City Council - Regular Meeting

You just say one. Are we streaming?

We're ready.

Go ahead. All right. We will call the meeting of August 3rd to order, and please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, Nice, thank you. Can we have roll call, please?

Yes. Councillor Bouchard? Here. Councillor Reynolds?

Here.

Councillor Sandesky?

Here.

Mayor Burris? Here. Councillor Christ? Here. Councillor Oppenheimer? Here. Councillor Noxinger?

Here. He's excused. Next, we have the approval of minutes for Monday, July 20th. Anything?

I'm going to be approved the minutes from Monday, July 20th. Regular session 2nd. All right.

Moved and seconded to approve the minutes of July 20th and any other discussion. Hearing none all those in favor signify by saying aye aye opposed by the council seat. Next is public comment. Any person may address the council after being recognized by myself. However, topics which are under appeal or legal in nature cannot be addressed. Please state your name and address for the record. Time is limited to three minutes per person. We have a chair and everything. It's time. Anybody has anything? You're good? You're good? Josh Triplett- yeah do we have anybody online.

Josh Triplett- nobody's online, but I do have an email to be read, but I would like to read it during the portion for the downtown part.

Josh Triplett- Okay that's okay yeah. Josh Triplett- All right, nobody. Josh Triplett- All right. Josh Triplett- You have any other announcements. Josh Triplett- Go to. Josh Triplett- All right, ordinance number two zero. Josh Triplett- To six dash zero to an ordinance amending portions of 71 and chapter 72 of the municipal code second reading and adoption.

Josh Triplett- get to the right page here yeah. So this is a follow-up to last meeting where we introduced this as a first reading. So this is the cleanup of chapter 71 and 72. That's removing some overlapping, some outdated and to enforce provisions. And then also clarifies vehicle and property storage restrictions on city streets. This will establish a 72 hour parking limit for vehicles. and prohibit the storage of boats, trailers, RVs, anything like that on city streets. I've had a couple of calls, spoke with a couple of council members about some calls that people have received about this topic. And want to clarify that the idea here is not to prohibit anybody from parking an RV on the city street and loading it for camping, right? You know, you bring it in on a Thursday night, you want to load it up and then have it ready to go for first thing to leave Friday morning. We're not looking to go out and ticket you for that. what we're looking for is the long-term storage of rvs and stuff um i believe in council member optimizer if i can quote you on this uh he told me that he went out driving the other day and found 67 i think was the number you told me uh vehicles just in the small section of the city that would qualify under this We would hope that the first portion of this would be, as with all of our enforcement activities, we aim for education before we move to citations and such like that. So this is something that we will utilize our code enforcement people to go out and educate over the next 30 days before this ordinance takes effect. And hopefully people will find them. You can move the RVs into your driveway. When you do so, we're not going to be taking a tape measure to find out where the right-of-way line is to make sure that you're not hovering in it. It's just to get it off the streets and make our streets a little bit cleaner. This helps for public works with our street sweeper to be able to get through and help with that. It helps with some of the other things that we've seen problems with over the last couple of years. So this is the second reading for that. It also removes bicycle licensing, rental parking meter coin collections. We don't have our chief of police going out and collecting coins from parking meters anymore and all of those things. So the first reading was held at our last meeting. There were some edits that were requested. We've made the prescribed edits in your packet. I hope you've noticed that we've also changed the formatting of how we presented this to you. HAB-Jacques Juilland, So anything with red and a strikethrough is what goes away the black is what is staying from the original language and anything that yellow highlighted as language that is being added, so we hope that clarified. HAB-Jacques Juilland, What was going away and what was being added to it and we'll use that form going forward, but that's the presentation on that when any questions from the Council.

HAB-Jacques Juilland, Anybody know.

HAB-Jacques Juilland, Well.

HAB-Jacques Juilland- Who wants to make a motion, I mean, I would just say, I mean no questions, but I would just say as Sean said, I mean I kind of want to see you know what what's the scale of the issue and. HAB-Jacques Juilland- I mean driving around take an evening drive around it's a it's significant issue in the city and so far more than I actually you know we see a couple here and there, but as you drive block by block. there's a lot of inoperable vehicles parked on the road there's a lot of trailers um and and in a lot of in disrepair i mean i would imagine they don't move um they got weeds growing under them uh it's it's pretty it's it was eye opening uh how big of an issue this this really is in our city so anybody else yeah i'd like to ask a question of terry

You've been really dogging it here with us about solutions to do with parking issues you've identified. Have you had a chance to look at this? Does it address those or some of them? I think that's the next one. That's the next one. Nevermind. I'll catch you on the next one. Okay. Thank you, John.

I would move that council adopt ordinance number 2026-02, an ordinance amending portions of chapter 71 and chapter 72 of the municipal code.

Don't we have to do the second reading first? Yeah. Motion by title only. By title only. Yeah.

Sure.

Sure. Perfect.

That's what I said, right? Yeah.

I like it.

Second.

For second reading by title and adoption.

And that's fold 71 and 72.

Yeah. Any further discussion? All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? All right, motion passes. Can you please read it by title only?

Yes. City of Tillamook, ordinance number 2026-02, an ordinance amending portions of chapters 71 and 72 of the Tillamook Municipal Code relating to traffic control and parking and declaring an effective date.

OK. So is that a good enough motion for both, for adoption and everything?

Okay, perfect.

All right. Let's move to ordinance number 2026-03, an ordinance amending portions of chapter 72 of the municipal code related to downtown parking. First reading by Ty Hall.

