Board of County Commissioners - Regular Meeting

Um, thank you very much. Um, for the record, uh, this is Jerry Woolly, acting vice chair today and with me is Commissioner Thrice Fi and Snider. Uh, Chair Harrington has taken the afternoon off not feeling well, but she will not be here the rest of the day. Um, so we're going to go into executive session right off the top. Uh, that item has been moved um till later this evening. We're going on to the proposal from the OSU extension. Uh well, there you go. You guys moving all the marbles. Okay. So, Ann, you look like you were ready to go. Step right in and take it away.

Thank you very much. Uh Ann Ober. I'm one of the assistant county administrators and I'm here today to introduce our OSU team. We were here a few weeks ago talking about a proposal they have for creating a special improvement district. and the board had some questions of them in order to move forward. So, they have returned to answer those questions. We also have some additional information that was created by Alex Barnett before he went out on leave uh just to answer a few questions about the how we would create that district. Uh so, I will let the team introduce themselves and then we will go from there.

And just since it's on the record, I'm going to interrupt quick. We are talking about a service district. We are in the midst of budget and so a lot of different um districts and improvement districts and language is rolling just off the tips of our tongue. So we are here to talk about a service district. Thank you. And once a city manager, always a city manager.

Okay. Thank you. Good afternoon commissioners. Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak with you. Again, my name is Angela Sandino. I'm the regional director for OSU Extension. I serve Washington, Multma, and Clackmus counties. And I'm joined by Naen Manashi, our administrative office manager serving Washington County. And we're here to share an overview of the Washington County Extension and 4 Service District proposal. We really appreciate your continued support and look forward to our discussion. Thank you so much for having us back. This um this presentation will outline our proposed five-year service and staffing plan for the Washington County Extension and 4 service district. The plan of course is contingent on voter approval in May 2027 of a local option tax service district of five cents per $1,000 of assessed value phased in gradually at 1 cent per year. One of the factors we discussed when we were here in February was the sudden budgetary influx that this service district would bring from our current budget of approximately $500,000 which includes our $350,000 allocation from the county general fund plus the generous coverage of our building lease to what would be closer to $4.5 million annually with this service district. Our approach prioritizes direct program delivery, ensuring that the resources are focused on serving Washington County residents. We have formulated a funding and staffing plan that would implement a 1 cent increase per year for the first five years of the service district, which would allow us to increase programming responsibly and maintain necessary flexibility to respond to

community needs. At the same time, we intentionally would build capital and contingency reserves over time to support long-term sustainability. The plan's designed to remain flexible, allowing us to adjust staffing and programming based on evolving community needs. And overall, this framework balances growth with fiscal responsibility, positioning the district for long-term stability and impact. The thing that is most important to us in this plan is of course that we are using tax funds wisely. Um it's also important to note that we would continue submitting an annual budget to you the same way that we do now. And you will be the ultimate decides of how much to levy that year based on the budget that we proposed to you, any unanticipated needs in the community that may need our attention, and overall economic conditions. Just as we do now, we'll hold on to some modest contingency funds. And we're also excited to save up for a building that will fit our needs as we grow our programming. On this chart, you can see an annual overview of how much we would collect in taxes, um how much we plan to spend and save up for our own building, and how much we could anticipate putting into reserves. We're very aware of inflation and increasing costs. So, it's really critical for us not to risk overstaffing and to implement a phased service model. So, this slide illustrates how services and investments scale over the fiveyear period as revenue is phased in. I'd like to share a little bit about what we anticipate. So in year one, collecting only one cent per thousand gives us an annual operating budget of approximately $900,000

and the focus would be on sustaining concurrent operations and maintaining existing programming. This ensures continuity for the community. We would focus on sustaining our current programming which includes the staff that currently manage our office and fundamental programs like 4 and master gardener. OSU would continue to provide the faculty needed for all of our programming and the tax service district provides support staff and money for operations. In year two, as revenue grows to $1.8 8 million as we collect two cents per thousand. We would begin expanding core programs with a strong emphasis on youth engagement through 4 and related efforts. By year three at three cents collected and a budget of $2.7 million, we would broaden our reach across the county and across key program areas including agriculture, forestry, and community health. In year four, with four cents collecting, giving us $3.6 million in our budget, we would expand geographically and deepen community engagement to serve more residents across Washington County. And finally, by year five, reaching the full five cent per $1,000 of assessed value and a total budget of $4.5 million, the district reaches a stabilization phase, supporting mature programming, accounting for inflation, and maintaining strong contingency reserves. As you see in this five-year plan, we will ensure responsible growth by increasing our programs one at a time, adding two or three positions per year that include educational and program

outreach positions. All of these staff will spend their time in communityfacing roles across the county. Importantly, a detailed budget will be developed and submitted each year as along with an annual fiscal audit for board review and approval which ensures transparency and accountability. As mentioned, a critical component of our service district will be the responsible handling of public funds, something that we have already been successful at for years. By prioritizing a phased expansion, sensible capital and contingency reserves, and transparent reporting, we anticipate very low risk in operating this plan. Um, these are the risk mitigation strategies that we'll be focused on, including revenue sensitivity, programmatic flexibility, reserve strategy, contingency protection, and transparency. And then to provide a full picture of the options available, we would also like to highlight an alternative proposal that is currently under consideration. In late February, we had a conversation with our 4 team about programmatic needs, which included a discussion about the fairgrounds and particularly the animal barns and cloverleaf building. In several Oregon counties, extension offices are colllocated on fairgrounds with capital improvements supported through similar district models. We have been wondering whether it would be appropriate to consider incorporating certain fairgrounds capital improvements into this service district framework. And after discussions with Washington County staff about this concept, we wanted to share that option with you. This model

differs from the phased approach we just presented in that it includes capital improvements at the Washington County Fairgrounds as part of the service district. Under this proposal, we would uh the full 5 cent rate would be implemented immediately beginning July 1st, 2027. rather than phased in over time. This could allow for more immediate investment in public facilities, particularly at the fairgrounds, which serve as a very important community asset. Any additional funding not used for extension programming or operations would be set aside into a capital improvement fund to be used at the discretion of the board of commissioners. Under this option, in year one, the full 5 cent rate would be collected with revenue of about 4.5 million annually from the onset. Because spending ramps up gradually, this would generate substantially higher revenues and reserves in the early years. Year one alone would produce roughly 3.6 million in reserves. Year two, we would have 2.8 million. three 2.3 million, year four 1.9 million, year five 1.6. Therefore, after five years, we would have approximately $12.2 million in reserves. These reserves could be used to undertake a building project on the fairground site. This option also creates opportunities to expand youth development programming, especially through enhanced 4 and fair related activities. Additionally, this approach could support a closer and more integrated partnership between Washington County and OSU Extension.

We're sharing this option for your consideration and to outline the range of potential approaches and their associated benefits. We're interested in hearing from you about whether the board sees a vision in this potential partnership. We know that meaningful growth under this plan may not be possible with only a 5-cent rate, but if you'd like to further this discussion, we'd be pleased to investigate it further. So, key takeaways for you today. The phased model I first presented of 1 cent growth per year prioritizes gradual growth and alignment with extension service delivery. The full rate model in partnership with the fairgrounds accelerates reserve accumulation significantly providing greater upfront financial capacity for capital investment and contingencies. Both these approaches maintain a strong commitment to fiscal responsibility with the primary difference being the timing and scale of reserve buildup. With that context, we'll move into the final slide.

Before we leave, do you mind if I comment? Yeah. And we've come to questions.

Perfect. Perfect. So, I wanted to just talk a little bit about how this last option came to staff and about where we are from the county perspective on this as an option. Um, I want to first and foremost call out Angela with a thank you. We're looking at the fact that we really struggled, especially around some of our barns and some of our other spaces to find a capital plan that would help us do the implementation. Uh when we first saw these numbers, we got really excited as a possibility, but as we started getting into conversations, I think Angela got a little panicked uh at the excitement that the county was bringing to the table uh because it does not generate as much as we would need in order to deliver on the master plan as it is designed today. So I just want to I want to put some caution to everyone as to how much generated uh capacity this would actually bring to the table, but it could allow for some implementation of the master plan. We would need to go back to the master plan and look at the staged approach that was outlined in the original master plan to make sure that we aligned what OHSU would be using as a shared amenity to what we would be building with those funds. in partnership. Right now, we haven't prioritized those projects based on that.

Yes. Talking about the fair grounds master plan. Fairgrounds master plan. I just wanted to Yeah. make sure that we were No, I appreciate that.

Yeah. And just for maybe members of the public who may be viewing this, when the master plan was adopted, there was not an associated financial strategy or funding source to execute on the fairgrounds master plan. So it is um very common that your board hears requests from community fair board uh 4, OSU and other partners for wanting to see execution on at least a portion of that master plan. And so this does provide an opportunity for us um to leverage funds given the sheer volume of county critical facilities that also need uh puppy sources. identified as well.

And then the final thing I would just add to this conversation, actually two things. One, uh I did have an opportunity to talk to Dashuites County. I really appreciated the team connecting me with them. Uh that partnership has been done in multiple places across Oregon. Dashes is one of the counties where they've colllocated the site. Uh they're happy to come meet with us if we decide this is of interest to the board to continue down this path. The second piece is um we have not had any this is our first conversation. We are a long ways from having final information and we have not spoken to the fair board. So in this case there are actually this is a three-legged stool instead of a two-legged stool. So if there is interest for even exploring this concept, we would need to have our next conversation with the fair board.

Are we jump right in there? So I'm I'm I'm a little confused and I just need um a clarification on steps here. So So when we first talked this was about OSU and uh the extension services that you provide and the first part of your presentation is the stepped in process from one to five cents and that still conceptually was around those services that you've talked to us about. Now the the this last little slide says, "Okay, maybe we should rethink this and look at going to five cents, which would allow for uh a CIP in relationship to the buildings at at the fairgrounds

over the first couple years or is it on?" Well, that's one of my questions. Is it ongoing? And also I do want to take a step back and ask about what the process is to put this on the ballot because this has to go this this is will be an approved process. Does this shift make it a Washington county proposal or does it still stay under the purview of Oregon state? I mean I'm I'm thinking about all sorts of tax implications. uh what our what our residents see that type of thing. So I need I need just a little bit more storytelling. Thank you very much.

I am happy to do the second part but if you would like to start with the first part. Okay. Um the first part being the first part is is this over a fiveyear span or is this over a future several years of growth with I think the question really is you know the proposals are ramp up faster but then by year five you'd have the same amount so then are you so are you just using the money you collect in that first couple years for capital or is there some capital component beyond the five years for O andM associated with the capital.

