Board of County Commissioners - workshop

Commissioners, we are now live.

Welcome back to the Washington County Board of Commissioners work session for the afternoon of Tuesday, July 14, 2026. We have a full complement of all five commissioners. Our next topic is the Jail and Community Correction Center Expansion Project Update.

All right. Thank you, and good afternoon, Chair Harrington and Commissioners. We're pleased to be before you today for a Jail and Community Correction Center Expansion Project Update. For the record, my name is Erin Callard. I'm one of the Assistant County Administrators, and I have the pleasure of joining Sheriff Caprice Massey and Director of Facilities Fleet and Park, Little Brown. Today's presentation It's primarily informational to update the board on the work that has been occurring around the potential jail expansion as it's been just a little while since we've been, or since we've presented in work session on this topic. However, there has been some good work being built out on the project plan. It's ready for your board's consideration and direction. In conjunction to this project update, we do have two policy questions for you today. Is the current direction of the project plan aligned with the board's priorities? And does the board wish to formally approve the project plan before the end of the calendar year? And I'll caveat that question with a comment that if the answer to number two is yes, then of course the team would be coming back to you in work session to provide the actual project plan. This presentation is the first of many updates. We've planned them for about every four months or so, depending on the stage of the project and the action items for the board. And these updates are just one component of our communications plan, which also includes monthly progress reports and eventually a quarterly newsletter that will be public-facing. Before simplicity, we have adopted the acronym JACE, Jail and Community Corrections Center Expansion, for ease of reference. You may see this on documents such as the monthly project updates and other project communications. But we'd like to start with a brief orientation to the project and remind your board of the journey so far and for any listeners who are not familiar with the work. Under Oregon law, the county is legally responsible for funding and maintaining a local jail. while the elected County Sheriff acts as the statutory keeper and day-to-day operator of that facility. The current jail was opened in 1998 with 572 beds and was almost immediately too small that we moved in. Capacity was full at that point. The need for additional beds have been explored several times since then. And due to inadequate capacity, the sheriff's office is often facing the need to release adults back into the community before their charges or court process would indicate a process called forced release. We've talked to your board many times. We've talked to your board before in many public safety system presentations. about how forced releases are sort of that center ring of issues that impact the entire continuum of the public safety service delivery model. Forced releases may mean that a defendant doesn't show up for their hearing. They may fail to appear or FTA and have a warrant issued for their arrest. This warrant essentially puts the case on hold and impacts the courts by creating case backlogs It essentially pauses the case until the person comes back into custody, but it impacts the defense attorneys and the prosecutors that need to prepare for the cases and that keeps these counts on their caseloads for the moment until the person does come back into custody. It also clearly impacts victims and the community in terms of unresolved cases. And many times those on warrant status continue to commit new crimes and then it becomes a vicious cycle. Our cities, our partners, and our community all experience these pain points. In addition to the jail being too small for the county's growing population, the adult in custody population served today presents with significantly more complex issues, including mental health and substance use disorders, which create a higher risk to those in custody, as well as to the staff who provide services and oversight in the jail. The current jail was just simply not designed to support the needs of individuals with those conditions. Washington County is really fortunate to have and operate the Community Correction Center, which is part of the continuum of custody services and has a bed capacity of 215 beds, but is currently only funded for 167 beds. The center is an important part of the service continuum and partners with the Sheriff's Office to receive adults in custody who