Okay, so this is the first time that we are seeing this one. This is also Chapter 72, so there may be a little bit of confusion. And I just wanted to make sure. There was a question that got brought up to me last week about, once we had sent the language out, about why the... table of contents in this ordinance did not reflect the change table of contents from the past ordinance, and that is simply because the past ordinance doesn't take effect for 30 days from today. And so we are presenting it as it's currently written, but those table of contents will change as these ordinances pass. We have had a lot of discussion We could maybe call it bedlam, lots of kvetching about things that are going on here. And I'm really a tingle that we can get this ready to go and get this next one off our plate. So after lots of discussions and most recently at the May 18th, 26th council meeting, We have developed a parking permit concept that is intended to provide additional long-term parking options for downtown businesses, employees, and residents. The code that you're seeing tonight does not actually implement the plan. It changes the code so that we can implement the plan through resolutions and fee changes later on. Our goal as a staff is to have this up and operating by October 1st if the council approves this ordinance. The way that the parking program initially will work is this will take the parking lot, which is west of the Eagles. We call it the old library lot from the Eagles Lodge to the library. That has 27 parking stalls in it. The idea there is that those would become our tier one or premium stalls where initially for a fee to be set by the council, we are proposing somewhere around $250 a quarter. You can buy a pass and we will only sell 27 of those passes. The idea being that those, that parking lot, if you have a pass to that lot, you can park there and nobody else should be parking there. You don't get an assigned stall, but there should always be a stall available for those 27 permit holders. This is addressing having some of the stalls available that people can reserve for residences or employees to come in and park there. The other stalls that are under city control, and I want to make sure that we are very, very clear, the city does not control the Safeway lot, right? We don't control every lot within the city. Averill's have a lot that you can go and have a private lot that you can pay for a specific stall. The lots that we are talking about are the West Ivy lot. So this is behind the Dutch Mill and the Chamber of Commerce. That is a public parking stall. Mark Benthien, ECA- And the still well lot, which is just across to the south, the first two rows on the eastern most part portion of that parking of across from flavors on first if everybody knows where we're talking, we can pull up a map if need be. Those lots currently are public parking lots that anybody can park for four hours at a time. What we are proposing is a second tier of parking pass that we can sell as many passes as is necessary as people want to buy. That does not guarantee you a parking space, but what it does is allows you to park in excess of the four hour parking limit. So when code enforcement or traffic enforcement comes around and you've got a pass in there, they're not going to chop your tires or time you to see how long you've been there. So you can park for as long as you need to. This is designed to help employees that have shifts that go longer than four hours. These can be purchased by individual employees. They can be purchased by businesses. you know, if Terry over at the Dutch Mill wanted to buy three or four of these that he could have to, that his employees could go and grab and stick in their mirror, they could do that, right? These are not being tracked by car model or make or license plate number. It is just a pass that you hang in your mirror and that if you have that pass, you would be exempt from the four-hour parking limit for those lots. This does not include the Tura lot, which is immediately next to the Stilwell lot at this point until we finalize the IGA with Tura and get a new lease for that parking lot because we don't control that as of right now. But as we add that, this ordinance would allow us to maintain this parking pass program in city-controlled lots, not just city-owned lots. It's one of the text changes that we had to make to it. Our initial thought for the tier two, and I hate to put tier one, tier two, but for this other style of parking was to make those about $600 a year, which would make them about $150 per quarter. And the but with both of these, the two things that we were looking for was we didn't want to undercut April's parking lot or any other private lot that is selling stalls. So that's why we're priced a little bit higher than what we know their prices are. For the just the I call them to get out of jail for you, that tier two, you know, you're not restricted by the hours. We wanted to make them so that they would be available and there would be incentive to get that instead of getting parking passes. Now, there could be a thought that we want to lower that price, at least initially, to incentivize businesses to purchase them. I'm not 100% on the price of the passes right now. And that's something that the council, by all means, you set the prices, we'll bring back the resolution for you. I'm open to questions, Brian.

These Tier 1 and Tier 2, are these seven days a week or Monday through Friday? What is it?

Right now, it's just under the current pass schedule, which is Monday through Friday. But we would essentially enforce them seven days a week as we could. We haven't proposed changing the downtown parking hours that would be enforced, but that is something that we could look at.

So what's the difference between Tier 1 and 2 besides the location? Is Tier 1 24 hours and then Tier 2 is?

Tier 1 is 24 hours and we're only selling a limited amount of those with the idea that if you have a Tier 1 pass for that specific lot, you should be able to drive in and there should be a spot available for you guaranteed. Whereas with the tier two, we're still inviting the public to come in and park for four hours at a time as we always have. So we're intermingling pass holders and non-pass holders so that if you don't have a pass, you're stuck to the four hours. If you do have a pass, you can park for long.

Got it. And what is the cap on the tier two parking pass?

There is no cap. We can sell as many of those as we want.

Is there a cap on how many hours you can consecutively park there?

It would fall under our 72-hour parking, just like the streets and everything else. This does not... I'm sorry.

No, go ahead.

I just had another question. I was just going to say, these parking passes are only for the parking lots. This does not anticipate any changes to the two-hour on-street parking or for loading zone areas that are under code now 20 minutes. The...

yeah i just i just had a the april lot you're speaking of is that the one across from the museum across from the museum depot and so i thought i have on those those people have a guaranteed spot my wife has to have yep and so you might be able to price the the tier two under that because you're not guaranteeing them the same kind of and the tier two is priced oh i thought you had said that you went out just a little over so the tier one is priced a little bit above that the tier two is understood sorry yep

And my understanding is, so tonight, though, first reading of this ordinance, all of the details around the actual parking pass program will be brought back for fees, all that stuff. Yes. So, I mean, I think we have some time to work on that. It's not necessarily tonight. I shared with Sean just in... So it's my understanding, because it sounds like I heard differently, though... The parking passes for like, especially like tier two, like the kind of shared ones, they'd be looks like Monday through Saturday, not Sundays or holidays.