I think the idea is at the 5 cent per thousand rate and that would bring in approximately $4.5 million. The first five years we wouldn't need that full $4.5 million. So those money that money would go in reserves and after five years we would have about $12 million that potentially could be used to put like the Cloverleaf building uh remodel or some sort of extension location co-housed at the fairgrounds and then afterwards we would have we would be operating on about a $3.6 6 million budget then we need to add for inflation each year bringing in 4.5 million. So we would have a modest amount to save for then the next increase in improvals improvements at the fairground complex. So what we're really talking about is the using the first five years at the uh 5- cent level from year one as an influx to uh fairground capital program.

Okay, that's I just wanted to make sure I understood that. And then the next the other question was about the process that gets us to this to a potential for this. So, uh, in the conversations with other districts, they have not had an agreement in place between the three entities managing the site. They would recommend we have an agreement, but to answer your question, it would remain an OSU process. You all would place it on the ballot as you would for any district that had come forward. Uh, we did confirm and you have a memo from Alex outlining that the um the type of district this would be is similar to the ESPD. So you would continue to receive the budget from OSU and adopt it. But this is an OSU driven process even with these capital dollars. And this is the this is not the first time we've had a request since I've been on the board for a special district formation.

Correct. Uh but this but we and we have not approved a special district formation. Correct. During the last eight years. Correct. Okay. Just want to make sure I'm sorry. The if it's like the enhanced sheriff's patrol district would they would there would be a budget committee. Yeah. The commission would out and approve the budget, deliberate on the budget. Okay.

So OSU and other communities presents the budget to the county and they basically just turn it back to the board of county commissioners during the budget hearing process for you to review. So they would be there with us for the presentation of the budget. They would talk through their programming. You would have the opportunity to give feedback in that process and at the end to determine the actual direction of the budget. But to Commissioner Trice's point, this is the first time. It's not it's not similar to ESPD because it's an internal this is an outside.

Correct. Yeah. This would be an outside agency in in a quasi governmental agency that we would be supporting through this process. Correct. The funding is similar. Correct. Yes. And the portion of law that we use for its creation is or is the same. So it has to be renewed every five years. No, this is a new district. So the 0.5 cents is permanent. It's a permanent rate increase. But they couldn't raise it beyond the 5 cents unless they did a levy just as we go through.

Yeah. What would be I want to go back to Commissioner F your question. What um Yes, it would be a district that would be uh overseeing an operating program outside of the county structure. If the board would move forward, the voters would approve the district. That would mean that the funding source for OSU would be through the district revenue, not through the current general fund allocation to the district. So that that would not be allocated anymore. And how much is that?

Approximately 500,000 is what we receive about 350,000 annually. And then Washington County is covering our lease which is about 150,000. So combined about 500,000 annual budget. Our share is No, our share is the 500,000. So we're paying it through two different buckets. One is through Laurel's team uh through facilities where we're paying the lease and the other is through an allocation that we make every year in the budget process. there monetary and correct and and part of the monetary plan

and to take us back a few years part of the reason we are at the place we are at having this um conversation getting your board's um direction is because um over the multiple years of budget cuts we have cut into year-over-year the OSU operational funding to the point um that this last year. Um the board's heard me say their tone um uh various county operations. OSU is at that point too in that tipping point. This has been um an idea or a conversation point. I would say over maybe the last three years, but really last year was the tipping point to bring something forward and looking at other alternative ways to fund versus reliance on the county general fund. I have a couple more questions. Um, you know, as I'm I'm reflecting on some of the other discussions we've had around things like enterprise zones and the costs to our taxation and assessment department for doing this types of things. Are those types of costs projected in this as well? So, those are administrative costs. We did talk to some of the departments about what the impact would be and we can bring you back a more specific budget that outlines what those shared revenues are back to finance or whoever who's running the budget. Uh with CWS in that case, it's actually probably a slightly better example because CWS is actually that funding source is paying a portion of money to the county for use of things like

interactions with the board and our facilities. So that is something that we would still need to have conversations about, but it is a small number. And the other question that I have is um as as we look to agree to to put this on the ballot and I'm taking now I'm going back to the very beginning step. Uh do we need I would ask shouldn't we be talking to our municipalities to all others that may be looking at what their options are moving forward for um for new revenue. And I'm I'm just raising that issue. It actually was a part of our last like deck because one of the things that staff has said throughout this whole process is this is an OSU extension services process which means they need to be meeting with the cities. During our last presentation they actually had their engagement plan outlined and we can send that back to you.

Uh but very specifically they are making a commitment to do that interaction for this district out in the community. the Thank you. And I'm glad that that's part of the plan and thank you for the reminder. But I would also say when it comes back, it'll still be the mayors of the various cities that call and say, "Why is why is this going to be on the ballot when our levies on the ballot?" I'm I'm just I'm just putting that out there that yes, they'll have the input, but it'll be our decision. So ultimately we will be in that in the driver's seat on this.

Correct. And the other thing to remember well to think about I want to remember is that um Angela and Nadine have been amazing about saying when do you want this? So they have so we had put it into May in part because we're trying to balance out things like this is the only place where we're paying for a lease for an organization that is not a county service. and we have been making commitments and steps to removing that from our funds because we've been having all of these cuts. So, you'll see in the budget this year that we're continuing to cover this to buy the team time to go out and have a discussion with the voters. If we decide to push it or if you decide to push it further or and and give your support, then we would need to have a conversation about whether or not future budgets at the county would continue to support and subsidize the programming or not. And our goal Sorry, go. No. And I I just want you to know that I'm It's not that I'm not in favor. I'm just looking at what all the different complexities are. I know that the city of Beaverton was going to go out for a levy and THPRD did. So, there was there was some um push and pull there and I I don't see this as any different in that regard. So, that's why I'm that's why I'm raising the question for for all of us to think about, but this is countywide.

It is countywide and we've also been having the GRO process in which we've been talking about other resources of funding for county services. This is one that would positively affect the general fund just because of the fact that these funds would no longer be needed and that gives us revenue back into other expenditures. Um, but it is not one that is as large as some of the other discussions we've had that would offset as much uh would offset as much need that the county currently has. So that's real too. I mean the way the way I frame this in my own mind is that this is a very valuable program that's on a unclear sustainable financial path and this is a way to move the programs onto a sustainable financial path

and like I said I I certainly support this. I'm just thinking about all of the implications as we move forward. And you know, I also like, frankly, if if we're going to be participating, I like the idea of going to five trying to solve some of our other problems in relationship to uh our CIP and at the fair at the fair complex. So, I like those ideas. I think that that that gives us even more rationale around um putting it on the ballot. We are beginning our meetings with mayors in the next couple weeks. We wanted to conduct this meeting first. Thank you. Well, we do have meetings on the calendar with Mayor Pace and Mayor Batty. Great.

But you should be talking to more than just them. Yes. The commissioner with the most cities as well.

The uh I like the collaboration approach at the at the fairgrounds. I think that makes a lot of sense and helps give us options to solve community problems in a more creative way over time, recognizing that's not going to be a, you know, full perfect solution, but I think it heads heads us in a good direction and provides some uh capital capacity. So I'm supportive of of that approach. Uh and um certainly looking forward to the engagement and hearing how the engagement goes. So that would be the other thing I would ask is it's not just doing all the engagement you're talking about, but making sure that both the team is responsive to what you're hearing and also that we know what we we get to at some point hear what you're hearing.

Well, I guess from my standpoint, I'm uh going to ask What's the fair board's role in this? And then Oh, wait. Go ahead and answer that question.

So, the fair board has, and I'm gonna invite Leah to correct me if at any point I get this one, but the fair board has oversight and responsibility during the actual fair. So, any agreements that we make have to protect that access in perpetuity. That's the first piece. So they will be involved in any contracts or any negotiations we have with OSU around use of those properties during that time or ongoing because we can't forgo our responsibility to own the fairgrounds either. That's a part of state law. So we the next step of this is that we would go sit down and see where they want to be involved too. We're this is a conversation still. This is not a dictate and so that would be our next step. I can't give you more until we've talked.

Well, I I think as a member of the fair board, yeah.

Um I think that would be a good conversation. Uh fair board is very supportive of 4 activities. We're also very aware of the the cane properties that we have asking for these kids to to do things um out growing the the cloverleaf building for starters. Um so yeah, I think this would be a great conversation for them. Um, and I would look forward to seeing what um, additional revenue streams would provide for at least some major maintenance um, versus big stuff like new buildings. Um, so yeah, that would be a great great conversation.

Well, and it wasn't intentional, but uh, the two agenda items on today's afternoon actually backtoback do provide insight into those opportunities. So, in our next conversation, we'll have additional conversations around this property and ways that we continue to try and find funding sources for the maintenance of that of those grounds in particular. Last year during the budget cycle, we did use lottery funds at $1.2 million in order to do some of the the needed improvements at the site and TLT continues to be a source of funding for the fairgrounds in general. So all of those things, this is all a package deal. This is just one leg of that stool.

Yeah. Yeah. And um

and if I can just add on to Ann's point, when Ann says improvements, that is current maintenance of our facilities capital maintenance because as the board may recall, we do not have capital maintenance funds for um or uh Westside Commons complex as a whole that are sufficient enough to cover, for example, Wingspan AV or just the growing needs of a high use facility. And so those funds, I would call them um ongoing capital needs that we need to just reinvest to keep the buildings going versus major improvements to the site such as clover leaf or another building. One, we we had to tear down a number of the facilities at the site because they were dangerous and we did not have the capital to make improvements to them. So there are also once these con these items are constructed or improved, we don't want to get in this position again. It would be there would need to be a plan for maint.

Yeah, I think we in Yeah, go ahead. Thank you for the presentation and thank you for I think I think you're doing the right thing. I think you're bringing people together and solving problems as you should. Um, and here's a lowhanging fruit question or comment. FFA, do we need to mention that in there? Say 4 and FFA. FFA. I was feeling a little bit left out. Yeah. Yeah. Seventh graders in college. Just calling that. I thought it was a low hanging fruit and a bit of a levity to it, but

yeah. No, FFA is a wonderful organization and they're not under the umbrella necessarily of OSU extension, but they definitely do access the facilities at the fairgrounds and they would benefit from any improvements there and many of the FFA members are also 4 members. Yeah. And then they under but FFA as an organization is not part Exactly. It's not part of OSU. But we're going to mention the fairgrounds. Yes, they definitely use the fairgrounds and improvements I think there those facilities. Yeah.