can safely be released to the center as an alternative to releasing into the community. And if they're eligible, it also maintains jail beds for those who are the most risk to the community. The capacity study completed last year included the Community Correction Center. So this project history slide highlights some of the important milestones in the history of the Jail and Community Correction Center expansion exploration. As mentioned, the need for additional capacity was identified not long after the current jail opened in 1998. Excuse me. In 2007, a report was commissioned to explore the Jail and Community Correction Center expansion. In 2010, a second report was commissioned, which provided some refined information and was completed as part of the update to the 2007 report. In and around 20, excuse me, in and around 2022, jail expansion became a board priority and identified jail capacity planning as a focus area. And then in 2023, your board directed staff to develop a comprehensive public safety briefing paper which highlighted the challenges with the current jail and the cascading and compounding issues facing the public safety system. Partly related to the inadequate size of the Washington County Jail, but it also spoke to the interconnectedness of the public safety system. Your board then directed a jail capacity study in 2024, which was completed by Matrix Consultants in 25, and built upon the information in the prior reports of 2007 and 2010. We'd like to share with the board the staff who are working on this project and their roles. There is a core team of people that have been meeting for several months to do the initial planning, and we call them the project leadership team. These individuals represent our one Washington County approach with representation from five different departments and offices, including the Sheriff's Office, County Administration, Community Corrections, Facilities, Fleet, and Parks, and Health and Human Services. This slide and graph illustrates the project organization. Establishing project governance matters because it sets clear roles, expectations, and decision-making processes from the start. It keeps projects aligned with goals and uses resources efficiently. On the left side of the slide, you can see your board at the top providing policy direction and investment decision-making. The leadership team provides oversight and direction. The project managers are in the day-to-day coordination and planning. We've also developed a steering committee made up of a wide variety of local partners and internal stakeholders. This committee will provide valuable perspectives and input, ensuring the expansion work integrates with broader community priorities. And then we'll have focused work groups, which will include special focus areas for the subject matter experts. This gives those experts time to weigh in and provide their expertise in the context of the work that is occurring, but it also doesn't bog them down in processes that get too unwieldy or long. The graphic on the right we affectionately refer to as an eye or an eyeball. It illustrates the project organization that I was just describing. So starting from the outside and working in. The project informants encompass those subject matter experts and focused work groups, along with the steering committee and the jail work groups, for example, or jail staff. The project execution team includes three project managers to ensure that key areas receive adequate focus. The facilities project manager, Stuart Spofford, focuses on the physical design and construction considerations. The sheriff's office project manager, Jim Wheaton, ensures the design and function addresses the needs of the Washington County Sheriff's Office. And the Health and Human Services Project Manager, Kristen Burke, considers the psychosocial needs of both adults in custody and staff in integration with community-based services. Additionally, we've added a finance committee, which works on other capital projects in addition to the JACE project, including the courthouse, which you'll be hearing more about in the next presentation. This ensures that there is awareness of opportunities as well as potential barriers to these complex projects. in working toward funding strategies and also ensures the awareness of timing and other initiatives that the county is working on, such as levies, et cetera. Then as shown on the graphic, all of the project work is coordinated by the project leadership team or project leadership, including the leadership team that is directed by your board. This team provides oversight and direction to all the project managers. And all of these components, of course, are working toward the project goal.