That's what our current ordinance. Okay.

Um, and then, um, And I shared with Sean a little bit, like I would actually, I'm gonna probably advocate for a lesser tier two cost just for, I think a lower barrier, encouraging people to get the pass rather than try and skate the system and then get caught and get a ticket and then come back and get a pass. I just think that there's, I think it shows the intent of the program is we need revenue to, have these have, you know, the next parking areas have enforcement, but at the same time, you know, we're not trying to get rich off the back of somebody parking. So, um, that's where I, you know, and Sean and I talked through that and we'll, we can talk about it as, as it comes forward. Um, but the, I still have a couple other things on my presentation, if that's okay.

So, um, one of the things that we've talked about and that I'm sure we will hear tonight is that, um, None of this means anything without enforcement. And what we've talked about with the downtown business community is that if we do a parking pass program like that, we have to price it such that we can afford to hire a part-time enforcement officer that is specifically and singularly focused on track and parking. The minimum... amount that we need to accomplish that is roughly $22,000, right? So in theory, if we were to sell 27 annual passes for that Eagle lot, that would provide us enough income for that parking enforcement office. We are not offering an annual pass right away, mostly because we want to tie an annual pass to our fiscal year in July. And we want to give a gauge of how popular these are going to be to start out. If we can start this by October 1, we would have three quarters of the year available for parking to where we could see how this really works and works out any kinks before we start charging an annual fee for somebody on that. The other, I'm sorry, Hope. I'm sorry, I didn't.

Oh, no worries, no worries. I'm hiding behind Brian. For the 22,000, is that like a part-time employee, like 15 hours a week or what does that entail?

Roughly. It's no benefits. It's a part time employee. And when we would advertise for that position, they would fit under the police department as our current code enforcement with the instructions that their schedule is random throughout the week. We don't want them always working 10 to noon Monday through Friday. They should be, you know, two hours or four hours off. one day or five hours, one day in the morning, five hours, a couple of days later in the afternoon, come in on a Saturday. Sometimes we have a not to exceed cap on our part-time hours that were limited in state law, but everything else would be work at the discretion of the police chief under that type of format.

What's the hourly that's the 22,000 is based on?

We haven't discussed what an hourly wage would be for that. We just know that 22,000 is kind of the minimum number of cash in hand we have to have before we can even advertise for a position to ensure that we have the money to pay them out of our budget.

Got it. Thank you.

I guess my caution on that, what I would want to see happen, I guess, is what is the chicken and egg at that point, right? So if there's no enforcement, there's not a lot of incentive to buy a permit.

So we have talked with our code enforcement officer and the police chief with the idea that there would be specific times going out and an increase of enforcement as we start this program to work on that and to make sure that our current code enforcement. And one of the things that we're looking at is the passes that we will design for this or that we have designed. They're ready for an organization done is something that makes it very easy for the code enforcement person and actually helps them get through the parking lots faster to know who's legal to park there and who's not.

Anybody else?

The only other thing I have before this is the parking fine amount. Did you want to chat?

Thank you. So when we were going through the ordinance, and you'll see in there, there were lots of caveats to the minimum fee in the ordinance. And one of those caveats to the parking fees is And that is what our current maximum fee that we can charge a parking violator in the city, which for most people, that's not even a slap on a wrist. That's just why the paper up and throw it away, because it's not worth even fighting or doing anything or even paying it. So my first thought is let's just, there's already a penalty in there and the penalty was set at $250. Let's just make all the penalties $250. And so that's what it reads in your language tonight is $250. But after we got to looking at a couple of things and I did some research about what parking fees are around the region in the state, the maximum parking fee in the state that I have found is about $75 for a parking violation. And I don't think we would qualify under the 14th Amendment of excessive fines and such like that if we were three times the maximum anybody else is charging in the state. So I do think as one of a friendly amendment on this, Our attorneys say we should have a not to exceed. We have to keep it under $1,000 so we're not getting into the criminal stuff. But we can put back a line that says parking fees are not to exceed something or a minimum of $50 or $75, not to exceed the total penalty of $250, depending on how that goes. We can draft some language, but you're right. We do need to bring that back down to reality. Yeah.

Yeah, I'd like to see it amended down to whatever you think. I mean, whether it's 50 or 75 as a minimum. I kind of think from an enforcement, you also need a maximum because if you have an eventual person who doesn't seem to care about a $50 parking ticket, it should get ratcheted up for it until the Do care, you know, like, um, the pains enough, you know, and so, you know, what that looks like in the fee schedule can be yet to be determined. I do think that, um, you know, if I was to get a parking ticket, I mean, I think $50 is even like, I'd feel it, you know, I'd be like, oh, shouldn't have done that. Um, You know, I think 75 is a real hitter, and I would support that too. But, you know, if I was setting a minimum and maximum, I'd probably go for the 50 up to – I don't know. I'd probably set a maximum of 500, to be honest with you. I mean, not because I think that that's going to be handed out, but because I think that if you have – there are people, frankly, in downtown – that park that regularly knowing they're not supposed to now. Um, and I, I think at some point, you know, if $50 isn't, you don't feel it $50, you should feel it at a hundred dollars and, you know, and so forth. And if, if, if you get to a level of where you're, you know, five, six tickets in and you're at $500, like, I mean, at that point, I'll take the revenue.