Um this comment is to you and Tanya. Um it's I saying thank you. Good presentation. Go forth with your engagement plan. I think it's a you're going to have a good conversations and and I do think that this is a value. A lot of community members do value this um especially Washington County and there's a quite a bit of movement to pres preserve the archicultural heritage of Washington County. So you'll be surprised a lot of the allies and the friends and the sympathetic ears that you find in Washington County. Now I think there's a lot of question about like how do we preserve that culture for the next 200 years? um you know because somebody did it for the last 200 years for all of us here. So I think there's that bit of a foresight conversation happening. So um but the question I have for you Tanya is a bit of a the process of to get to the May 2027. I don't want us to rush through and there's a bit of a overturn overturn this board happening. So, um, I just wanted to not finish that sentence, but also put it out there.

I would recommend that we're back here quarterly or every six months, depending on what kind of information we have for updates. It's three months in advance of an election that we place this on the battle ballot and you three you as a board would be voting around that. So, we want to make sure you're absolutely prepared. uh when we have a new board seated, I think it makes a lot of sense to bring this topic back and present it again with the slides and the information just to make sure everyone's on the same page.

Yeah. So, given today's conversation, when we do come back, some things that I've I've heard is um and I'll just start where we end it and just um timeline update also engagement update. Heard the OSU team speak to the engagement with the mayor. So wanting to get an up the board wanting to have an update of where we're at with that. Um and then given the questions um comments and feedback we heard today refining the budget um a bit more including that partnership piece on um capital um investments with uh at the fairgrounds

bringing new members of the board along which you were just mentioning. I will just state that's going to be super critical if we think we're putting something on the ballot for that passed a May 2027 vote. Yep.

Yeah. Staff are actively and thank you um members for lifting up that we will be welcoming um new members to the commission. We are actively taking note the multiple um I'll say onboarding and also commissioner conversations that there will need to um be had not just on this item but the several items. So please keep bringing those up so that we can make sure to take note of that and I know the staff assistants Aaron Doyle just did that like I heard Aaron Doyle and that's all about it. I I do think though that

um the proposal of one penny per year for five years or 5 cents all at once is different than when you start talking about money for county facilities. And so the emphasis would move from OSU extension and 4 to this is a county project. That's my sense because when we start adding more money tax

into this or we start talking about what we're going to do with the extra money and we're going to be improving county facilities, then it kind of it kind of feels like, oh, okay, we're we're using this organization, but it's going to help ours. And that's a different message. It is. And I think holding us to account for that is important. I also think that there's benefit to OSU for that to happen. If I'm transparent, I think that having two birds and one stone. Correct. Two birds in a scone. We're gonna feed two birds.

I for I left out a one word. That's the best I could do with that. Absolutely. 100%. This is how do we meet multiple needs? And I think that the board has an opportunity to make choices in how you choose to engage at that point. Yeah. Yeah. I I think it's a great idea and I look forward to the continuing conversation. There's a lot of details that need to be presented at the next time. So yeah, we'll look forward to that. Wonderful. Okay. Is there is there make me think of We can move on if you want, but you got two and a half minutes.

Oh, okay. It might just take me that Sorry about that. Um the question I have is it just made me think of when I heard Commissioner Willie, Vice Chair Willie um articulate that portion like if a constituent asked in the aggregate what are all the taxes being applied to and the reason why it made me think of it this is a phrase that I've heard for the past six years from Commissioner Willie death by thousand guts. type thing like how how much is it

are we going so I don't that could be a question down the road to answer but I think um yeah I think that's kind of what I was asking if for the next generation of information that we get it's going to have a lot more of that specificity

and that's really fair it goes back to also why when I was talking about our general revenue project we had been targeting projects where we were going to see $5 million or more for really trying to to prioritize the things we were working on as staff. This won't generate that level that we had originally said we were trying to accomplish, but it accomplishes something very different that I think is of interest to the board and to the individuals at the table. And so we didn't want to minimize that in coming forward. It's the timing is smart. Yeah. Um but I hear you. It is still an increase on a tax and it is still another cut.

Yep. Okay, we good. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much for being here. Good to see you. Thank you. Thank you. Right. All right. Next up is the transient lodging tax and ETV explore valley contract update.

Yeah. And don't don't move anywhere. This is my whole afternoon. Uh, so I wanted to start just by thanking everyone for the opportunity to be here. We originally had proposed bringing this forward a couple months ago, but because of timing on the commission board, we didn't have a chance to present. Some things have changed since we originally had presented the information through a packet. And so I just wanted to be transparent about that right now. Uh the first one is that we uh have been continuing to meet with ETB over the course of the last couple of months and I really want to thank Dave Pillo for how he's arrived in those conversations and the opportunity to work with him uh to make some clarity around roles and responsibilities between the county and ETV. Um and a lot of that work has been done on our side by Laurel Brown. So, thank you to Laurel and to Dave. Originally, when we had come forward, we thought we'd be presenting a red line of a bunch of changes. The good news is is I think we're largely aligned between the two organizations. We're going to touch on that briefly today, but hopefully those pieces are going to proceed. We've also had an opportunity to talk about the finances around this and what the original proposal was. We have a lot more information we're going to present on that today. It's possible that even the financial side of the ETB piece is actually all but complete and we'll talk about that in this presentation and that we have some alternative ways of covering some costs for the county. So, we're going to talk about those today. But, I just wanted to call out for anybody who's been tracking this for a while, it is different than what we were going to bring forward a couple months ago and the teams just worked really hard to get us here. So, thank you on both sides of the table for that. And with that, uh, Ann Ober. I'm one of the assistant county administrators.

I'm John Stein. I'm the chief financial officer. Laurel Brown, director of facilities, fleet partners.

Right. With that introduction, I just want to start off um with a different topic uh and related is transit loging tax and the House Bill 4148, which we passed. You know, there were some questions on what does that do for us as accounting as far as use of our TLT dollars. So, um, I learn more every day about TLT as a job. So, I wanted to bring this forward what what my perception is of the House bill and how that impacts how we use our dollars. And so, the policy question for the board is, do you want to consider changes to uses of our TT revenues? And we might talk about this even after the next conversation on ETV. But just to bring us up to speed on TLT and the history of Washington County, it was started in 1972 with the first implemented 5% rate. Um so TLT and unincorporated Washington County amount would go to the county and then incorporated areas of Washington County split half to the county and half to the cities. 1984 there was another 2% that was added. uh 1% went to the fairgrounds for promotion um maintenance and operations and then 1% went to our explore tool valley marketing campaign. In 2003, our legislation required that 70% of new or increased lodging taxes had to be used for promotion of tourism or tourism facilities. So the next time we had an increase was 2006, another 2% increase in our TLT in the county and that was allocated toward our TV contract and the event center. And so putting that in perspective in our municipal code, this is from the municipal code 3.080. And just to highlight, so the way the code reads paragraph B1

there, one ninth is dedicated to fairgrounds promotion of tourism and maintenance operations of fairgrounds. So that goes to the fairgrounds. 3 9ths is dedicated to promotion of tourism as well and tourism related facilities and of that money uh 2.339 goes to our explor valley contract and 67 9 goes toward our events that are debt service at the fairgrounds. all tourism related for the first two bullets and then 50% of the remaining amount after the deduction of of above goes to um the cities and community split options and then the remaining comes to the general fund that we can expend for in purpose. That's current state of where the code is today. Um, House Bill 4148 uh changed the revenue usage ratios allowing tourism going from a 7030 to a 50/50 split so counties can have more flexibility on how to use that money uh in their county and cities. Um, these new ratios can be applied to all the revenues we have regardless of when the percentage went into effect or it can be applied going forward. additional uses authorized in the TLT revenue. Added some some caveats there to also provide flexibility and more um legal background on some things that cities and counties would like to use be able to use TLT money for. One of those was to add u a stipulation for resiliency grants for small businesses, restaurant, lodging um primarily in cases where we have um disasters or economic shocks that gives an avenue to use some TLT revenue to do more than just marketing and help our

business or local businesses. The second one adds a definition to allow emergency or non-emergency services provided directly to the county. So, we could use it for for that. Some uh some counties and cities are do have agreements where they provide services through special districts like their fire district or um other districts that they use that money through and it helps provide that legal backing to do that. The last piece directs a banning report the first one due on September of next year. So, may I ask a question instead of whispering?

Um, that that second bullet uh on the the second bullet and then the in the second circle below that you just talked about the emergency. Would that include for example ESPD? It's a special district. It would if if we were to use some TT funds. Um that talks, you know, fire districts, amos districts, rural service districts will be qualified as city or county services. So, okay. Just I'm just curious. I think primarily the driver of that though has been the coastal communities because they wanted appropriate. I just wondered if it was um that would fall under there that but that's how it got in there because coastal communities are saying we need struggling we need this for public safety

resiliency and previously it wasn't allowed to not even just resiliency they needed to function in the summer when oh yeah handle the five times as many people as normal John if I understand correctly it's gone from 70% 30 to 5050 testing. Yes. So they can use 50% for tourism and 50% for other It's an option. It's an option.

Yes. Um so really based on that last slide, my takeaways were were as we talked about I mean we could we could change the ratios have flexibility in that going forward. Um the pre203 grandfathered amounts that we have are are less restrictive than the 50/50. even um additional authorized revenue, we can decide to broaden it and use for these other categories that we talked about. I don't believe we need to change our municipal code to do that because it's backed in the legal language. Um and then just the other thought as we go into the next conversation on ETB, increasing TLT revenues if we decided to add additional dollars uh percent tax 1% increase in TLT is about 8 million TT question was do we want to consider some changes in usage of TLT based on the bill

and just to make sure that I say it out loud we have contracts with ETB and with others so we're not actually proposing I believe at this time making any changes but this is a change in law that allows for the board to make some decisions We want to make sure you have the information uh and an ability to give us any different feedback. And this also might be something where staff may propose a change in the future to solve a a problem, but you're also asking us if we want to proactively seek correct some sort of change. That's what's on just clear what you're asking. Yes. So I I think the confusion for me is and I've been trying to understand TLT since I came up with the commission. Welcome.

You too. Um, so we've got 12 cents. It is now. Is that it was 10 and then I thought this we're at 9 cents. The state has one and a half. So 10 and a half%. Okay. And of that previously 70% was reallocated. The 30% went into our general fund. No, because it was grandfathered. The 7030 rule came into effect in 2003. Well, our our tax was implemented in 1974 and added in 1985. So those amounts are not subject subject to that 7030. No wonder this is so hard.

Exactly. So I guess what I'm trying to you know that dollar bill that you use for funding. I need one of those. And the reason why is because I'm trying to figure out if we decided since 50% of the money we could drag into our general fund or what percentage or whatever that however more of it right that would mean that there'd be smaller pie for the allocation to the cities uh because a fixed number is ETV contract is fixed the debt service is fixed So that leaves the cities.

