tiebreaker vote. Again, the questions from the councillors, I'm sorry, any questions from the councillors before we begin the interviews?

Yeah, Councilor Rustin, I've got a couple of concerns on this, actually. Given the information that was submitted today with the recall, there still seems to be some questions. I question whether or not this is something that we should decide on today or whether or not we should postpone this pending written legal analysis for the city attorney on their call petition status under the Oregon Statute 249.865 of the North Plains Charter.

Any other comments? Anybody have a comment around that?

I don't see a reason not to proceed. Councillor Webber.

Councillor Huigarte. Thank you, Councillor Huigarte. That was also a concern of mine, just given, again, the emails that we've received today mentioning the recall. I also would be curious if Emily is online, if we could potentially discuss, you know, any negative outcomes if we postpone this appointment process until the recall petition has been confirmed and gone from there.

Is Emily on the call?

Emily, if there's anyone from BEH to represent legal counsel on this call, that would be great.

Mayor and members of the council, I did talk to the attorneys late this afternoon and included in my quick note to you what Emily's opinion is. If the current Mark If he were to be selected as mayor, that would render the recall move. It takes it away because he's being recalled as a councilman and not as a mayor. So that would be the impact. It is, and Emily mentioned this too, this is a policy choice that you all have to grapple with. You either want to move forward with this or you want to postpone action until the recall is done or some other action that you may choose to do.

Councillor Weber, my understanding from the attorney, she did not tell us that she recommended that we should not take action. No, she did not.

Councillor Ruston, about the email that you sent out, I think the words you used was the city attorney suggests I would like to see a written legal opinion from her. I would also like to, you know, now that we received the signatures, I think that needs to be validated before we, you know, whether or not we even have a valid recall.

Councilor Warrington, so were the signatures submitted to county or to whomever needs to validate the signatures at 10 o'clock this morning?

To be honest with you, Councilwoman, I do not know the status of the signatures. I only received the letter. It would take some research for us to get the signatures and spend the time to have them validated. I talked to Bailey about this and suggested we work closely with the county to make sure that it's done above board and open.

Okay. So at this point, we don't know how many signatures are collected. We don't know if they've been submitted to the county. We don't know if they're all valid. But we do have the attorney's advice that there's no risk for us to complete this process. Is that correct?

That would be my interpretation of what she's saying.

Okay. Then it is my opinion that we do what the city attorney is suggesting and proceed with this selection process.

Councillor Weber, I would agree.

Councillor, you are good. Thank you, Councillor Ugarte. And I do want to remind this body to please raise your hand, wait for the chair to call on us as part of our council rules. I will add in my own opinion that I think that we should postpone tonight's process, given that, you know, we as a council represent everyone in this community, not one side or the other. And while we don't know all of the details and these signatures have not been verified, I think it's important that we pause to let that process move forward and to gain more information before moving forward into tonight's process. Again, we've heard time and time again from our community, transparency, honesty, those are all key things. And I cannot, in my own approach, I cannot feel that this is the right move to potentially consider someone that's potentially being recalled into a mayoral position. That's not part of the integrity that I see. And I would be in support of postponing tonight's mayoral selection.

Councilor Rustin.

Yeah, Councilor Rustin. Yeah, I agree. Just based on everything that came in today, like I said, I would like to see written opinion from the attorney, not just something that, you know, what they, you know, suggest in the conversation. I've explained my thoughts on just the recall, and I think that that needs to be, you know, validated before we move forward. And I do think that, you know, I... I agree that, you know, we do need to take our time on this. You know, this is a significant decision that we're going to go ahead and make. And I don't think that it hurts for us to go ahead and make sure that we have gone through the process. You know, there are, I think, some valid concerns were raised today with the public comment. I think if we go through and, you know, get the legal opinion in writing. If we validate the recall, we then have a firmer foundation to go ahead and move forward, whether that is to select a marriage before the recall or wait till the recall happens. I just don't feel comfortable at this point making a decision.

Okay. Councilor Warrington here. So it sounds like we have a stalemate, two to two here to proceed. So when that happens, I think we take a 10-minute recess, regroup for a minute or two. Maybe we can get PH on the call, see if they can talk to us about this real time so we can get their opinion. Mr. Weber, Council Member.

I have a question. My understanding is we have on the agenda to select the mayor. If a majority of us decided to not select the mayor, then we would not. My understanding is if we had a two-to-two, that means we would proceed because there was not a majority to change what's on the agenda. But I don't know, you could...

I would defer to... Is that correct, Mr. City Manager?

My recommendation was if it's two-to-two, that you not proceed. That's what I...

Yes. All right. So... All in favor of taking a 10-minute deliberation break to see if we can get BEH on the line? All those in favor? Oh, I'm sorry.

Any discussion? Can we have a discussion first? Council Ugarte, I appreciate you suggesting the idea of a 10-minute break. However, again, I want to be transparent to the community, and I don't think that we need to have a 10-minute break to discuss this, right? Because we should be discussing it right here on the dais in front of everyone. I do see Paul is, looks like he's probably trying to get someone from BEH online right now. But I think overall, this is, the question at hand is, do we feel that this is the right decision to move forward without knowing all of the information on the recall and knowing that we're dismissing part of the public recall process. And so I think that's really the question here of, do we wanna just dismiss that and move forward and hope for the best, or do we wanna do our due diligence and pause, reconvene in two weeks and move from there?