Uh, I know when I got my parking ticket in Hawaii when I was over there, by the time you pay all the fees and the little this fee, this fee, it was $75. By the time all the little fees are done, it was right at $75.

And one of the things that we're looking at is we have to be careful on this because, one, we want to put this just in our ordinance. We're not tying it to the state criminal code. that comes from that. We have to put the penalty in the ordinance itself, because if we don't, sometimes the judges will say there's no penalty for this. Even though we can put it somewhere else in the code, they won't go look at that. So what we're looking to do is bring you a consolidated fee schedule where all of our fees, so our planning application fees, our towing fees, anything that's labeled a fee is on one place where we can have it, where everybody can see it. But the penalties would remain in the code as the penalty for that individual infraction or that as we cite you for that. But that's basically my presentation. The edits that you see in the code are the technical changes that allow us to institute a thing like this. We will bring back an official program as part of a resolution to institute the parking passes. And then when you're ready, I'm ready to read the email that we received this morning via the website.

What's the next timeline then?

So we'd like to start selling passes mid-September. So we have this for a first reading tonight. We would hope that this would come back for a second reading at your August 17th meeting, which would mean that the ordinance would take place 30 days from then. And then probably at the first meeting of September, bring the resolution for the fees, setting it up so we can start selling mid-September so passes can be effective October 1st. That allows us time to change signage or anything that we need to do in the parking lots.

All right. I move that we...

I think he wants to read something. Oh, that's right.

You've got to read your email.

I'm going to read the email, and I'm sure there's somebody in the audience that wants to talk. Oh, I see. Okay.

My bad.

But that's up to the mayor at your discretion on whether you want to let them do that or not. This is from, and I apologize if I butcher the name, this is from Caitlin Robich. Robich? Robich. Robich? Good morning. I'm writing in response to the city saying they're going to take away more parking for the public for employees. First and foremost, I see multiple businesses leaving downtown. With the cost of benefits for any city position being higher than the pay, I don't think financially it's beneficial to hire a new position just to deal with this and at the expense of already struggling brick and mortar businesses. As a female, especially a mother of small stature, the only parking lot I feel safe parking in and have not had issues with homeless is the small head-in lot east of the old library, 3rd and Ivy. This would be the Eagles lot I think she's referring to. The high visibility from the roadway, little shade, and proximity to many businesses make it ideal for patrons and uninviting for homeless. Please do not take this away from us. Very recent closure of multiple businesses downtown, ever-growing adoption of remote work and vacancies. I think it's best to look into the actual need for employees right now and ensuring businesses who have parking lots are using them for parking. And that ends with a question mark. HAB-Masyn Moyer- Oh dot coming into replace non Ada compliance sidewalks could get back parking they took away or at a minimum open up second street backup for employee only parking outside of planned events again question mark we're glad to see the right away storage ordinance is going in best Caitlin.

HAB-Terry Palmos- Thank you. HAB-Terry Palmos- Okay.

HAB-Terry Palmos- Okay, I mean we take it first reading. HAB-Masyn Moyer- As written or no.

HAB-Charlotte Pitts, I have a small concern and regarding the language that needs to be changed with the minimum fine max fine if we don't have specific language to put in that we can pass second reading next time so is that something that. So that has to be 7 of the 9? I can, we can... State law was max 1,000.

State law is max 1,000. How about if we put a maximum combined fee of $750? I want to avoid that $1,000, just so there's no question. And say we set a minimum parking fine of... I mean, do you guys want to go 50 or 75? I think 50. Yeah.

Somebody like me, I don't have a lot of extra money floating around in my own life. And so, I mean, I'll pay you a $50 fine, obviously, but that's a tag deep enough for the average person, I think. To make you think twice about parking there.

Yeah. I've never gotten a ticket here, so I don't know, but I don't want to either. So- David Ensign, On the language, it says the fine for each violation shall be established resolution city council, but should not be less than this is 250 we could put not less than $50 per violation, so what we would do is the parking fine because we need to leave that 250 for other finds that are in that chapter.

David Ensign, But we can say parking fines separately shall be no less than $50 and I can we could draft out.

David Ensign, everybody good with 50.

Yes. Just that's how it was before. You'll see the red strikeouts. There is a line specifically.

A little better than that than 500. Yeah.

It stings.

And then will there be the maximum not to exceed?

And then in the maximum language, we can

So that's cumulative.

So you can get an individual $50 fine, but the maximum would be... And if somebody does hit that max and doesn't care, what do we do? I think we have other avenues that we can go to.

Can they get impounded?

We can impound and such at that point.

We used to.

Ultimately, the Justice Court has their system for collections, so you'd be sending collections to get the money. So one point out, we'd get the money. HAB-Jacques Juilland- impoundment of car. HAB-Jacques Juilland- it's an option, but I don't that's a that's a process. HAB-Jacques Juilland- Expense I mean your issue here.

HAB-Jacques Juilland- And and frankly someone push it right it's I could pay an equivalent of $750 in fines or $1,000 for parking spot $750 in finance, I can park wherever I want. HAB-Jacques Juilland- yeah. So if it's a cumulative and there's a maximum of what you can occur and find each year, that throws a little bit of a, you know, and I wouldn't put it, I mean, frankly, if I was over on Pacific somewhere and I wanted to park right by my front door, if I was tossing up $750 or $1,000, I'm paying fine. Sometimes it's cheaper to pay fines than it is to get the rent.