I think the amount split to the cities comes first. We'd have to meet the split requirement on the first five cents of our 5% on our commission wants the dollar. I just want to understand the new allocation with a 5050 um proposal that legislature gave us. So what exactly does that mean?

Right. uh because obviously it would be enticing for us to say great we'll use a little bit more of the TLT and maybe we throw in a penny and it's a $ 1.8 million bump. But I mean there's a whole bunch of variables in there. I contend that and have had this conversation multiple times that um an increase in TLT to a point doesn't impact tourism because I've asked everybody I know when you decided to to check into that hotel. Did you ask them what their TLT was compared to the guy down the street or in another other neighborhood or something? Nobody ever checks that. So, it's just incorporated into the cost. So, if we add another penny, obviously that's another penny, but

I just need to know how this allocation works and especially under the 5050. So, draw me out a dollar sign, John, and show me who gets the Okay. No, I think it's a good idea. I don't have a dollar sign, but I think well, one of their like one of their questions I I guess I want to make sure we're clear on what you're asking because if you're asking what the current allocation is, that could probably be put in one of those sheets, but they're asking us a policy question about whether we might want it to look different in the future, which is where the 5050 change would come into effect. So, I don't think they can put that on a dollar, but we could have

what it looks like now and a proposal. We could if there was a proposal to but that's the that's the policy question being asked now and we're going to ask it right. Uh what I'd like to do is I'd actually like to jump into the next conversation. Okay. See if there's some direction from you about what the second dollar bill might look like. Right. There's the today dollar bill and then there's a second dollar bill that says if we increased it by another penny, what would that split look like or what could that look like? And so I think that we that's the kind of clarity at the end of this we really or we adopted the 5050. Correct. Yeah. So basically maybe $3 we're talking about. But

is that is that that right Jason? Um I I guess if we were to propose something different than the I mean there's what's happening currently. There's the what would be possible if we went to 5050 and then you're maybe interjecting a third thing which would be something in between those. Oh, adding a penny. Oh, adding a penny. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, yeah. Increasing the total amount of collections all

right. Well, I will also point out that our amazing attorney on this is actually also present and has been very quiet through this uh presentation uh because Jason is the person who does our tax law questions here at the county. So, we have been having some of those discussions and I would invite John or Jason to correct me, but right now we are doing better than 5050 because of when the funds were actually brought into the county. So us moving to what's now allowable actually is worse for the When you say doing better and worse, what are you meaning?

We are bringing in more to the county under the existing structure we have than is allowed for under law in this change. Because when we adopted the funding structures, we were able to take a higher percentage at the time that they were adopted than we could when it changed in 2006. 2003, right? Uh so it's it actually is even more cumbersome and confusing than just saying a 5050 split. But what you're when you say better and more you're referring not to the total amount but the amount that is not fixed strictly for tourism or facilities correct

that's correct I okay so the total amount is not wouldn't necessarily change

if you think of the 9% as a as the dollar being 100% um what Mr. is saying is the only portion of our transit lodging tax that is implicated by the 7030 percentage is the portion of the tax that was implemented in 2006. So that's the two% of the of two out of nine. So 22% of our transient lodging tax um is required to fall under that 7030 divide. whereas before that um everything else um is grandfathered in. And that's why when you're looking at the 5% and Mr. Sire saying 2.5% goes to the county versus the 2.5 that goes to this the city like that distribution is different and then like that's obviously separate than the IGA we have with city.

So are we allowed to apply the 5050 only to the two cents now or if you apply the 5050 does it have to go to the total amount? So if we I think under this provision there's a question about whether we don't want to mess with anything prior to 2006 because we'd be un undoing um more we'd be underdoing the grandfather percentage but going forward if we wanted to have a more than 9% um any future amount would would be subject to that 5050 percentage and then there this does go back. So, we can readjust that two out of 9% to 50/50.

Okay, that was my that was my question. Okay. Okay. So, and but Jerry, here's the key thing. This isn't going to move the needle significantly anyway for our county because of what is already because of how much we had grandfathered and and our contracts. Yeah, correct. But cities are bearing worse counties. cities. No, they they're happy. They wanted it. They're happy. I thought cities were opposing.

No, it's because they have more flexibility in what the money they have. Remember that the TL the tax is actually varies between like 14% to 17% whatever beavers. Yeah. America and they get all that above 12 and a above the nine plus one and a half 10 and a half. Everything above 10 and a half is theirs depending on how many what how many hotels they have. It's it's based on where the money's collected. So yeah, they're happy. They get they can now use it 5050 instead of 70, right? And they just started those increases probably years ago. So I think it's advantage for them. Yeah.

Yeah. I think Hillsboro the last few years I was mayor added 12 new hotels and then there's been a variety of others. If I could just make one request, we either talk about this in a percentage or a penny because when we talk about a penny of the nine pennies, okay, that's one thing. when we switch to a penny to oh yeah that's 10 and a half percent or whatever it is then everything gets really wonky. So pick one one unit but stick with it. It's either got to be pennies or it's got to be percentage. We can do that. Okay.

That's trouble I've been having with this thing for two years. So I get I get lost myself because the explanation that I've got at home in my file goes all over the place. They use percentages here and they use pennies here and what I'm doing here. It's complicated. Okay. Sorry. We can switch. Go ahead. No. So, I just want to make sure I'm clear. We are being asked to bring a dollar bill though in which we show some of this. So, we're going to work on that and then there's a second conversation that's about to happen. Once we receive that direction, we can talk about next steps on that presentation.

Moving on. ETD conversation. So purpose is to provide an update on the ET contract agreement. Um the policy questions today I'll talk about the financial proposal that we uh talked with ET about and then Laurel from facilities will take on the well and the funding mechanism and then Laura will take on the taxition with the contractor. Second the second policy question is 8 million. Is that correct? Yes. Yes.

I just want to make sure I understand. Okay. Correct. Yes. All right. So, um, with TLT, revenues have have gone flat. So, when we originally set up our agreement with ETV, um, we were projecting to have additional funding available to pay for an agreement that was put together with the city of Hillsboro. So, just some of the history behind that. uh in February of 24 um authorized use of TLT to help pay for the city of Hillsboro develop the minor league hops off park in May this we entered the agreement with the city of Hillsboro to pay $8 million um payments due before the June 3027 and we have the interest amount for things outstanding after one dinner of this year and then in March we revised the grant award with ETB to help provide a cap and how much we would grant them in order to allow some of that revenue that's coming in from TLT to pay for uh the hops uh payments. Now, with the hops, we don't have the money with the TLT, we don't have money to pay the $8 million from TLT up front. So, we put together an inter fund loan from our strategic investment program, SIP, uh, into TLT to help pay for this, uh, and repay from TLT to SIP over a 10-year period based on inter fund loan rules. Um, in the agreement of ETD, we had set lesser of a dollar amount or a 26% rate. Um, at the time we did this calculation, we thought that it would be enough in TLT to pay for the ops repayment interf. We foresee that's not possible. So in December, um, Ann and I went and met

with Dave Pro from TV to talk about a proposal uh, and the financial portion of the agreement, which is paragraph 3.1. And what we had proposed was to u make it more specific um going back to the language instead of 26% to 2.339 which is more in line with the code.339 is about 26%. And so that was just a change to make it align with the code. Um, and then we talked about, you know, could we put in exact amounts that we're going to repay ourselves from TLT to to repay the fund loan for the remaining periods of the contract. And so in in the packet, we had ETD's response. They took it to the board and talked about um our financial proposal. Um and over time they've the county has reduced the amounts going to ETV a couple of times and so this is just another reduction in in support for ETV and so clearly the board is not in favor of that and so as an option to go forward um but it is one option so we we thought we'd bring it to them and ask that was possible. HP has also paid money into the hops ballpark project as well and so it felt like they were getting hit twice. Don't want to do that. Um so we've had some discussions on this with uh the board individually and we kind of came back with some alternatives to consider on the financial side. So one is to modify the agreement and we think that's that's probably not the one we want to recommend. Um the second option is to maintain current repayment plan to the SIP and just reduce our general fund transfer.

Um for this year for example though that's about 500,000 that we would reduce our general fund transfer and that's that's about 10% of our normal general fund transfer from I think that's a good recommendation. Another one would be to adjust the SIP repayment plan and come back with the the revised interf fund loan repayment plan. Uh number four might be um to make all the all or a portion of the house payment directly from SIP um and reverse the inter fund loan completely or in part. So we did that in two tranches. First trunch was $2.7 million which we've already paid and the second tranch is in the next fiscal year $5.3 million which so we could do one tranch or as as a cut off point and then a longerterm solution potentially to increase the tax um to add additional funds to this to help this project as well as our event center and um our grounds. With that, I think that was my last slide on financials. If you want to talk about recommendation now and then go into the other piece.

Are these like options or consider all? I one or two three. I think that uh they're all options except for one. I think that we've heard clearly from the board for ETB that they're not interested in in that option. They don't have the revenues to be able to participate. So that would leave options two, three, four, and five. Um, and I would also say that just John's going to correct me if I'm wrong, but on number four, what that would be is that we would actually just make a budgeted payment and there wouldn't be a repayment plan back to the county or any of our funds. So you could choose to simply takes that hit. Yep. You would just choose to make

They're the banker. SIP is the banker. Well, but in the one we said it back. I was talking about one in number four, you would not pay them back. In number four, you would simply make an SIP payment and you would be done. Yeah. Some of these are mutually exclusive though, right? So, one is out. Yep. You know, not all of two through five can be like some of them are opposite of each other. Okay. Different options. They're not all like it's not a pick and choose. Well, we're over. We could do half of it. You could. I mean,

I'm just and you could choose to come up with your own options. These were ones that we as staff felt like were worth conversations. Um, but this is this stems from a decision that was made by the board in order to fund the hop stadium. We want to make sure that we're true to that decision and so we weren't present actually for that and you all were. So we're here to ask and part of that too I want to take us back to that time there was clear direction that TLT was to be the funding source for the hops repayment expectation that it was doing this though

100% I just want to say so that is where this changes the policy conversation especially if we are using SIP or reducing the SIP transfer to the general fund which means reducing general fund service like so um I I just want to ground us in the why this a policy discussion because it was a Yep. Because this was a policy discussion to use TLT for hops funding. I heard

um I was gonna ask I heard John you say number two it's good recommendation. Could you speak more to the reduced to general fund and then you've got apprentices non- tourism funding?

Right. So the portion that we talked about the tourism non-ourism or service county services general services when we talked about our general fund amount that we take from TLT goes in the general fund. is the five half of the five cents or 5% of of the TT revenues goes into our general fund and that's about 4.7 million per year. Um so if we just took it from there 500,000 would reduce the transfer back to general fund or other things.