Thank you, Councillor DuBartain. I did not mean we were all going to have a secret meeting and discuss, of course, because that's colluding. But what I am trying to establish here is to give clarity on the issue through VEH. So taking a maybe five-minute break, trying to get VEH on the call so we can get clarity today so we don't have to push this further.

Yes, thank you, Pastor Muerte. I would question, what is the question we're looking for VEH to answer specifically?

Councilor Rustin has requested more clarity on the process and wants a definitive decision from the attorney on whether we can proceed or if it's just suggested we proceed, if I'm not mistaken.

Councilor Rustin, that is one concern. The other concern is I do think that we need to know, I think we need to have the status quo. The recall, I do think that from a process standpoint, we do need to know if it's a valid recall before we move forward. So there are two things. So I don't know that there's anything that BEH is going to say today that is going to change my mind. We've been short-staffed since I joined a couple months ago. I'll see how us putting this off for two weeks really is going to hurt anything.

Thanks.

We need order.

There's no clapping. We're the voters.

I know you're the voters, but this is a city council meeting and you don't get to clap and do that. So thank you. So I understand what you're saying. So I think that we're still in city manager. Are you aligned with, um, are you trying to get a little of this city attorney?

I will. And I would suggest you go ahead and take the five minute break. I think from that connection.

Okay. Okay. So five minute break, uh, starting now at 743. So it's 748. We'll reconvene. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your understanding of this.

Can you hear me now?

Can you hear me now?

Yes. I wanted to let you know we did get Emily on the call. She will be joining. When she joins our Zoom call, we'll reconvene, so we might need a minute or two while she joins the call.

Okay.

We're just going to continue the meeting and when Emily joins, then we'll go back to, oh, look, I just had to say that she joined. Good. Emily, are you on call? Can you unmute? Yes, I'm here. Awesome. Thank you for joining the call abruptly. I appreciate your timing. I am, we're at a kind of a conundrum here. So we're looking for some legal advice from you. We are in the process of doing the mayor selection process. And there's some questioning about should we continue to do the mayor selection process while there is a pending recall on one of the counselors. So we've read your emails, etc. It says you Your opinion, I think is maybe the word, is that we can proceed. But Councilor Rustin and others have a couple of questions if you don't mind answering for them. Okay. Of course. I'll hand it over to Councilor Rustin then.

Councilor Rustin, first off, I don't recall actually seeing a letter from Emily on this. I saw Paul's summary of it. I have to find it.

Could you use the microphone, please? It's really hard to hear. Thank you.

Okay. So what I was saying is I don't recall actually seeing a letter from Emily on this with a written opinion on this. I saw a summary from a conversation that she had with Paul that I'm not part of. And what my request on that, so it's two things I'm looking. One is a stated written opinion. on just, sorry, I had this written down on here, on whether or not we should be moving forward on this. The other thing is, and I don't think we're going to settle this here, if the recall documentation was submitted, I think that we have an obligation to at least have it validated before we make a decision moving forward. I don't think that that's something, Emily, that you can definitively answer on that. You know, if I'm wrong, please correct me. But I think that, you know, we owe it to our constituents to validate those two things before we move forward, whether that's, you know, voting on and putting Councilor Forge in that position or Cindy Hurst or whoever else, you know, may be more appropriate. So does that make sense what I'm looking for?

I think I understand, and I think that I have one answer essentially to respond to both of your questions, which is that there is no legal need to stop the appointment process at this point. The council may proceed with appointing someone to the mayoral vacancy, even when one of those applicants is someone, Councillor Deforge, who has a pending recall petition. If the council were to appoint Councillor Deforge to the mayoral vacancy, the effect of that would be in order to accept the mayoral appointment, Councillor Deforge would need to resign his council position. And the effect of that would be to moot the recall petition, which was for Councillor Deforge's position, council position. So that, there is no legal reason to stop at this point. That is a policy choice for the council to make. It is up to you whether you want to continue the appointment and, you know, risk that effect. Does that address both of your questions?

No, I understand that we can do it. I think it's, you know, the second question is, you know, should we do it this way? I personally think that we need to take a little bit more time to think through, you know, for myself, I need a little bit more time to think through some of this stuff, you know, just with the fact that we had the documentation submitted that we did today. You know, I just think that that's, it's responsible to take a little bit of time. I don't think it's going to hurt anything for us to take two more weeks. You know, because, you know, at any time we can move forward with this regardless of where we are in any kind of recall process.

So essentially the risk in not appointing to fill a vacancy is very low. Um, it is a duty within your charter of the council to fill a vacancy. There is no deadline. Um, so you i mean i guess speaking practically you have another vacancy which i think will be up in two weeks as well um i know that council had talked about keeping those processes separate in order to avoid confusion but um it seems like that could that's a possibility

I also remember a question Emily so explain how the process works if in fact are not valid signatures on this recall explain the timeline and costs involved everything that happens to actually my understanding it then would have to go to a general vote a separate some kind of vote could you so could you explain kind of the timeline and all those steps before it might come to a conclusion.