And if they pay off their fine, does it start over?

Or is that cumulative a year? It doesn't say cumulative to a year. It just says cumulative in that. So I don't know if there's a reset or how that's worked in the past. I mean, those are questions I can definitely ask. I mean, I think for Chelsea's point, I think we have the guidance of language that we can come back to. And then we can bring that back in the second reading and we can run it through the attorneys. And if it doesn't pass muster there, then we can...

talk about it at the second reading i think that's i think that's an important thing to take to the journey i mean it's a i agree piece of it the the question i have is if your target is the middle of september um

Do we have enough procedural opportunities to pass all this to get there? Yes. Okay. So that's the question.

So we can also issue amendments? Unless the parliamentarian here.

I would like to suggest maybe not doing the first reading this meeting and getting this squared away so that we can be sure that the first reading if there is something else that comes up it can be amended and we know without having to have a legal check so that in the second reading can actually pass because if we go to second reading and there's still changes i think we have to drop it and start it would it make a difference so because we restarted it so if we if well if we passed it tonight then by the time we got there if we had to restart it we wouldn't lose anything yeah you'd still have to have a second reading you restart that timeline in two meetings

HAB-Jacques Juilland, For the meeting, so what i'm going to suggest tonight for the Council is, if this is a big enough issue that you want me to go back and amend it, I would suggest a motion to table decide and depending business that our next few.

Well, I'm confused because I agree with what Justin just said. Because if we have to start it over anyway, then what would it even matter if we did it this time tonight? Yeah. And we got the first reading with these corrections and then came with it set, ready to go for the second. and we're able to do it, then we wouldn't have to. But then if we didn't, we would then have to, right? Yeah.

So what's the difference? So the corrections, we're not sure on the corrections. So you guys are voting to pass a first reading with specific amendments. So you guys need to agree right now on what those amendments are in order to pass that first reading so we can bring it back with the amendments and then have a second reading. But if we don't know what they'll be yet, you can't really pass a first reading because it's still it's not finalized does that make sense yeah okay so that's why we should probably table it to the next that's why that's why i asked the question

If we don't first read it tonight, are we going to be stuck at the 1st of October and not really ready because we didn't get everything done? That's the only question I have. If this can still be put into your timeline and follow all the procedures and we do the first reading next time, can we still get it done? That's the only question I have. Otherwise, I think we should hammer out the amendments tonight.

Your first reading would be if we punt it until next week, that's August 17th. Your next meeting is September, the Tuesday after Labor Day.

Can we do both that night? I'm sorry, Greg? Can you do the other one after we do this one? If we approve the second reading that night.

You would approve the second reading on September 8th. And then the ordinance takes place 30 days. There's a 30-day time wait for the ordinance to take effect. But that puts you into October 8th. You're only losing about a week of the quarter. And we could take pre-sales or whatever. We could start working on things in the meantime. And I will also ask the attorneys if there's a pending ordinance doctrine that we can use in the past. We've used a pending ordinance where if we know an ordinance we can start to enforce based on that. And I'll see if that counts up here too.

So consensus for tabling? Or do you need a motion?

I would like a motion if you want to table it. If you want to hammer out language, we can hammer out language right here.

I'm just asking. I just don't. I mean, that... maximum of an annual like i as much as i probably the one that wants us hammered up the most uh that's a pretty big stinking point for me that i i would like you want to get i would like a legal opinion on that because if if we're limited by an annual amount like that like we need to figure out Because that makes no sense from an enforcement standpoint. And if we have something that's a loophole that's that obvious, once this thing rolls out, I can think of a handful of people who will pay the fine. Like, out of the gate. They'd probably prepay it. John Gerstle, they'd be like here just take my $750 off park wherever I want to yes um so i'm in i'm in favor of tabling this. John Gerstle, To get that opinion and how we can maximize you know how we can continue to find people incentivize yeah.

John Gerstle, So i'm we table ordinance number or our discussion and deliberation for ordinance number 2026 dash oh three until. 17th, August 17th.

Or your next meeting. I think that's the date.

Just a quick question.

We need a second first.

Then we can do discussion. I'll second. Is it possible to hold an emergency meeting in the meantime?

I mean, there are provisions for emergency meetings. I don't think that the meeting on this topic.

There might be some people in the public that disagree, but...

It's an OGEC restriction, not even just our charter or our council rules.

Yeah, the limitations on holding an emergency meeting or having limited and so i don't feel like this would rise to that level okay but i can research it some more and bring an answer back if you want to call us now not an emergency meeting but you theoretically could call a special meeting for it there those are two different things so depending on how soon you can get information back yeah good so as much as i love that idea i was i i

PB, Harmon Zuckerman, I would actually love some clarification, maybe not today, but at some point of if we can call especially because when I read through the Charter on these kinds of things I PB, Harmon Zuckerman, I was, I think I thought it said to regularly scheduled meeting to regular to regular counseling. It's like very specific language.

HAB-Masyn Moyer- You're right for an ordinance. HAB-Masyn Moyer- You're absolutely right. HAB-Masyn Moyer- Because we have to. HAB-Masyn Moyer- We have to. HAB-Masyn Moyer- notify the public, so that. HAB-Jacques Juilland- As much as I would love to.