So I think the reason and John can correct me if I miss him. I know he will. Um, I think he's saying that's a good option is because it's still staying true to the board's original policy direction that you would be using the TLT's um, funds for the hops repayment. I want to say the challenge on that does mean that it's less general fund revenue to fund general fund services. Right. If I heard you correctly, it's you're you're saying 500 less every year for the next five years. Yeah. For this year, next year it's might be a bit more. It'll depend on how much revenue comes in.

Can I ask the board that was in place when this decision or the at least as many members as there are here today that were involved, what was the rationale for not using SIP to begin with? Was it because TLT was available and made sense? Was there a specific aversion to using the SIP? And if so, why? Because it's one I mean, it's one-time expense. So, I'm just want to make sure I understand the reasoning for the original policy decision or direction. I think I think it was there were multiple reasons, but uh and you probably outlined them. Keeping SIP as whole as possible for opportunity for future opportunities and also the ation was TLT would be sufficient.

Yeah. Over time to replace that money. So, so it was it was basically as we've said here, it was using SIP as a bank and repaying it. And that was that was the idea. I I don't think any of us anticipated the change in the in the TLT uh economy, so to speak. And that's that's what caused the the regrouping. and none of us ever thought that we would take a hit on the general fund side. So I that was the other caveat was always protecting the general fund. So I think as we go through these policy questions we have to keep that in mind as well.

To to me that's the f that's a good first one which is that I'm I'm not in favor of a solution that's going to reduce the general

fund. That was kind of our basic tenant. Can I just add um I know the um the chair had made um and I'll um share what she had shared at the time just because she's not here um concern on the unfunded facilities in general at the county and hence using TLT versus SIP and um wanting assurance on the use of TLT because of just the significant unfunded facility needs we have at the county. So why why fund another facility expansion if we can't take care of our own? And that was part of the conversation as well.

I have a question number three. Adjust the repayment plan instead. What is Yeah, that was just an option. So we have even payment plans across the 10ear cycle. If we if we decided that we wanted to make payments earlier and bigger bigger payments later anticipating revenues would go up that might be one option to think about. The restriction is that an inter fun loan must be repaid within 10 years. So the 10 years is a hard right that's not a term that can change

right and then why does it so longer term solution would require municipal If we if we had a percent increase to the tax, we would have to change the curve because that's where the tax is put in. But if we were not doing increase, could we do longer term solutions? Well, then we back to spare, right? Numbered my own question. So the the 1% TLT increase one percent then we go use percentages actually we're going to get better about that.

No. Um anyway generates $1.8 million. Okay. We and but but is that a voter approved thing or can we make that decision? We'd like to come back to you with that. There's been some disagreement on the team. Uh, we've been working with Marina on this option over the course of the last couple months and I'd like to get you something in writing from our attorneys one way or the other. Well, the city should know that because the cities do it have done it. Uh, I believe that what I was told by Marina was that it didn't have to go back to the voters that this could be approved by the board. John,

I recently, yeah, as I was doing research in 1985 when we changed it for 1984, it was read and done the public hearing. It did the four readings and then it was referred to the voters on the ballot in March. Can I just ask that we come? Can I just come back? Come back just because I don't want to cause any more confusion. Percentage Penny voters. Okay. Board approval, but we can bring back in the next few weeks. Okay.

Yes. What our conversation was when we had our one-on-one with me was I felt like we should pay out of the SIP fund the 5.2 million or whatever it is that we owe. We owe the SIP fund back at 4% interest. So, we're paying oursel. If we if the TLT is not sufficient this year, it's going to come back. It's just like the stock market. It goes down and it goes up. Okay, we just pay the interest rate for this year. Interest is 4% on 5.2 is $20 and some thousand. And then with the commitment that it would be paid in full in 10 years because that's our outline. That's as far as we can go. So, we negotiate that deal and and if TLT bubbles back up again or we decide to add one, then um we can allocate that money, dedicate that money to it. And I think if we run the numbers, we can do this within the 10-year window that we have available and no negative impact of the general fund.

And then if the 10 years isn't going to get hit for whatever reason, then a future board would have to fix it, right? Well, you can fix it by add by increasing the TLT. Yeah. Is that number before choosing to pay for it out of the SIP? Yeah. Doing doing number four, but doing it later.

Yeah. Yeah. See, and and to me, that gives us more flexibility for the immediate until we figure out what this new 5050 deal looks like. Uh and maybe uh a snapshot of next year's TLT. Um, we're going into summer. Um, and yeah, I'm I'm hearing that at at least it's going to be flatlined. It's not going to increase. So, let's just hit the pause button. Let's just negotiate a deal with SIP and pay them interest rate this year and see what next year looks like. So, you're saying three then that's the selection. Adjust the repayment plan.

Three and four combined. Well, four would come up later possibly. So, can I repeat what I think I'm hearing? Sure. Okay. What I believe you are saying is still staying true that the ultimate funding source for the hops repayment is TLT. Since we do not have the revenues in TLT, we would use a inner fund loan from SIP. um create the cash flow um over 10 years

using the 10-year window to repayments to from um repayment between ZIP and PLP and we would need to revisit that at certain periods of time to come back to the board if if we're not going to get there if we're not going to get there. at the same time um continue to explore an increase in lodging tax rate. But that would be a much larger conversation, right? Is that

right? Because it's kind of like going to remodel my house, but I don't have the $250,000 I want to remodel to. So, I'm going to go out and I'm going to get a second mortgage on my house. So then you have a longer period of time to repay that second mortgage or a credit line 10 years whatever it is and uh you have more flex over that 10 years. And that's what I'm thinking we would have in that 10ear window much more flex to watch TLT recover or watch maybe some county stuff recover. And so um yeah to me it just gives us more flexibility. But okay I'll shut up. Go ahead, Pamela.

So, so um I guess the one little red flag I want to raise is are we looking at whether or not we were too aggressive originally on our expectations of TLT. So, I think I I think I want to I'd like to to take a look at that too as we move forward and and just just say, okay, because of that, we have to look at some alternatives here. And I I think that uh we can back into that. Well, yeah. Go 10 years out and roll it back and say, "What's it have to be?"

That's that's fine, too. But I what I'm saying I'm just a little concerned that we've set a bar that's so high that we can't we we're never going to get there. We're we're just chasing our tails in these discussions on an ongoing basis. So, I also want to clarify one thing. I don't remember Commissioner Willie you saying increase the transient lodging tax. We have that as an option. Yeah. But I don't remember you like because I think um do we need

not as part of the let me clarify that not as part of the repayment the plan that the board would adopt but let's say let's say separate action future discussion if the board would determine to increase the lodging tax you could then use that additional revenue to pay off the interf loan. So like but that would yeah that's a bigger piece to fry because I think different yeah a lot of the businesses were not okay okay I think I think of the two options you laid out is and then we can come back with increase in future years

you have enough info I think so

so I will just add that when John creates his cash flow I would ask that he um has um review periods within the cash flow or in the final call dates that we would be coming back and checkpointing where we are with TLT revenues as well as um just if the interfund loan plan needs to be adjusted. I also want to just call out John. John has done a lot of work over the last x number of months digging into and revising um the projections. Um Commissioner Thrice, I'm highlighting what you said. You know, were we a bit too aggressive in how we were projecting out? And I believe at the county we were. And so John, I just want to call John has um brought that down a bit to expectations based on what we are seeing. um what we have seen and to temper the reality and knowing that uh Commissioner Willie to your point lodging tax does eb and flow also um within the market too.

Well, I'm I do just want to say out loud and I think I'm right, but John can correct me on this. So we've sort of combined number three and four. We're take three now or might have to be later if we don't get there with three. Correct. Um or will be higher at that point because we are going to be taking on interest. So I just wanted to say out loud. Well, so we're making payments during this time. We're going to be paying on the interest only. That means that that amount is still that that full amount is going to be sitting there waiting for repayment if we only make interest payments

and this is and we're paying these to ourselves. We are paying these sort of back can I yeah can I I just want to repeat when I had repeated back I did not say interest only um so I would suggest we come back with an actual repayment plan. I I will say um as county administrator budget officer, I probably will never give you a repayment plan that is an interestonly plan. Yeah. Sorry. That's just not.

So, so but I think the team I would ask that John has the time to create what that repayment plan options would look like. And it could be one option, it could be two different options as he digs into this. And but the reason why I I threw that out as an option is to Commissioner Snider's comment of do no harm to the general fund. So So we're going to come back pretty soon because we need to make sure that for the budget we can actually balance. So we will be back hopefully with a plan.

Can I ask that clarified question? the the interest is the is a replacement of what it would have earned otherwise. Is that right? I will come back to that because in in our original under fun loan we we said we weren't going to charge interest to ourselves, right?

So the only interest that we're paying is interest to Hillsboro for any payment we haven't paid them after one January of this year. And so we're planning we were planning to repay the rest of the payment to Hillsboro by July of this year. Six months of on 5.3 million about $106,000 in interest to Hillsboro and what we said in inter fun loan was we would we would pay back sip the 8 million plus interest that we paid to Hillsboro but not charging our okay thank you for that that okay we didn't pay Hillsboro because we didn't know where the money was we wanted to get in loans we cost ourselves 106

we also need to check with our auditors I just want to make sure that I understand the usage of the term interest

and when we come back um Mr. or um this over make sure that we also have clarity both what Ann had said checking with our auditors and also lifting up the county practice because the county does well has um done interfund loan transfers for example uh we interfund loaned before we received SHs revenues from the general fund and we have there is a practice in place on how we handle that and what we charge from an interest standpoint and So, um, being very consistent in that that we don't trigger audit findings. So, that

and this has been super helpful. But what I do believe we've heard today is from the board, option three is of most interest. So, we're going to work on something to bring back to you that looks at what the payments could be based on what we are receiving. We will be here soon. Okay. Okay. I'm really disappointed ATV wouldn't buy us our new BMW for $8 million and make the payments so we could drive. I want to thank Mr. Gorilla for his patience and his adherence to the program. Thank you very much. I can't believe we were considering that honestly that we would shift that burden to ATV, but that's not their purpose.

So, okay. Well, I think our team was trying to figure out how to honor I get it. All the variables and I I think Dave was a great partner and ETV was a great partner in their board and you know I think we got to a good spot but I don't think we should beat ourselves up or our team up too much over that. We always have to ask a question. Yeah. Okay. And with that we're going to move on to the scope of work. We got one more thing. Yeah, this one's pretty quick and relatively straightforward. There's no pennies and percents. Hallelujah.