Let me uh i can explain the next step and then let me look up so that i know and can explain so the next step is if it appears to the city that there are enough um signatures then the county verifies those signatures um And that's up to the County. I think that the, if I recall the deadline for the County is within, I want to say 30 days, I'm pulling it up right now. Um, so I can tell you more definitively.

Emily, this is Councillor Warrington. Do you know if the signatures were even submitted to the County?

No, I don't believe this. I believe the city received the signatures today. I don't believe they have been turned over to the county yet. And the deadline is the 30th day after submission or 120 days after the prospective recall petition is filed, whichever is sooner. And in this case, I'm almost positive it's 30 days. So the signature, the county has 30 days to verify the signatures after the city provides them to the county.

Thank you. So what you're saying is that this wouldn't, in two weeks, if we delay this for two weeks, we're going to be in the same position. We would still have to wait for the signatures to be valid. And then if they are, we would still be in the same position until the vote in November to do the recall, if all that works. Is that correct?

So the recall is extremely unlikely to be on the November ballot. It is very likely to be a special election based on the timelines of ballot printing and everything. So it is, I think, I don't know the exact timelines. I expect that county elections is very busy right now with the upcoming November election. And so I expect they would probably take most of those 30 days. And then the election, there's a resignation period, five days. And then there's a election no later than the 35th day after the last day for the public officer to resign. So that is about 75 days from, did I do that math right? 70 days, excuse me, from when the city turns over the signatures for verification to the county. And I think probably, like I said, because of the timing of it right now, it's likely that county elections will take most of that time.

Thank you. Any other questions for Emily? Okay.

A practical question. If we're split, you know, on the agendas choosing the mayor, if we're split two to two on whether to proceed, what does that mean?

So it depends on what the motion was. What was the motion?

It was a question.

What was the question put to council?

This has come up during discussion. We haven't made an official motion yet.

We just restarted the mayor selection process and came to kind of a reaching halt because of discussions before we even started it. So the motion would be something similar to electing or appointing a new mayor to fill Aaron Dunbar's position.

Point of order. My understanding is we already have on the agenda to fill it. The potential motion would be to delay it, delay that for two weeks, right?

No, that's not our original motion. That's their... another motion. So the original one was for us to appoint a mayor. The other one is to take a two week break to the library. Does that make sense?

Oh, I'm sorry. Hey Emily, this is Councillor Ugarte. I I think the question we have here now that we've learned a little bit more, we know that there's likely going to be that full 30 days for the county elections office to validate signatures for the recall. I think my question that I specifically would ask is, is there an inherent risk of us postponing this process for 30 days? until that validation process has gone through. I think the other part, you know, is that we are all concerned because there's four of us on the dais right now and likely could be a stalemate. So I think that's the part where we're trying to figure out plan A, plan B, plan C of can we wait 30 days potentially if that's the consensus of council. And if tonight we do come to a stalemate do we just postpone until a further date or what would that look like?

So I would say that like I said earlier, the risk in postponing temporarily is very low. It is a duty of the council to fill vacancies, but there's no timeline. So that's pretty much all I can answer on the risk. It's, It's low, but there's some there. It depends on... As for a tie, it depends on the situation. I think that the... What I understood, there is no, have you interviewed the candidates? Are you proceeding? No. So the question, it appears to me that the question before the council is whether you intend to postpone the mayoral appointment process to a future meeting. And I don't know if you're talking about two weeks, if you want to talk about when that is.

I think you said 70 days until, not 30 days, but more like 70 days before this might be finalized. Is that what you were saying?

That's when the election would occur. The actual recall election would occur is around 70 days from now. The signature verification process is the next step. And once the city provides the signatures to the county, then the county has 30 days to verify the signatures.

Councilor Ugarte, go ahead. I was just going to say, so we have a window of 30 to 70 days to get this complaint off, for this to be settled. 30 to 70 days.

Councilor Ugarte. Thank you. Councilor Ugarte, I think, Emily, just the final question I have for you is tonight, because it feels like We have kind of already taken a stance before we've even deliberated this full process. Um, so my question to you is tonight, if we are a tie for moving forward with this mural process, how do we break that? How do we move forward if we cannot agree to even move forward to interview tonight?

So I understand that counselor to forge is there and he has been excused by the council from participating in this vote. So according to your code, if this is section 30.07, sub B, if any member declines to vote and the result of such action would be to create a tie, that member's vote shall be counted as an I.

And I, Councilor Ugarte, I just wanted to clarify, if my memory serves me correctly, at our last council meeting, we discussed this potential that Councillor DeForge would not be eligible for a tiebreaker vote, nor would Councillor Warrington as the acting council member leading the meeting. So that was my understanding, and feel free to chime in, but there really isn't a tiebreaker. So that's what I'm trying to figure out of. How do we move forward? Because it's very likely there will be a tie tonight, and I feel like there's only the option to postpone. But I want to keep it open.

yeah sorry to interrupt um that is so the mayoral appointment is different and that's where there's all these sort of uncertainties where the in um the code and charter it provides that the mayor votes to break a tie but you have a mayor vacancy so the mayor can't vote to break a tie this is this is separate from that This is much more simple. And this actually applies to this situation because we're not appointing the mayor. So the members vote, the excused members vote shall be counted as an aye vote. So if I understand the question before the council to be correct, which is, should we postpone the appointment process? The councilor deforges as an excused member, his vote shall be counted as an aye. So that means yes, his vote would be to postpone the mayoral process to a future meeting.