This slide is a preliminary high level project schedule that we have developed as part of the project plan. It is showing you the lifecycle of this project from initiation all the way through to commissioning. Generally speaking, we have more confidence in the items that are on the left hand side of the slide and less confidence as we proceed through time into the future for the items that are on the right hand side of the

But when you say confidence, I think what you're meaning is precision. Is that what you're meaning? I think I mean confidence. You know that step still needs to happen, but the timing and how it's funded, it's less precise.

Correct. That's correct. So, for example, the feasibility envisioning that we are about to embark in, where it says we are here, And that is going to provide us increasing levels of confidence in everything that comes to the right, we know that those are going to happen, but we don't know how much it's going to cost exactly and we don't know exactly how long any of it's going to take because we are still in the early phases of planning. Does that. Mary, the precision and, yeah, okay. So that is where we are today is embarking on information gathering. We're in the planning phase, which is an investigatory phase in general. I think important to note are those little green dollar signs, which are making note of places where we expect to get deliverables from our consultants that will increase that level of confidence in everything that comes to the right. Each one of those dollar signs will be a moment for us to return to this board with refined cost estimates and improved scheduling. Also of note on this schedule, you'll see the gray bar underneath the execution phase where the project team will be focused on project execution, design, construction, and commissioning. The sheriff's office will be focusing on the concurrent planning that is required to make sure that we are able to meet as a county the operational needs of an expanded jail. That's going to include funding strategies, staffing plans, and training schedules to make sure that the day that we open, we are ready to operate. Another important milestone is that red box at the bottom where it talks about current funding depleted. that and this entire slide is built on an assumption that we are not going to run into any extraordinary delays or obstacles up until that point, but we're currently anticipating that we have enough available funds to get us deep into design and engineering. Not complete, but deep into design and engineering, at which point we will get that third cost estimate update and that is going to be the point in time where we are able to really hang our hat on those numbers. Right now, we're doing best professional judgment estimates that will get better and better and better as we go. If we found ourselves in that situation where we have not yet secured enough funding to complete the entire project, that is where I would be returning to the board to advocate for stopgap funding so that we could finish at least the entire design and engineering package so that we do not lose time in the future trying to pick up a thread that was partially complete. Across the very bottom, you can see that we are already working with our finance team, capital finance committee that Erin referenced earlier to determine the most appropriate funding methodology for this large project and that we are hoping to begin securing those funds in 2028. The reason that we have it built out the way we do is because we are hoping that by securing the funds in 2028, we will avoid any gaps in this timeline and be able to move directly into.

As your board is aware, the county completed a competitive RFP process for the project consultant, and this process was completed earlier. and Washington County has retained the expertise of DLR Group to assist with the work of the feasibility assessment and the financial analysis. Your board recently approved entering into a contract with DLR Group, and staff have begun engaging with the consultants on this work. DLR is a consulting group that specializes in correction settings. They have offices worldwide, including one in Portland, and they've supported projects throughout Oregon and pride themselves on their work in behavioral, environmental, and social betterment resulting in healing, equity, and transformation for the individual and community.

Is that a future design?

Anything is possible. This slide summarizes the work that DLR will do for Washington County as part of the contract. As a reminder, this work does build upon the matrix study that was completed on the capacity needs. DLR will focus on taking the overall estimated bed needs and consider how to incorporate best and cutting edge practices such as specialized units for different populations, people who are in recovery, providing trauma-informed care, and also having a focus on staff wellness. The consultant scope is broad, and it includes processes like visioning, stakeholder engagement, building programming and functional space requirements, working through site and infrastructure, working through financial analysis and funding strategies, and then identifying site visits that allow us to learn from the work of others and ensure that we are incorporating cutting edge practices. This work will take a year to complete and will have touch points for your board, the steering committee, and other work groups as described in the prior slides.