HAB-Jacques Juilland- call a special meeting. HAB-Jacques Juilland- There was. HAB-Jacques Juilland- At one point, I was like. HAB-Jacques Juilland- Special meeting, there was like. HAB-Jacques Juilland- So it are, it is very specific language that says to regular city council meetings. HAB-Jacques Juilland- So it makes sense to. HAB-Jacques Juilland- And it doesn't make sense. HAB-Jacques Juilland- The more I want to. HAB-

All right. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? All right. Motion passes by the council seated.

So we will bring this back at our next meeting with the changes. Okay. For another first brief. Okay.

All right. Next is pending business. Consideration of League of Oregon City's 2027-2028 legislative priorities ballot.

Okay. So last time we said we wanted to... take some more time to look at the priorities for the city to present to the league of Oregon cities. You said you wanted to bring back tonight. I am ready with my spreadsheet of top priorities so we can tally votes. Hopefully you've all had a chance to go through those. And so I think what we should do is I will just go down the list of council members. And if you could tell me your top five and I will, if you could give me the committee and then the sub priority, So I can quickly find it here. We'll go mayor. Do you want me to start with you?

No, I have to pull it up. I didn't get the, I did get a text message from you. I can, I just put those, but I didn't put everything you're asking for.

Oh, committee.

I don't either.

Okay. Well, we can try to, I got an order of like in the packet, but okay.

That, that works too. Cause that's the order that I have them in. So council member, do you want to start? Um, How many you want, five? Give me one and then I'll ask for the next one.

Okay, cool. Targeting prevailing wage changes under finance taxation.

Targeting prevailing wage changes. Yep. Okay.

Next one for me would be land availability and land use streamlining.

Land availability and land use streamlined.

Okay, good. Public meetings law clarity. Okay, thank you. The 2027 transportation package.

All right, thank you. And infrastructure funding. Okay, thank you. Councilmember Christ.

I am not prepared, so I'm going to ask for a bye.

Mayor? I had public meeting law. Invest in community energy resilience and disaster planning. Okay. Infrastructure funding. You can find that one again. Thank you.

I'm trying to find it.

I got it. Okay. 2027 transportation package. And then strengthen economic workforce development.

Okay, Council Narfsinger is not here. Council President Reynolds.

Okay, I have- Did I skip Sandusky?

Yeah, you did. I'm so sorry, John. Well, I don't have a thing to share. Okay.

I didn't do it.

Council President Reynolds.

Land availability and streamlining. Investment in community energy and resilience disaster planning. Hold, please.

So land use streamlining and disaster planning, energy resilience slash disaster planning. Yes.

OK, go ahead. Let's see, the next one is emergency communication system resources.

I thought I had these in the right order, but apparently I don't. Go ahead.

2027 transportation package. OK.

and infrastructure funding. Okay. Council member Bouchard.

Infrastructure funding. And I did write down the page number. So if you need, if that.

No, that's okay. I'm good.

Transportation package for 2027. Okay. Strengthening economic and workforce development.

Okay.

Water and workforce development. Oh, apologies. Oops. Maintain affordable energy while supporting grid hardening and modernization.

Okay. Hold on, please. The water one. Water. Did you say water workforce development or water reuse?

Water workforce development.

Okay. And then what was the one after that?

And then maintain affordable energy while supporting grid hardening and modernization.

Okay. All right. With those votes tallied. Excuse me. It has not ranked my votes and priorities the way they were supposed to. But it's very clear that the 2027 transportation package is there. The infrastructure funding is there.

Public meeting law.

That was two. There's a lot of them with two. We've got a bunch with two.

So public meeting law clarity, which is one that I would support. Land availability is one that I would support. Not that my vote matters. I just... I think if we have those two and then all the ones with two, that would give us five. So strengthening economic and workforce development. The... land availability and land use streamlining, and the public meetings law clarity. That would give us five topics.

Those are the ones with two?

Those are the ones with two.

Aaron, didn't you say the resilience and disaster planning?

Oh, you did. Invest in community, energy resilience, and disaster planning. Yeah, so that would have two as well.

Oh, I apologize. I missed that one.

We're screwed if we get hit with a disaster.

Yeah. Which is an annual disaster. From a state perspective, though.

Because I put ones when I should have put excess.

We're not going to get any. There's no funding coming from local. These are state legislative priorities. There's no funding coming from local. There has to be something coming down from up. And we know they're just going to abandon us at that time anyway. Maybe that's why I didn't throw it on there. But if it's in law, they can't.

If we do that, then we have to take one of the other ones off. Which was...

I'd like to see land availability state virtually. That's on mine that I think. Yep. We need a lot of constraints on that.

So yeah, we've got two that are definite. That's the infrastructure funding and the transportation package. And then four that are tied with two.

And the land availability was the one I was talking about, the one that's tied, the streamlining.

Yeah. So the four that are tied are public meetings law, land availability, investing community energy resilience, and disaster planning, and strengthening economic and workforce development. So which one of those would you want to see cut off? Or do you want to give John or Dean the tie-breaking vote? Because they did not submit anything.

John, too.

Yeah, me too. Yeah.

I mean, I would say I think strengthening workforce development goes with the others. Well, I think for me, it's between public meetings law and disaster planning. And I think it's those are two very like they're the two opposite ends. Right. Public meetings law is important to advocate as a city just because there's some wild constraints and having a little bit more clarity and ability to you know, not be so concerned about serial meetings and have conversations is really important for, I think it's really important for local government. But then disaster planning, I think, is really important for a community. So, like, I can, I'll just, that's my opinion. I don't have, not a hill that I'm going to die on, but I think strengthening workforce and economic development would be a fourth, personally. Mm-hmm.