Councilor Rustin?

Yeah, sorry, Councilor Rustin. But every other... topic on the agenda. We've made a motion on that. We have yet to make a motion one way or the other on this. So I wanted to be a question as to how the motion would be framed. And if we are, we would need a majority to pass a motion to do this anyways. And there it's going to come out two to two with this. You know, if we motion to table it, two of us are going to vote yes, two of us are going to vote no. And at that point, it becomes, we get in one of these sort of catch-22s. I don't think we're having enough votes just to even pass a motion when we're at the upper. A motion to vote or not to vote.

Councillor Warrington, should Mark DeForest be unreclused to be the tiebreaker? No, no, no.

There is a tiebreaker in the code. Your concern is?

My concern is just what Councilor Rustin is saying. If we make a motion, two, we're going to say we don't want a postponement, and two, we're going to say we do want a postponement. So we're still stuck.

So who's going to be in that situation? The code provides that the member who is excused, their vote shall be counted as an eye. So it should be postponed.

Okay. So again, how, how do you do the motion? So I'll cancel you. Okay.

Councilor Ugarte, so Emily, I really appreciate you taking the time to join us tonight for this last minute Zoom call. I just want to make sure I'm understanding correctly. Hypothetically, one of us could make a motion to postpone the mayoral interview process for 30 days, let's say, and then it would just require a second. And then we would also consider any other motions and then we would be able to take a vote, right? Is there anything else we need to consider to move forward in this process?

Not that I'm aware of. No.

So, oh, go ahead. It's Councilor Warrington's floor.

Okay. Councilor Russell and I move to postpone the vote on the mayoral appointment for 30 days.

Councilor Ugarte, second. Okay.

Vote.

Aye.

Nay.

Nay.

Nay.

I'm sorry. Wait, wait.

Sorry. Can I say aye?

I'm so sorry. Councilor Ugarte.

Aye.

I vote to postpone the mayoral process. Sorry.

Too late. Yeah. I'm initially now. Okay. So it sounds like we're just going to postpone this for 30 days and give the opportunity for the recall to work its way through and we'll come back after that and try this again. Is that correct? All those in favor of that? I think they're all in favor. Okay. So I think that's what we're doing. So now Mr. Ford is coming back to his seat. He will be under the booth because there is no more mayor process, election process. So welcome back to Fun and Games.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Okay. You don't need me for anything else.

Thank you, Emily. I think you can appreciate you very much. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Now moving to agenda item, which was minutes that was added out of the consent agenda. So I had previously emailed our city manager to I think I identified a couple of states and it's that comes were working was listed as the main vote on page 6.

Some Council weren't and I got 3 or 4 that I have. I mean only there are five or more just before the meeting she has been you know she'll correct those including the name of some other items. So she's aware of the things and we'll take care of those.

Thank you. Councilor Huerta?

Councilor Huerta, can you please clarify what the corrections are to the minutes?

Yes, let me get my phone. Thank you for asking.

I can go first. Councilor Warren, if that's okay? Uh-huh. Okay, I'm looking at page six. And this first sentence, which is a continuation of, from page five, city manager separation agreement, says Councillor Warrington voted nay. I don't think that was correct. That was, that's what I'm asking to have changed.

So I have a complete list if it's okay. So page three, the staff presence, Bill Reed should be added to that because Bill Reed was in that meeting. On page 5 and 6 of city manager separation agreement remove of Council are wanting to go to Nate and that has to be part of the voting name. Appointment of acting city manager review Council are wanting to remain at canceling you are taking voting name page 8, the finance department monthly report remove a representative and that bill. Those are the 4 that I have. That is the July, July 15 minutes.

Was it June 15?

Yes. I'm sorry. June. Yeah. Sorry. I saw June and July. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Ugarte.

Thank you, Councillor Ugarte. Thank you, Councillor Warrington for clarifying. I also have a few overlapping, so I wanted to make sure. That June 15th, 2026 meeting notes for number seven presentation from Umpqua Valley Financial. Are you mentioning that the first sentence that says a representative from Umpqua Valley Financial be corrected to reflect Bill Reed? Correct.

Yes. So Bill, how would that sentence read? I just want to make sure. I don't have the sentence in front of me, but instead of a representative, that would be removed and it would say Bill Reed. And then he... represented Umpqua.

So is the sentence on number 7A, Umpqua Valley Financial would read, instead of a representative, it would read Bill Reed from Umpqua Valley Financial?

No. No, I'm sorry. It would say Bill Reed represented Umpqua Financial and then from there Because he was the one speaking, not anybody from Homequa Financial. Okay. And Jean Larson, we would redact that part of the question as well. I didn't see that. I know that Bill was doing the reporting out. Maybe there was a question in there, but I do know that Bill was the one who started the conversation and reported out that financial information.