So, this is the body of work that we have been working on with ETB since the original agreement was um approved by this board. Um we very quickly realized that we needed a little more detail in that generalized scope and parties all agreed that we needed to do some work to refine um the language so that we had clear expectations. That work was delayed because we've had several leadership transitions within the county during that time. Some version control between two different um organizations, but we're on track now and have created a draft that I'm going to call the final draft. um that is attached to this packet. So, if you've had a chance to look at that, you'll see where we've landed. Um we finalized that last week. The key characteristics of the scope of work now is that we've focused it on um services that meet the county's most critical need needs rather. Uh it is specifically intended to benefit Westside Commons with a marketing and advertising plan and also to support our efforts to update that older booking policy. Uh we also added very clear measurable outcomes with reporting requirements that come at a uh at a regular cadence that we will be sharing with this board to um keep you guys in keep the board in the loop. Um and the next steps are to bring the final amendment uh once we have finished uh with the financials to bring that final amendment back to the board for approval

and based on today's uh discussion we can do that also as because we won't be making any further financial changes to yeah I think I'm sorry questions thank you yeah you're welcome

yeah I I think to me the the importance of this part of the contract was certainly to um define the marketing, advertising and the booking policy so that we can have opportunity to obviously get more people using the wingspan and reducing the red t the red ink that we've got going there. So that's going to be the most important part about this. We're really excited. Okay, sounds good. Anything else? Are we done?

Are you going to go? Did you get an answer in the first question on your first presentation in this? Yes. Okay, we are done. Thank you very much everybody. We are going to take a 13 minute break until 2:45 as we are on time. Yeah. Well, kind of. We got two executive sessions. We haven't plugged into this yet. Jason's promised to be really fast. Okay. 2:45. Thank you.

Jerry Jerry is streamlining the process. Ready. Good afternoon, commissioners. We are now back live and just for the purposes of the record, item one on the agenda, the executive session for potential litigation will now be happening after board and leadership communication. All right. Thank you. Over to you, Vice Chair Will. Okay, next up is Lisa Catisol, library funding and governance process for review governance recommendations and draft agreement language. So Lisa, welcome back. We missed you. It's been a while. It's good to be back. Except we didn't want you coming back because then we'd had to have stuff to do. We'd have the levy to do.

Yeah, exactly.

We can we can use a few years. Um break. Uh so I'm Lee Tatell, cooperative library services manager. Um we're coming up on the home stretch now for our funding and governance work with our city and nonprofit partners. Um today I'm just going to uh briefly review the previous board touch points, the goals for the process, the timeline through June. We'll talk about the governance phase that we've just gone through with our partners um and what the collaborative process looks like looked like and then um highlights of the draft agreements that um were included in the packet. And then our policy question today is just what feedback does your board have on the agreements? Um so the process goals for our work together was really to establish a common understanding of current service levels and total costs to establish base library service levels available for all county residents. Evaluating and refining partner roles in providing base service to the community. Identifying options for funding base level services. um and then to establish metrics to allocate funding for partners operating libraries. And so we really did all of that work through 2025. And um what we're here to talk about today is just the agreements that are sort of codifying all of that work that happened last year. Um this is just an overview of all the board touch points to date in this process. Um I think the only thing I'll mention here is we do have all of this stuff on the WCCLS website if the public wants to do a deep dive. um timeline. Um and I'm sorry the formatting is kind of weird, but um I don't know what happened there, but I think it's still legible. Um draft agreements have been shared with partners and your board. Um and so we're planning to uh return to your board after this work session on May 12th to review any potential updates to the agreement to the agreements should your board have feedback today and or should our partners have feedback. Um after that um we'll be coming back on May 26th um with an action item to hopefully

authorize signatures so we can move through the contract process um which should take about a month given that we have 12 partners to get through that with and the goal is to have everything signed by June 30th so we can get funding out the door in July. So our goals for the governance phase um that we just and actually I'm going to point out one other thing on this slide. So basically from November through March we worked on governance accountability and IGA drafting work with our partners and that's what we're coming back to talk about today. So the goals for that governance phase were to define roles and responsibilities define the decision-making process a little bit better um establishing what accountability mechanisms will look like in the future and then updating our agreements to reflect current practices and policies. um to develop the agreements. Um Marina and Company, which is the consulting firm we've been working on this for a few years with, um they gathered partner input through surveys and then they we had four collaborative work sessions to shape the shared agreements. Marina then um used an asynchronous review process where partners could review updated language that was based on their feedback. They could share information and get um feedback from key stakeholders in their organizations along the way. Once all of the input was collected, Marina reviewed and analyzed the feedback to identify common themes and areas of alignment on the proposed revisions and that's what went into the language.

So what is that big a Oh uh not at the same time. It's a fancy word to say that we had a shared document where everyone could comment and um see what each other's comments were. So you could say city of Beaverton said XYZ and then City of Talton could say yes, we agree with that or Cedar Mill could say not so sure. Um, and so it was just a way for them to collaborate. Um, because we didn't have a lot of time. You should go to the library more. He's a numbers man.

Hey, move ahead.

Moving on. Um, so the the process resulted in two revised agreements. Um and that mirrors the current current agreement structure that we have with partners now. So we currently have a per a perpetual governance agreement and we will have a new perpetual governance agreement and the role of that is to cover uh capture the broad governance roles and responsibilities and decision-making for the cooperative. And then we always have an accompanying agreement that's five years and um so we'll have a new five-year what we're calling cooperative operating agreement and that's going to cover funding base service levels accountability and network and data protection and both of those drafts are attached um to the packet. All right. So, um, in terms of what's just kind of going over what's in the governance agreement, um, hang on. Sorry. Yeah. Okay. Um, so the governance agreement is a foundational one that really solidifies our partnership for service delivery. It was last updated 20 years ago. Um, and so it's it's good that we have this opportunity to uh, look at it again. No governance roles have fundamentally changed, but we've really just taken this opportunity to bring more clarity to how we make decisions in this really unique operating model and cooperative structure. We've also added a decision-making matrix to help refine when a decision is a cooperative one versus a local one versus a county one. Um, and then we've also just got more specific language throughout the agreement just to clarify things. And then this uh slide just shows what's in each section. In terms of the operating agreement, this has a five-year term with the same dates as the levy um beginning July 20 July 1st, 2026 and it expires June 30th, 2031. This agreement is fundamentally about how funding is allocated and who provides which services with that funding and how. The agreement also outlines roles and responsibilities for

library technology and data protection as well as accountability for funding. So sections 3 to nine update the language that already existed in the last IGA uh the last agreement, excuse me, about our IT um in terms of who's accountable for what services and to what standard. In terms of data protection, the updates in this section really reflect the advent of generative AI tools um and also reflect um county policy updates on data protection and AI. Sections 10 through 13 document the agreements that partners came to on base service levels and which your board adopted um back on October 28th of 2025. Um we got a little more specific around what base service levels entails especially around um clarifying more around open hours and building closures due to facil facility updates or emergencies. Sections 14 through 15 document the agreed upon service boundaries and service populations that were adopted by the board in an action item on October 28th. And it also covers um compliance with the civil rights act um in library service provision. Section 16 captures the agreed upon funding allocation methodology that was adopted by the board on October 28th. We've clarified this with a little more detail about allowable costs um and how funding can and cannot be used for facility improvements. We also note in this section the fund balance target of three months of operational expenditures for WCCLS which was also adopted by the board on October 28th. Section 17s the intent for shared reporting commitments. All of the parties are agreeing to participate in a collective reporting process to support systemwide understanding of service levels, financial stewardship and fulfillment of the responsibilities in the agreements. And we will work through a process together to establish a regular reporting methodology that will be um documented and then attached or um you know somehow uh codified uh as a

cooperative agreement as after this process. Next steps. Um, we'll return to your board at work session on May 12th with any potential updates um, based on your feedback or partner feedback. May 26, we'll be coming back with an action item to authorize the contract review and signature process. Um, and then we're hoping to have all the agreements signed by June 30th and new funding allocation rolling out in July. And so the policy question is does your feedback does your board have any feedback on the agreements?

Commissioners, uh, I have couple things that are maybe I mean they're related, but I don't if it's exactly on the on the agreement itself. Um just one piece of feedback. Early in the asynchronous review process, I think there were um some cities andor partner elected officials who didn't really understand what was going on at that time. Uh that I don't know that it was necessarily explained very well. So just a process piece of feedback there. I had multiple contacts with people that were kind of like, what's going on? Why is the, you know, like I think their assumption was that the language was sort of done when it was originally sent out instead of the the I think the intended feedback process. So that's just a touch point for for you for the future.

That's helpful. Thank you.

on the process and maybe for the consulting team. And then the the other thing um that I heard some community dialogue around in parts of my district were really about the I think the potential of moving up the uh the centralized collection work and uh just concerns about the realisticness of the timeline and what that I mean that it's continuing a theme that we know certain uh community leaders andor uh library involved folks are concerned about. So I just wanted to share that with you. I don't they're not necessarily directly on point for your for your questions about the agreements, but I do I don't know to the extent you can give us a really quick update on what the thought is around the timing for the centralized collection. I think the community might benefit from just hearing that briefly, but I don't want to take a ton of time off. Um the we are working with a consulting firm now on um they actually just completed library visits last week um to start gathering information to uh start developing um site profiles for each library and then we are going to be working to uh start uh figuring out the engagement plan with libraries once we have those in place to come up with um co-creating what a new system is going to look like. Um we are still targeting July 2027 um to start the book ordering at that point centrally. Um and then we are working on staffing up and so we have a new collections and technical services manager who starts on Monday. We're very excited. Um and then we're going to be posting two supervisor positions under her um I think May 4th. And so we're staffing up and building that expertise and then also beginning that engagement with library. So I feel like we're going

to be good to go. It's a big lift, but I feel like in the July 2027 is Yeah. So those positions are all related to the the new collection process. Correct. Y

that's all I have. And if it's helpful, um I am sure that Miss Patteral would be pleased to help um provide a quarterly management report update, just an upcoming quarterly management report just so that uh because I know collections has just been of interest um um to community and also the board and that way we could keep you updated along the way. be that would be via email or in the formal coming to this next.

So, as you may um recall, the board has asked that I produce quarterly management reports. So, this would be as part of that document. Um it could be an opportunity for you to lift up um if you're hearing any questions or concerns. Um, but that way we would keep you updated outside of a needed work session that Miss Datell would determine with Miss Kyle as needed. Okay. Assuming as we get closer to the LI dates, more things will be obviously much more clear. That would be a good time.