I would like to, if Dean and Chris could read it and then maybe email you, Sean, on what their preferences would be, I would appreciate that. So they could get a say as well.

Yeah. I would be glad to do that, but I'm sitting here a little bit egg-faced thinking that's not really fair. I didn't do the homework. And so to those that did, they're like, oh, great, now we're not going to do anything because those two guys didn't do their job. So I don't feel comfortable with becoming the tiebreaker when I didn't stop and do the work. So it seems odd that I would be, or even John, that we would be asked to help with that unless we had actually stopped to read.

And the tiebreaker, though, I would say the workforce development one can come out or drop lower on the list, not because I'm against it. but that's been something we've had in this county ever since I moved here in the 80s in one form or another. Which one was that, John? Workforce development. Workforce development, okay. The state has been involved at different levels over time, and so we still have that. I don't know, maybe I'm being way naive, but I think that it's more of a priority to have disaster services or other things that have been mentioned here.

Can I throw a curveball? Oh, yeah. We'll see. If I'm reading the tea leaves at the state level, not of you guys, I have a sense that no matter what, the league is going to advocate for public meetings. I think that's going to be every other community. If it were me, I might say I would give that one and choose the disaster relief planning one that maybe other cities are not as keen on, just so that you can elevate that one and that may be a tiebreaker at the state level. Because I think municipal or public meetings law is so far a field that it's going to win in a landslide on any ballot that the league puts out. That's me reading tea leaves. I may be wrong, but I...

I would be fine with that because I agree with him. Me too.

Brian? That would allow you to do the other five.

There you go. I will cast that ballot. I like it.

So do you need a motion for that or just staff direction? Staff direction. I think that's just staff direction.

Perfect.

I like it. You good? All right, moving on to new business. Resolution number 2026-021, a resolution authorizing the city manager to designate to execute a lease purchase agreement and any related documents for the financing of a vacuum truck.

So in your budget, we talked about this with Public Works. They're going from two vacuum trucks that are old and decrepit to a new vacuum truck. So this has been a and the total purchase price of the truck. This is a lease to own option. And because of the total purchase price exceeding my limit, I have to get your authority to do it, even though it's already budgeted for and we've already agreed to it. So we're just needing permission to sign the documents via the resolution. Jamie, do you have anything to add to that? No.

Our first payment wouldn't be until February 5th of 27. Last one would be February 5th of 2031. It's a five-year loan.

And at the end of that, we would own it? Yeah.

Yep.

So how much does one of these things cost?

And this one is, we're purchasing it for 510, 965. Oh, yeah. Yeah. It's a truck. It's a freightliner.

It's huge. But remember, this is going to be used by

from the two that don't work to one that does.

So our first payment isn't until February, but we've already received the truck and we can start using it? Yes.

Yes. Thanks.

Anybody? Other questions?

I move that we approve resolution number 2026

so that we can buy one of these vacuum trucks that our public works department needs.

I'll second. All right. Moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Questions? Questions called. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? All right. Motion passes by the council seated. All right. Reports. All I have is it's fair week. Go enjoy. Have fun. Watch for kids on bikes because it's what you're going to have down Third Street. A lot of people walking down Third Street. That's all I have tonight. City manager comment.

um along that lines as is our tradition we and per the policy manual we are granting a half day holiday to the staff on thursday to enjoy the fair and that has been a long-standing tradition at the city to uh for our staff so um that is their um national night out that the police department sponsors is and bring your cash so you can, I think we've got council member Bouchard and at least the mayor that are going in the dunk tank. Do I understand that correctly? Council member Optemeyer, we might be able to get convinced to go in.

Sorry, it's a hard pass this time. It's for a good cause. It's a great cause. Does not change. What time is it starting at? 5 o'clock. 5 o'clock.

Perfect. 5 to 7 at Goodspeed Park. So that's what we've got there. I'm trying to think of other things that we've got up. And I can't really think of anything off the top of my head. And I didn't write anything down.

When is the next movie in the park?

Next movie in the park will be the end of August. This is the one that is sponsored by the Health Clinic. Is it Tulane Bay or Nehalem Bay Health Clinic? Nehalem Bay. They're doing Hoppers. This is the one that we had originally were going to show here, but then they said that that's what they wanted to show. And so we pivoted to Zootopia 2 so that they could show Hopper just being nice. The twist on it, though, they're going to be showing it in Espanol with English subtitles. So... that was their choice. And since they're the ones sponsoring the movie, we let them make those kinds of choices. So I will say- Do you have a date on that specific date? I think it's the last Friday in August. um i will say i don't know if this made it back to you at our last movie in the park we had a family from bend that showed up um i did a survey of people a lot of people heard about it through facebook but thank you to the chamber for the spot that the banners a lot of people said they saw those and it reminded them to come to the movie in the park and our banners that we have there are evergreen so the the goal is to put them up on Monday before the movie they're up for the week and then we take them down and it just says movie in the park this Friday so congrats to our staff there and the one other thing I did want to say is thank you to Tillamook Bay Community College for allowing us the use of their room tonight this is a beautiful facility and hopefully we can have more meetings here in the future as it's August 14th? Okay. Moving on August 14th. I thought they were on the last Friday going through two weeks. So in a couple weeks for that.

All right. Thank you. Next is council comments. Start on the left. Justin, you're first. I'm good.

As am I. I'm good. Thanks. Nothing to nine.

Since we will not meet again until the 17th, please note community that on the 17th, that is the first day back for athletics across the county. And so you're going to have a lot of kids entering into school zones again. So watch the school zones. There's going to be a lot of kids present all hours of the day now. So please be cautious. Okay.