Okay, and I appreciate you clarifying it. I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I want to make sure I'm understanding correctly. So the sentence as presented in the agenda, or in the minutes, states a representative from Unqua Valley Financial, in parentheses, Ash, a partner, appeared via Zoom, accompanied by Jean Larson, who leads the single audit area. And so that's the exact sentence I want to clarify, that none of those people listed should be included in the minutes.

Thank you for the questions. I carefully watched this piece of the video several times to see what happened. And it was Bill Reed, who was a representative for Umpqua. And I don't know who Ash is. I don't know what that's all about. And it appeared via Zoom is not correct because they weren't on the Zoom call because Bill Reed was a person representing them in our council meetings. Okay. So I think we need to take a minute. I'll have to. So this is different than what I edited. It came back different. So I'm going to have to look at it again and rewrite it. Okay. Request a rewrite. It came to me. I reviewed it. I edited it. This is what I had. And this is how it came back. Different than what I requested. So. Okay.

Thank you. Thank you for clarifying that. So Um, what I'm hearing is there's still some adjustments that might need to be made given this new information and, and corrections. So, um, council president to forge, I would be curious if we really postponed after the, at least the June 15th, 2026 minutes to a future meeting.

Is everyone okay with getting ourselves some extra review time? Okay. Okay. Thank you comes we are going to move to the approval of the June, July 6, 2000 26 minutes. Was there any feedback provided to call me.

I did not have any issues with the July 6. I did not either.

Councillor Ugarte.

Councillor Ugarte. A couple of things I did connect with Colleen, just mentioning I was marked as absent. I had previously spoken to interim city manager Robin Doty during that time, letting her know that I would be gone. So I would like that corrected to say excused versus absent. And then there were just a couple small spelling errors specifically under public comment for the July 6th, 2026 meeting minutes. It says public comment section C talks about which can address the council. And later in that paragraph, it says Mr. Kendall and it just has his name spelled incorrectly. So it should say Mr. Kendall also noted that since North Plains Incorporation, et cetera, et cetera. So just want to update that to reflect the correct spelling in the minutes. And with that, I will pass it back over. All right.

You need additional corrections or any feedback to counseling breakfast corrections. If not, I would recommend that you listening for a motion to approve the July 6th, 2026 minutes as amended. Council or whatever. So moved. Second, second councilor warranted second. All those in favor of approving the July 6th minutes? Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. And we will continue the conversation on the June 15th, 1026 minutes to the next week. We're going to move along to item eight, which is old business. There is no item there. So number nine, city manager report.

Thank you very members of Council of my or any verbal this time because I didn't have time to write one given everything else so you have patients with me I did send you all a copy of a information sheet that I received about the city improvements. So you have that information. I also sent you a copy of Ross's final report that recommendations. may want to put that on a future agenda and consider those i'll be meeting with the city recorder on thursday to talk about her phasing back in to the work and that'll take a lot of pressure off some folks uh on wednesday morning um brianna and bailey and i are meeting with therese close out her contract, which will include doing one final newsletter. That will be the end of her work here. I'll be calling you all, if I haven't already, to schedule the interviews with you council members. And we'll be interviewing three finalists for the program and community communications supervisor position. There were five They've been boiled down to 3. And I'm setting those up for next week so we can get that position moving forward. And I'm meeting Wednesday at 1 on the clean water contract. To get that moving, that needs to come forward to you. And that concludes my report for today. Thank you, sir.

Are there any comments from city managers?

Also, whether what will be the process the 3 applications for the new position will you bring. 3 to us or one to us or what will be the process.

We will be bringing one for recommended higher. Absolutely are taking.

Thank you. Counselor Ugarte. I wanted to ask a little bit more about the city contract ending with PR for Therese. And what does that look like after that contract has ended? Do we have someone else lined up? Or what is the plan going forward for PR?

Good question. I think the plan is that you're in the new position of programs and communications supervisor. would pick up some of those elements plus some recreation and some other council-directed activities.

And so for the timeline of someone being in that position versus the contract ending with Therese Ling, what does that look like? Is there going to be continuity? Is there a gap?

My hope is it will be positive and the new person We'll pick up in early October. Therese has been notified by the city that her contract terminates on the 30th of September. So that we may see some void in there for a while. But I'm hoping that we don't have that. But again, the reality is we could very well have a week or two where there is nobody covering that base.

Okay, and what's the contingency plan if there is a gap?

Good question. I have none at this time.

And I just asked that because we unfortunately have made many headlines across the local news. And I think it's really important that we continue to be mindful of the narrative that is being broadcast from this council's actions and from our city as well. So I respect the process and understand that we need time to appoint someone for that new position. However, I would be curious if we had something where we did a week by week extension of a contract until we have someone solidified in that position. Again, the narrative for the community is very important, and especially as we are trying to attract talent to city staff, I want to be mindful that we are not relying on people on Facebook controlling the narrative for us, but instead have a voice for the city.