Yeah. And the purpose of that is I'm pretty confident that as we go through the um to that date um there's going to you just questions just from libraries. This is just a way to keep communication channels open. Yeah. Y' I just want to say thank you. I mean this has been such a process and you know step by step by step. So thank you for the work and thank you for the attention to the details. I mean, that's where we are now. And that's and you know that I I read this at the library that the devil is in the details.

He's saying you go to the library. So that's what asynchronous she really didn't. She was waiting.

So any but seriously it is it is this detail work that will make this um will make this successful as forward and I appreciate Commissioner Snider's comments about making sure that as we go through these processes and communication that we're all on the same page and I haven't heard that from people that usually give me a call. So, it's it's good to know that others are in contact and great job. Um, you know, over the weekend when I was reviewing this material, I sort of was anticipating multiple uh cooperative agreements sort of like governance agreement with the different entities of because I I I read it and I thought, wait a minute, I are we not listening because I've heard a lot like we want our own autonomy. We're a library in a unique community, unique area. So, when I was reading here, I thought, wait a minute, are we saying one sizefits all model? Um, but then I read it. Um, and didn't get that perception. Um, but I am wondering if you're hearing like tailored sort of a cooperative agreement that is specific to certain libraries, like how do we uplift that uniqueness? uh for their own um I'm all for streamlining processes and having sort of a you know something that applies transparency to the process right like it's if you have an agreement that is you know similar to everyone we're all marching the same orders but I just was I wanted to lift that and say how how are you centering the uniqueness of each

library and the community they represent here this agreement. I think it's an interesting tension in our cooperative structure because it's we want to be providing consistent services and also honoring that uniqueness of each community. And I think one of the benefits of this agreement like you said is pretty broad strokes because it is really clarifying like at a large scale sort of governance like how do we make decisions and I think one of the benefits in the governance updates is that we really highlight which are local decisions and so I think we're able to sort of clarify like these are cooperative decisions but these are decisions that you local library can make on your own with your own governing bodies and then these are ones that the county can make on our own. you know, we have contracts and various things we need to hold to as well. And so, I think that's one way in the governance agreement, which is like a really broad one-sizefits-all because it has to be, right? It's like a, you know, it's a governance agreement, but I think we do clarify those those avenues where um folks have that local autonomy. And then I think the same for the operating agreement. It's sort of like we need to have a universal sort of agreement around shared funding. But at the same time, I think we also clarify each partner's roles and responsibilities and also allow that like how they do a lot of that work is up to them. And so we specify base service levels for example, but what exactly happens within those 45 hours that a library is open each week is really up to them and that's where they can shine with their their community um knowledge and responsiveness. um each library staff team is super creative. So I think that's where we kind of create that space for them to do that. And then I think as we go into the central collections which is something separate to this but t you know also related I think that's the the big thing we continue to explore is how do we make sure that the collections serve each community and are also delivered in an efficient manner. So thanks for highlighting that. The other the other

thing that caught my attention was the call out to Washington County being a home rule with the exception of the Aloa Community Library. I think all the cities are home rural as well. So just you know the more you know kind of a thing. Yeah. So it just put me on a mood to be like why are we calling out the home role when the cities are? But you good? I'm good. Yeah. So, um, just overall, I thought it was good. I thought the the way you laid out your slide deck was good identifying the difference between the governance agreement, the operating agreement, and then I went to the exhibits.

Yes. I didn't see the map. Yeah. But, uh, other than that, the exhibits were all um gave a a good definition of what you were trying to say in the slide deck. So, that was good. We'll have the map. I know we're working um to get those maps ready for the final version when it comes to you. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Sounds good. Everybody good? Yes. Okay. Thank you. We're good. Wait so long. Okay. Thank you. Okay. We are in good shape. Um the next thing up do we go to uh

do we um Jason? Are you ready? Leadership. We are. You've got two Jasons today. Shush. I heard that four times already. Not many. I don't think my predecessor baked too they no I was just saying because of the timeline

and because we have a hard stop at 4:30 let's take care of county business and then the board and leadership with the exception of approving the draft letter response mayor will can we do that or do we need to go in um so you would be adjourned from regular meeting into executive session and we don't have all um parties. So, I would suggest maybe we start with board and leadership while um Mr. Bush gets the needed parties here um for the other items. Um and sorry, I'm looking at the team as I'm talking at the same time. If you are ready, I can start with my board and leadership um update. Okay. If

Okay. If we don't have everybody else here, I was just trying to be mindful of of a hard stop. Go ahead.

All right. So, um I have two items I'd like to update your board on. Um so, first is deflection um program. Um our deflection program will be the focus of a 20 minute segment on Oregon public broadcasting think out loud program scheduled for this Friday. Senior program coordinator Danielle Farre will be discussing the county's achievements after the deflection program's first year of operating. As your board might recall, Danielle and her colleagues updated your board about the first year of our deflection program at your work session in October. OPB's Think Out Loud broadcasts live at noon with a repeat of the program at 8:00m. Staff will also send you a link to the streaming audio with our media coverage um uh in your email. Um I did send to your board um this morning while you were in meetings, so you may not have actually read the email. Um, but the email that I sent was relative to your board's elected to elected um um uh budget session. We did come into a conflict. One of the scheduling things, it's not on the county's radar, but guess what? It's on city's radar when the League of Cities conferences. And so, we did send a notice out on Friday that we would be cancelling that date and revisiting um dates. within your um email, I did send um some potential dates. Your staff assistants have already looked at your calendars. Um I did uh hear back from the chair with her preference. She would, if possible, like to be there and so her preference would be looking at May uh May 11th as the first option and May 15th as the second option. The other options listed in the email are May 1st and May 5th. The challenge with both of

those is um uh the chair is out of the office for both of those. May 1st, uh Commissioner Snder, you do have a conflict that staff said they could um potentially reschedule um in May 6, in addition to the chair being out, Commissioner Trice, you have MDAC um that evening and I have a fair board meeting that 4:30 to 6. Okay. So, um, would you saying May 11th is the

May 11th? And I do want to highlight that does conflict with Forest Grove City Council meeting. So, Forest Grove would not be able to be in attendance, more than likely. And on May 15th, the challenge with May 15th is that's a full day of budget committee. Um, in the feedback we've received from your board, um, in the past is, um, full day of budget committee meetings followed by any, uh, county work can be very challenging. It's also Friday night, which I think is not a great time to try to be engaging other electeds. But, you know, it's also the second day in a row because Thursday is correct. Yep. Yeah. We need a little break.

May 11. Friday night. May 11th. May 11th just sounds good. May 11th's good. Keeping the same time like the 5:30 to 7:30 or correct? Whatever. And it will be at in Hillsboro. Um we believe it can be here at the auditorium. So, so from a staff perspective, it reduces the amount of staff time we need to invest. So, if we can have it here, my preference would be here. Okay, I'm good.

Okay, we're all good. Okay, thumbs up on May 11th. Great. The only other email I will draw your attention to is I sent your board an updated um travel indication um schedule. Um, as your board uh may recall, I do end my uh presidency in the fall of this year. So, my um travel will reduce substantially. Um I am looking forward to some of the upcoming convenings that I will be attending um in my role as ICMA past president that I do um think uh can feel strongly benefit here Washington County um especially the convening of the big seven leadership um uh focused on federalism and the impacts of federal policy on states local government and that'll be coming up with in next month. And that concludes my update.

Jason. All right. So, the county council side, I think most of you know this is my first time being down here doing leadership communication. Always had a You're doing great. We never talk enough about tax things in the leadership communication. Now's your chance.

Exactly. So, I did want to mention one thing that I've noticed in tax this year. As many of you know, we have an annual process where at beginning of the year, people petition the values of their property. Um, in a form we call PEAB, which is the property evaluations, apples board, which used to be BAPTA. Um, the staff did a great job this year like always. Um, after that happens in February, we start getting appeals to the regular division of tax court which the staff then work with county council's office through the remainder of the year. Um this year we ended up getting a much larger share of about 35 appeals out of for commercial properties primarily uh office buildings which is about a third more than normal. um while we end up having no residential appeals um and only a few industrial appeals that are going to the magistrate division on the value side. So that is a little bit different than what we've seen in the past and maybe there's some economic reasons why that's the case, but it's just something to keep an eye on. Um beyond that, our office recently hired we had another parallegal that just started working this week. I think her name is Jennifer Tjo. Uh eventually uh you'll probably run into her. Um not exactly clear what sections within the office she's going to work, but we're really excited to have her there as well. And that's it for me. Thanks.

All right. Who's next? Don't be sh

You can go first. Uh last week, last Tuesday, I was out at the city of Hillsboro and the hops to celebrate the new ballpark with many of you here. It was great event. Uh and it is, you know, I'm was reflecting on that as I as we went through our discussion today on TLT and the 8 million. It was well spent. We just have to figure out processes to account for those dollars. Uh Wednesday morning we had uh a WSI executive committee member uh meeting and that was to select the new uh uh director executive director for WSI and I am spacing on her last name. Her first name is Miriam. She comes from Vancouver and that was accepted by uh by workforce with uh work systems inc. And Andrew McGoff is very happy that she's there as well. Um, and that process was also led by Heather Gans. Just want to tell you that uh I'm in Heather Gans's uh overload a bit here. We uh been on I also had a Metro Regional Solutions Advisory Committee meeting that afternoon. And at that meeting, Governor Cotch attended along with uh co-chair Canop of the uh Oregon Prosperity Council. We talked about a lot of different issues. Um I brought up a couple issues that I wanted to highlight here. Uh we talked about housing and how important that is. Uh workforce development was another another key point. And I did put a pitch in to the governor's office to pay attention to the merger, potential merger between the Clakmus County workshed organization and our workshed organization for future efficiencies.

There was um discussion about a little explanation about the data center and the advisor advisory committee that's in place there. Uh it was really more a listening session for the governor to hear what's on the minds of the people that are are participate in that uh regional solutions advisory committee. I also have my application in for renewal if you will and it looks like it's being approved through uh AOC and that's that's the process that we follow. Um, I believe that uh let's see. I'm going to be attending the uh Springville Road celebration and rivet cutting this Friday. I am also meeting Friday morning with Angela Crowley Ko of OSSIA, the Oregon Solar and Storage Industries Association, Erin Eddie of Sunpath Services, and Anna Stevens of ANR Solar to discuss residential solar permitting. And that discussion is has been facilitated by Representative Ken Helm. And I'm not it's more of just uh bringing issues to me to in turn talk with the rest of you about. So I'll be updating you after that. Uh I will be attending Kaleidoscope on Wednesday night uh for community action. I know Commissioner Fi is the board member now. Uh, Commissioner uh, Snyder has been the board member. I've been the board member and I know uh, Jerry, you've been very active in in that organization as well. So, I I will be attending that. We have um I have an upcoming meeting with ARSAC, which is the not ARS, excuse me, ARWAC, which is the regional waste advisory committee, and we'll be looking at upcoming fee adjustments. So this is the

first of our discussions and I'll be meeting with our internal team before that. So thank you. All right.