The past two weeks, I've had a lot of conversations with folks in my ward, specifically folks around Stowell and 4th and 5th Street. And I did get a lot of complaints about their lift vehicles and extended parking in the neighborhood. And so I was very pleased to be able to talk about the ordinance changes that we have coming with our 72-hour parking requirement. So I think a lot of people appreciate hearing that and that that's coming. So I thought that was a nice little win, but.

Mayor, can I add one of my comments? I apologize for this, but this is the way my brain works. Our elections timing each seat had one person file. So if you filed for your seat and you get approved by the county clerk, once those signatures are verified, then congratulations, you'll be on the council again, starting in January.

That'll save me time and money. That'll save me some time and money.

Thank you.

When do we hear back if there's any issues with the signatures?

We submit those to the county and then the county gives us a certificate. I think that's how it works. Or they will let us know if there are deficiencies in the signatures. This is why we at the end of June. The state filing date isn't until mid-August. And we wanted to make sure that we had plenty of time that if there was a deficiency, you guys could remediate it or any other candidate could remediate it. So that's why we did that. So Chelsea and I will be getting those to the county ASAP. And hopefully, they'll get those signatures verified promptly.

All right. Do you know how long it takes that we would know if they're going to say anything? within a couple of weeks.

I think it's by the first week of September.

Then is there, if there is an issue, is there time to correct after that?

That's our goal. Well, I'm planning on taking them tomorrow. And so they'll begin their verification process. So the goal was if there were problems so that you guys would have time before the August 25th date, after August 25th, it's too late. Gotcha.

Gotcha. We were looking out for you guys to get those signatures verified.

I just wanted to note the fact your daughter's getting married? Yes. Congratulations. That's pretty great.

It's going to be a busy week.

I forgot. I talked to your son today. Saturday. I talked to your son today and I'm like, how did I not know? Congratulations.

With that... uh do we excuse people first or go and then you read and then excuse that's uh what about the bills that'll be we're coming back in we've got that we've got that because we have to come back in yep thank you All right, now, city council will now meet in executive session for the purpose of review and evaluate an employment related performance chief executive officer. Executive session is pursuant to ORS 192.66021 to review and evaluate the employment performance Related performance of the chief executive officer of any public body, public office, employer or staff member who does not request an open hearing. Representatives of the news media and designated staff and other persons shall be allowed to attend the executive session. All other members of the audience are asked to leave the room. Representatives of the news media are specifically directed not to report any of the deliberations during the executive session, except to state the general subject of the session as previously announced. No decisions will be made in this executive session. At the end of the executive session, we will return to open session and welcome the audience back into the room. All right, we're opening our executive session.

For those in the audience that wish to stay, we will come back. You're welcome to stay in the building. We just have to vacate this room. Thank you. Thank you, guys.

John Gerstle, I turned it back on so now's the time to. John Gerstle, come back if you want.

I think if I'm reading this correctly, a loss is in place. Closing discussion and authorization to pay the bills. It was the school security guy. Do you have?

How can we do that? I have. Oh, I know. Get the bills without Garrett. Yes, exactly. on the reason we had to bring this back, I do have a contractual thing that I want to bring up. This is not a total renewal or anything like that. There is a clause in my contract that says that I am only allowed to attend one national conference every other year. I attended the ICMA in Florida last year, and I was treating that as my one. And my intent was to skip this year. The ICMA this year is in Los Angeles. I would like to attend. We budget for this every year. It's something that every city manager prior to me has always been able to go every year. So I would like an exception to my contract so I can register for this conference. If you say yes, I will register for it. If you say no, I won't. And we will keep things. and stuff. I need to register for it now if we're going to do it. I'm just asking the council if I can register for that.

What is the conference about?

This is the International City Managers Association. It's all the city managers across the country and around the world that get together once a year to go. There's classes and trainings and stuff to go. It's quality. I enjoy it. I'll do some So get them all.

Well, I think that's important that, you know, I think networking is really important, especially with other city managers. And I think that's evident. Sometimes I'll ask you a question and you'll be like, I'll get back to you. I talked to these 10 city managers and this is the consensus. So I think events like that are really important. And I'm glad that you feel it's beneficial to you. So. It seems like a no-brainer for you to go every year.

I've said it from the beginning. We had this discussion last year with the tours and with that. It's not just about going on the tour. It's about networking, talking with people. I've gotten more ideas and better information sitting in a bus on a tour of roundabouts in Bend and talking with people than in the actual conference. And if Jamie says yes and you say yes, we can afford it, and this is done, I mean...

as I would bring a contract rule that is one thing that I'd want to change is that every year I do get to go to this but where it sits down I'm not allowed and I don't want to violate my contract and I you know registration opened a month and a half ago we haven't done anything because we were waiting for this to be done do you need a motion or consensus I'm happy with consensus and with the assumption that we will address it in my next in any contract negotiations later good Dean

Good to go. Brian? Yes.

Thank you.

Yep. All right. And then with that, we need the authorization to pay the bill.

Well, with that, I move to authorize to pay the bills. I know.

That's what I said.

How can we do this without Gary?

And you got Sandusky seconded? Yes. All right. Could you please pull the council?

Yes. Councilor Bouchard. Councilor Reynolds. Aye. Councilor Sandusky. Aye. Councilor Christ. Aye. Councilor Oftenmaier.

Aye. All right. Motion passes. And with that, we will adjourn.

We will bring Second Street Plaza next meeting. That's already on the agenda. Okay. I just want to.