Good point. Let me analyze that study and get you a report back to let you know what our options are. I see at least a couple. One would be a couple week void. If we have the void, what staff members will cover those bases? If we can extend Therese for a week or two, if she's even willing, that would be an option. But let me do that and get it to you. Okay, thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor. Any other comments?

Yes, sir. Mayor, if I may put one other point out here, and I've done this in my daily status reports. I am just absolutely amazed at the amount of work that is being done by your staff. You have about a short staff city as I have ever run into in my 110 years of doing this. But it is amazing. And I would suggest that any time you get a chance to compliment your staff, do so. Because they are really under pressure. And some of them are getting more pressure now that I'm here, throwing more responsibilities on them. And they're just soaking it up. And they're delivering at a high level. Very nice and certain we appreciate our staff.

And they don't before I move on to the next agenda item. But a move to council comments 10 a which is council reports. Council arrest and you might if I start with you come on down.

Yeah, that's fine. So I since last meeting I'm not an expert you know obligations, but I will be attending the library board meeting next week. One thing that I am concerned about as I've gone through the calendar is just the number of boards and committees that have canceled meetings. And what I would like to get on the agenda is for the EDC, library, all of them in front of the council to give an update on when their last meeting was, what their primary objectives are, roadblocks that they have, and assistance that they need from the council to move forward. I'm just concerned that we're seeing stalls in, as far as I can tell, every board or committee, with the exception of the library, and maybe public works.

Paul, would you like to address that? I know we've got the planning commission scheduled for tomorrow, right?

Yes, and I'm in discussion with Patty for the record. Congress Board meeting coming up in a couple of weeks, but I think that's a good comment. Justin, let me let us do some analysis and come up with a plan to properly service those committees and get that moving forward.

I appreciate that, and it doesn't necessarily need to all happen once, but I would like to see us move forward.

Thank you, sir. Does that address your concern? That is. Thank you. Anything else you'd like to comment? No, I think I've done it on today.

Thank you. I would like to add an agenda item, a high priority one for the next meeting and possible. We all the whole city is behind data center ban. We have a ordinance number 501 that Emily Waldron I wrote up for us as a draft. I think we would like, I would like to have a agenda item that we can review that and see if there are next steps or what we need to do to further the data center band in our city. Thank you, council. I'm not done. Also the Jesse Mays thing. I know there are two sections around that. I know that Mr. Paul is working on the picture itself. And we need to also have an agenda item around the drinking fountain plot. So I'd like to add that to some agenda items soon. And the audit results for 2122, the last time we talked about those, there was additional details or more in depth that we wanted provided to us. Have we gotten those details from, is it Umpqua?

I believe it was Marina.

Marina, thank you. Did you get those additional details that you asked for?

Yes, I believe that that was complete. I can provide a copy.

That would be great. Thank you. That's all I have.

Okay, so let me just pause a second here because you brought up some items that I wanted to check with the team. A data center band as a future agenda items there council consensus that he would like to discuss this. Yeah, I think he's not.

Okay, so whoever you know if it were possible it would also for me be helpful to have Emily legal counsel look over the document and see if there are any legal issues that

Yeah, I think my suggestion for next steps would be now that Paul has an agenda item for us, he would think about how to maybe bring us options. And I can share with you what a citizen prepared a document and as a starting point, then we can have a conversation so that when the next council meeting happens, we can address Councilor Warrington's suggestion. You also suggested Jesse May's picture. I believe we have... I talked about that before, and everyone's on board with that. I think Ross left it as the Public Works Department was going to be responsible for hanging it, and we just need to get that across the finish line. Is that right?

I believe that is correct. We need to know where to hang it and then ask them to hang it. So just a quick agenda item to discuss that and finalize.

Is it an agenda item, or is it you're asking the Public Works Department to hang the picture?

Where are we going to hang it? I mean, it was under the TV. Is that where we want to end it?

So how about, can you come back to the council and tell us what Public Works feedback is on how to paint that picture? Would that address your concerns, Councilor Wharton? Or do you want to go ahead, Paul?

Yeah, sir. When I discussed it with Patty today at Chamber Luncheon, she indicated that they felt it was the role of the our committee to review the situation and come forward to council with recommendations about where to hang it, how to do the plaque and all of those pieces.

Councillor Warrington, there's two separate things and the hanging the picture is one and that was going to be in this room, I thought. And the other one is the plaque above the fountain. And maybe that's the Parks and Rec thing. but the other one is the framed picture that was just gonna become.

So can we break this into two separate issues? So the first one is the picture. So Ross's feedback before was public works on that. If you would like to take all a different position and think about it, analyze it and come back to us with a recommendation. I think everyone's aligned that we want to on our Jesse means, and we would like that, but we'd like somehow to make that happen. So if you could think about a way that would address Councilor Warrington's.

I don't think there's any doubt that public works have to do the hang.

Yeah. Okay. Okay. For that address your first concern on the picture. Okay. Thank you. Now to the drinking fountain. And this is follow up to the public comment that I believe was Meredith made. So it looks like we would like to get a plaque. I think Meredith said $500. And if we could, since Elmer is 100 years old, if we could make that happen, I think that would be great. Is that okay with you there, Paul? Yes. Thank you, sir. Is that okay with everyone else? Okay. And I'll take an action item on audit results. Okay. Councilor Weber.