I can go. Last Wednesday, the chair, Commissioner Fi, and myself all participated in the local mental health authority interview that I think went very well and we heard feedback later that um I think our team our teams did really well and that OA was very complimentary of the work that our teams are doing. Um it was nice to be able to uh support that a little bit. Uh last Wednesday I also had a planned lunch with Clakamus County Commissioner Savis and some of our transportation leaders along with the Clackamus County transportation leaders. Again, we're working on trying to help get the region one act uh where it needs to be in its work. And uh I actually in the next hour there's going to be a meeting with uh ODOT region one staff with our staff team and the Clackamus County staff team and suggesting that they operate a little bit more. We're using examples from the Northwest Act on how we might be a little more functional in some of the work that we're doing. So um work works happening on that. Just wanted to make sure you all had some insight to that. Uh last Wednesday also, Commissioner Willie and I attended our or hopefully our final SHS onboarding session um for the new work ahead. Uh last Thursday, I had a check-in with our staff about the one of the uh battery storage projects that they had some questions for me about that's proposed in in my district. Um, also last Thursday had a meeting and check-in with the TW Riverkeepers executive director um and some of their staff. And then last Thursday afternoon, I mentioned this last week, but I'll I actually have it in my hand now. Um, from the Juvenile

Crime Prevention Advisory Committee, we have the final report on our youth justice system review. wants to take a look at that, we can certainly get you copies of it. Um, lots of lots of great suggestions and I think our our team is taking a very practical approach to figuring out um what can be implemented quickly, what things should be considered and maybe some things that uh don't align with our approach, but we thank them for their feedback. So things are in lots of different categories there and I would encourage you to take a look if you have questions. Last Friday, um I attended the AOC public safety and veterans steering committee and we had a joint meeting with the Health and Human Services Committee at the beginning and there was an overlapping topic that um I think both Commissioner Fi and I can uh speak to, but just so everybody on the commission is aware, um there's this continued emerging issue around the uh sort of risk of uh transporting, doing secure transports and having law enforcement staff involved in some of that um when it's not a criminal matter. And so there's not necessarily solutions there per se, but the identification of issues and the seeking of hopefully solutions from the legislature in the future. Um last night we had our budget committee orientation Wednesday. So, tomorrow I have a WA board meeting and then in the evening I will not be at Kaleidoscope because I'm going to be presenting um the vehicle registration fee presentation at the King City Council which they specifically asked for and that was the date they could

accommodate it. So, that's where I will be doing our work. Thursday, I have a meeting with the Washington County Haulers Association and then a prep session for the AOC presentation. I'm going to be representing all of us at uh on the following Friday. There's then an audit committee meeting tomorrow evening or Thursday evening, excuse me. Friday, I do plan to be at the Springville Road celebration. And then Saturday is the event I mentioned a couple weeks ago at St. Anthony Church in Tiger uh related to um immigration and housing. So I will be there on Saturday. All I got time um I'll go next. Okay. I was just gonna jump in.

Yeah. Thank you. Um, so last week, uh, I did have my, uh, continuation of the monthly meeting with the Beaverton School District social workers. Um, and then, um, the local mental health authority interview. That was quite interesting. I I do agree with you, Commissioner Schneider, that I think it went well. The three of us contributed, all of us. Yeah. Washington County being the mental health authority and what we think and what are some challenges and opportunities. Um so next had a really great meeting with the executive director of Twolitin River keepers Glenn Fee um more on clean water services side um but that was really good meeting and I haven't sat down with him for a while so that was good um good discussion and then last week was a public health week celebration and I had the honor of speaking at that event and great turnout, the staff, uh, very well organized, very well put together, and the community showed up in critical numbers. So, I thought it was a great event as usual. I wasn't able to stay for the award ceremony section of it, so I kind of missed that one. I was there for last year and it was quite fun actually. Um, but congratulations to all the awardy award winners and everybody that was nominated and and everybody who showed up to support uh the winners. Um, so that was a really great event. The AOC part, I agree with you, Commissioner Schneider. Uh, it was a overlapping discussion, but a really well organized and well put together discussion that this month for health and human services steering committee. Uh, the the topic on that side was homelessness prevention and response. uh state of the state sort of the state of the counties like what the

budget u the policy and budget look ahead looks like for with Oregon housing and community services. So the director Andrea Bell showed up and really gave a holistic overview and provided some insights on that topic. Um and and then I I actually logged out on the law enforcement transport of an individual for civil commitments investigation and services discussion a little bit but that was also quite fascinating in my opinion and I think um I tracking down the recording for that one so I'll share it with the rest of the board as well. And then yesterday was WCCCC meeting um and uh that there's nothing to report there in terms of everything sort of um there's no board um something to weigh in. Uh but I did want to provide you some because the staff shared this with WCCCC um which is that Washington County Transportation Committee uh staff leaders are applying a grant application. They're putting in a grant application for the federal Safe Streets for All grant program. um in in consideration for potential grant application to the state federal no federal safe streets for all program and this is I I don't think I'm going to put the number out there how much they're applying uh but it's between $25 million somewhere there my notes say 35.8 eight, but I think we we fixed that yesterday. So, it's a critical number. Uh, and this is for the project of 170th Avenue. Improvements. Improvement to 170th include three-lane complete street improvements with pedestrian and bicycle

improvements on both uh both sides and then potential new bridge over Beaverton Creek adjacent to the Twitton Hills Nature Park. If you live in district one, I think you probably know where those exact areas are. Um or if you traveled and then uh the the connection to the pedestrian improvement on Merlo Road as part of the Beaverton Creek Trail. So, more to come. I think uh it it this project really generated more conversation at the WCCCC and the staff did a really well good job of m you know managing that discussion. So, I just share that because that's a potential grant that we would have to as a board approve and then it would go to WCCCC for considerations. Let's see. Oh my goodness, 19 seconds. This week, I won't repeat where all the places we're going to be together. Uh, but just to say that right after this 5:30, I do have the public health advisory. So, Commissioner Willie, you should finish this meeting on time so that I can go home and and log in on that one. And then uh this week uh quickly um I have JPAC. Uh one of the thing that I wanted to point out is that there's going to be a new chair on JPAC now. Uh Council Gonzalez is managing another committee. They had to reshuffle some things and so there's a new change. So JPAC's chair now is councelor I almost called her commissioner. Councelor Christine Lewis is the new JPAD chair as of this week. Um so I just wanted to share that nothing board related discussions on that part.

Sorry for all winded there. All right. Um well I'll uh just follow up what Pam said about the Hops game. It was a great night for baseball and especially since my grandson got to throw out one of the first pitches. I have videos and pictures if you if you'd like me to entertain you. I was gonna say he threw a strike. Yeah. And he was great. He was hot. He was so wired. And he love it. Nothing compared to Mayor Pace's performance though. Or Senator Salman's.

Yeah. Anyway anyway. Um so she would agree with that. I'm I'm sure that assessment uh yep. Uh for let's just say Ford threw the only strike. And that's why Ford fits not me. Yeah.

Um but uh yeah, we had our second onboarding meeting. Uh and yes, that's the last one. The next one is next week. I got a briefing for uh what is on the agenda next week. It is um uh they have quite a list of items that we're going to be talking about. uh key performance indicators, key efficiency indicators, as well as the uh local plans. Just there was just a whole whole litany of stuff that we're going to be talking about. Ambitious.

It is ambitious. There was no rock that they're not going to uncover and have the conversation about. It's going to be interesting. Um I was in um Columbia County last week for the Copac and Northwest Act. at COPAC. We we had our usual conversations about it um about what's on their top of their list and some grants and things like that. But it was interesting that we were at the Columbia County PUB and the executive director used to be uh on staff at Forest Grove. Um Dave and I'll think of his last name in a minute. Um but he he was giving us a little bit of a snapshot on uh this the challenges that they're having with water and with energy, electricity specifically. Um and he was just making us aware of the fact that they there is an environmental group that is continuing to uh talk about removing three dams on the Colombia and those three dams generate 31% of our regional electricity. So that would be a hard thing to replace. Um and then Northwest Act Northwest A was a great conversation. And our our challenge this time was because there's four counties of course um that would be Columbia, Klatsup, Telmuk, and Western Washington County. And it was our objective to identify five projects to put before ODOT or actually the uh OTC um for consideration for money that we don't even know how much it is. So, we don't know how much money we've got, but we put that out there. Three of the five they designated uh highway six. So, this is um that's kind of the collaboration mentality that we have in Northwest Act is that everybody kind of looks at the

big picture. Highway 6 certainly benefits Tel County and Washington County more than Clatip and Columbia, but they realize it's a big deal. if uh when Highway 6 was closed for a period of time this winter, uh there are no alternative routes and uh we now have um some truck drivers who are refusing to drive over Highway 6 because they don't trust. So um so that's a high criteria. Um let's see. We had uh Bank City Council. I'm going there tonight um to talk with um Jessica about the vehicle registration fee and then also to give my my semianual update that I do um kaleidoscope on as well on when is that Wednesday. Um and I have one more item. The Thursday, the Gleno High School students have a Veterans Day called uh living history, and I'm going to be speaking at that for a few minutes on Wednesday. And then, um, yeah, Friday, um, yeah, last night at the Forest Grove City Council, uh, new police chief David Marcelli was sworn in, Marceli. And, uh, he's one of our own. from they stole it from county but anyway peace and happy about that that's all I got so okay uh next item is

don't be for the letter I don't know what I do with seven mothers in this room I tell you hey Erin's got the the letter up she's back let me go through this this is not my first rodeo he's trying to be helpful he's he's been a mayor for eight years just so do you want to say something. Huh? Does anybody have any changes, modifications? Are we okay with the letter? There we go. Okay. Thank you all for being here. We're going to adjourn into executive session provided I get a vote from every all of my consultants. Is that okay, Jason? Can I do that?

I think you should do a roll call vote with them to make sure I've got a majority. Okay. Uh, we're good, right? Yes. You say so. We're going into executive session. Well, we have to we have to all those in uh are not pertinent to the executive session, we are going to I entertain a motion to go into executive session pursuant to OS 192- 192.660 2 F and H for the purpose of discussing exempt records and potential litigation. Hope I got that right. So move. Correct. Second. Motion and a second. All those in favor signify by raising your hand. Yep. It's unanimous. Thank you very much. Jason,

you're going into executive session. We might need one minute to grab a couple people outside.