Councilor Weber. I'm not sure the best way to do this. I would ask for some sort of council, perhaps work session would be the best way to do it before the next meeting to discuss where we are with the TGM, the UGB process. That has not been doing much for several months. One suggestion would be to see if we could invite, I'm not sure his full name, but Glenn works with ODOT. We're the people in that are involved in that whole process, if perhaps he would join us at a work session to discuss what our options are going forward.

So, Paul, did you get a briefing on our TGM project? Are you familiar? I have that. Okay, I can bring you up to speed on that, but basically we have a planning process through ODOT, and we need to continue on our next steps. So let me just check around the room here. Is adding the new TGM check-in or update or decision point to a future agenda something you guys are consistent with? I'll start over here. Councilor Westman, you okay with that? Warrington? Okay, looks like there's consensus that we would like to discuss the TGM project.

Okay, Councilor Weber, go ahead. A couple meetings I attended I'm involved in the Mac metropolitan area communication Council and I will be working. With Paul we have a 10 year Comcast agreement that they would like our resolution that we would approve the next meeting I think there's 15 different municipalities that are part of this Comcast agreement. We don't get a huge financial. I think it's around maybe 15 to 17,000, but it's something we are all a part of, have been a part of this for a long time, this Comcast agreement, and we need to do a resolution. So I will work with Paul to bring that before the group, and then the group can decide. I've also been working with Mac a bit, just trying to create a good relationship with them. Unfortunately, when I first joined the Mac, There was a problem with a grant that they had given us that was going to be used at the Kindle Center, and $30,000 of the grant was never used. So they responded that the city would need to repay the unused portion, and I'm not sure the whole reason, but there was a six-month delay when that money was not refunded when they had requested to be refunded. Fortunately, myself and a others were involved and that was worked out. The money about a month ago was given back to Mac, which was good. I also met with the, talked to the new director of Mac about one of the priorities have been to get a better sound system, TV, all that in this room. And he corresponded to me that in 2025, he had come to this building met with Bill Reed staff and brought an expert on board and they are open to funding. At that time, it was the 15 to $20,000 upgrade grant that they were open to helping us with through Mac. Unfortunately, I don't know the whole reason for it, but he said they went back and forth several times, but for some reason in March, March, April, May, June, the city, for some reason was not responding back to requests from Mac. And at that point Mac, the grant process timeline ran out. So that money went away, but he is open to us reapplying for future funds. So we will be working on that. I also attended a EPA and Brownfield meeting on the five acre Glencoe property cleanup. Ross was at that meeting, also Tom Bolt, our lobbyist, was there. It was a very impressive meeting. The representative from the EPA was there, and we had an excellent discussion on the brownfield cleanup. The part that was a little surprising to me, at one point, she said, I'm just here to kind of clarify if you still are hoping to get the $1,000,000 because we have not received any of your paperwork. The agreement, the way the grant works is you're given the grant, but then there's a whole agreement process that needs to take place. And for some reason, in this last 15 month period, the city had not completed that documentation, had not given it to the EPA. The EPA was very cordial about it, but was surprised that the city had not responded with what was needed. They said that was very unusual that the city would wait that long to basically get the money. So the good news is that is moving at this point. Ross has worked on it. Tom Bolt is involved. I think they've come to you. Bailey, I think, is working on some of the paperwork. And the good news is I think that's the key is not so much looking back, but the forward motion now is working. where we will be able to secure those funds that looks like and then hopefully additional money for the house room house removals. That is the end of it. Thank you, Sir.

Thank you, Councilor Ugarte. Again, no ex-officio duties. I I want to echo Councillor Rustin's statement regarding trying to establish our boards and committees back into their regular meetings and meetings. So thank you to Paul for already being proactive. I think my question is for Paul, is there anything you need from council to help support getting meetings back into a regular schedule for other boards and commissions?

Right. I'll have to let you know. OK. OK.

Um, the other topic I wanted to mention, and I, I would like everyone to refrain their pitchforks for just a second, but I'm going to say data center. I know that's a hot topic. Um, but I, while I support us exploring an option for data center ban, I would say that we have other topics that are of a higher priority and more time sensitive, um, than spending time on a data center van. Right now, we need to get our city into a functional state with just staff in general, getting our boards and commissions back into place, and to spend time on a data center van when we don't even have enough buildable inventory for anything in the city. But close to a data center, it just feels like this could be a waste of time at this point. I do think it is important. I do not personally want data centers in North Plains, But I think that we have other priorities, especially given some of the feedback that we received from previous interim city manager on some data points and areas of opportunity. I would really encourage this council to consider postponing discussion for a data center and to really highlight a work session and or agenda topic for some of those points that Ross had previously left for us as a council. And I know Paula had also echoed that that is a priority. I was just curious what everyone's thoughts are. Are we, I know time is finite, but are we leaning towards wanting to spend time with the next meeting for data center ban or are we wanting to potentially table that for a future topic once the city is stabilized and we instead we can focus on really the task at hand of stabilizing our city, given the feedback we have.

Councillor Rustin, I don't think that there's any reason to postpone it. I think we can address the other things and at least entertain a conversation. Having a conversation does not prevent us from doing anything else. Okay.

Councillor Warrington. Councillor Warrington, I think a discussion is in order. I don't think we need to spend hours upon hours on discussing it. but at least start the conversation to see where it might lead us is a good idea. Thank you, Councilor Weber.

I would also move forward with the conversation.

I'll also support the effort to have the discussion.

Okay, no problem. A couple other things I wanted to mention, just Again, huge thanks to the community for coming out, just really giving your support and letting us know how you feel and what you want. So I just want to say thank you to everyone online, to everyone here in person. Just thank you. It's really important to show up. So thank you for that. I also wanted to remind council, I've noticed that there have been several emails amongst the council that is replying all. And I want to remind everyone of the serial communications law. we should not be hitting reply all as councillors to any communication amongst council. So I just want to remind everyone, the other thing I wanted to remind this council of are Robert's rules. Part of our council rules is that we need to make a gesture for the chair to call on us and say, Councillor Forrenton, Councillor Ruston, because there have been several times tonight that I have raised my hand. And someone, another council member has spoken over me without following Robert's rules. So again, I know we're all learning. This is a new process for most, but I just want to really make sure that we are following the agenda and the rules at hand with us. So that being said, the last thing I wanted to cover are just our ex officio duties. and try to get a clear picture of what meetings are occurring within the city this month. And that might be a question for Paul, that might be a question at the next meeting, but I'm just curious what meetings we should plan on holding for the month of September for our boards and commissions.

Thank you, Councillor. My quick update is I will be attending the planning Commission meeting as an exhibition tomorrow. I've been attending Metro policy advisory committee. They didn't have a meeting in August, July. And I think that is it for me, Councilor, you're good.

Thank you. So back to my previous question, what what meetings are occurring this month? Can we trust what's in the package that the Parks and Rec Board will be occurring on September 14. Yes or no?

To the best of my knowledge, no date has been set. The chairperson for the committee will be out of town until next week. We agreed to get together and put together an agenda and a meeting date.

Okay, so the 9-14 Parks and Rec Board is still TBD. Is that correct?

Could happen. I don't know. Probably. that she's going to want to bring in.

So. Councilor Russell, according to the North Plains calendar, the meeting on the 14th is listed as being canceled for Parks and Rec, which was part of my concern because I've seen a lot of those on the calendar. Thank you, sir.

Thank you. And I think that's the disconnect right now is as, you know, staff is doing their very best and there's a lot of moving pieces that have to get updated. And looking at the calendar, it said it canceled. But looking at our agenda packet that was just recently provided, it says that all of the meetings are occurring. So I don't want to piecemeal this. And I know, again, staffing is at a critical level. But we need to have direction. And we need to know, are these meetings happening in the next three weeks? I don't think that's too much to ask. So if this is a decision of we're going to cancel the Parks and Rec meeting for 9-14 and try again in October once we have a clear picture, maybe that's more definitive. But I feel like we're running the city day by day and we are getting notices of special meetings that are out of cadence that are not being properly communicated and everything is discombobulated for lack of a better term.

I think those are good points. Let me get back with you with a comprehensive report to bring all of that up to date.

Okay. So thank you. And I appreciate it. And again, I know you're just walking in and, and again, everyone is doing the best they can, but I think as a city, again, it's really important that we're communicating and there's a big disconnect right now. That's again, why I'm concerned about PR. The other question I had planning commission, we are good to go for the library board 916 meeting is that Planned in progress, or is that canceled?

As far as I know it is on.

Okay, perfect. Thank you. And then just the only other thing I wanted to touch on is for the Washington County Coordinating Committee. I know that that typically has been just mayors that are able to attend. Is that something within your scope? I know you have a lot on your plate, but do you have capacity to attend that so that we still have representation for North Plains?

What's the date of it?

It's the second Monday of every month, so it looks like it'll be Monday the 14th at noon. And this is the very last page in our packet if you need to reference it later on.

Let me take a look at that. function and my calendar, see if I can do that.

Okay, thank you.

Councilor Rustin. Sorry, Councilor Rustin. One more thing, just looking at the calendar, we don't have any URA meetings scheduled for next. We're going to have to discuss that.

Okay, get this back on the calendar. Okay, yeah, that's a good point. Okay, I think we kind of transitioned into 10B, which is review September 2026 council calendar. So is there any other comments on the calendar? Okay. So I am going to adjourn the meeting.

One last comment. I'm sorry. During our meeting today, I requested the audience not to clap or make noises. And I think that we need to revisit the rules of disruption to the Council meeting. I know that Hillsborough allows people to snap. So it isn't as disruptive. I know that, you know, there's obviously emotions going on here and we want to let people express themselves, but we don't also want to be disrupted. So Maybe we can call that up for the next comments or something on how the audience can participate in their emotions without disrupting the council.

Okay.

Thank you. Are there any other comments before I adjourn the meeting? And so the Senate Council meeting is going to be adjourned at 0.53 p.m. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.