One key area of work that is actually right around the corner is project visioning and goal setting. Here, we plan to collect input from key leaders to develop project priorities and goals. Your board will be a part of this process, which will lay the foundation for all future aspects of jail design, coordination across the systems, and people's experience in the jail, both adults in custody, staff, and stakeholders. Think defense attorneys who come to visit, district attorneys, and understanding that we have courts right-connected. We also want to include subject matter experts in the work to make sure that what we learn is working, what isn't, and what are the current needs of our staff and the building. We've grouped the work into several key areas shown on this slide. I'll explain a little bit about each one of these. Intake and release, that area focuses on workflows and considerations for when individuals are initially received at the jail, processed, related to their charges, and released back into the community. The supervision operations will explore workflows related to assignment and supervision of adults in custody. They'll focus on how building design can support efficient processes and effective supervision. It includes identification of populations that would benefit from specialized services or units within the jail. Some of those include behavioral health needs, medical conditions, developmental considerations, gender identity, and considerations for security threat group and things like that. Think about adults in custody who can't be housed with other adults in custody because there might be a conflict that we want to mitigate. As we talk about programs and services, we are going to focus on a variety of services and programs that are offered to adults in custody designed to support their growth, wellness, and connection with a larger community. It also considers services and supports that are provided by external partners, both in the jail and externally. So transitional services into the community once they leave, classes, counseling, that aid and assist docket that helps ensure that our adults in custody are competent to stand trial and to get through their process through adjudication, deflection, peer mentors, and diversion. Medical, as you know, is the largest county contract that we have, and the medical care that we provide to our adults in custody is essential. We need to make sure that the continued behavioral health and physical health of our adults in custody, especially those who present with acute issues like intoxication or withdrawal, are taken care of while they're in custody and they can be well. When we talk about jail operations, we have to consider things like the kitchen, laundry, janitorial, access control, so security and technology, and staff support areas like locker rooms and break rooms. And then over in the Community Corrections Center, We look forward to exploring the role of the Community Corrections Center in supporting individuals under supervision and how they fit into that continuum of care. The last thing I'll touch on is juvenile services and co-located non-custody services. During our visioning efforts, we are going to choose to explore whether or not we could integrate any sort of juvenile services in connection or associated with the physical structure of the jail that are outside of sight and sound of adults in custody to mitigate the need to travel to other counties so that they can go through their adjudication process. And then currently the jail facility is co-located with WCSO Operations One of our greatest considerations has to be all of the other things that exist within the Sheriff's Office Law Enforcement Center that are not the jail. So patrol, detectives and investigations, our executive team, concealed handgun licensing records, civil, professional standards, which includes internal affairs and courts. They are all going to have interest in what we design for our future. One of the things I'm quite excited about is exploring who is not just following best practices, as I've said around here, but setting best practices across the country and what might we learn. We plan to really include subject matter expertise into this and make sure that we are out and adventuring, looking around at what other things we might be able to go glean from other places. So our consultants tentatively have identified several jails that are aligned with our vision and goal. We plan to send a team to visit these sites and learn from them, including design features, integrated services, staff wellness, release services, and connection to community services. Just as by way of a couple of the specific things that we hope to glean is here we talk about Jackson County, Missouri, Their building design supports evidence-based treatment and training opportunities. And I think it's going to give us a unique opportunity to see something that is brand new. Similarly, the James A. Carnes Correctional Center includes dedicated spaces for behavioral health support. And Yavapai County Criminal Justice Center incorporates a reentry center and diversion facility adjacent to the jail that is designed to support adults transitioning back into the community. in that space between fully in custody and fully out of custody. And then Contra Costa County in California has a behavioral health and treatment facility within the existing jail system. They have expanded special needs housing and support areas incorporated as well. And I'm excited to see what, if any of their setup and the supports that they have and the relationships they've developed can help inform how we might design and build for our future. I'm not going to Hawaii, sir.

So as Erin mentioned, the project plan will be a significant milestone and communication point in this project. We have developed an initial project plan to help guide this work to date, and we'll be sharing that project plan with you later in the summer once it has more meat on the bones and we have received more information from our consultants. Following this, there will be an opportunity for one-on-one meetings with the commissioners to ask questions and provide feedback. And then in October or November, we'll return for your review and adoption to codify the team direction going forward. I am really excited to be following this conversation with our presentation on the courthouse replacement project. because there are obvious overlaps between the two projects. Besides just size, impact and function, the facilities that we are talking about today are going to be housing teams that partner daily inside the public safety ecosystem. And we have a fantastic opportunity right now to consider these projects in tandem to make sure that we are building, we are creating a built environment that supports that cross-functional collaboration for years to come. On this slide, you'll see a few of the areas that the project teams are going to be focusing on as each one of these efforts matures. So even though those are the two largest projects in our minds at the moment, there are also many other projects that are working their way through our project pipeline. This is an example or a snippet from our current capital improvement plan intended to give a high-level overview of a few of the projects that are coming up at the same time. They include the MEO space development, investigations into the possible archives facility, and the continued design of the Walnut Street seismic upgrade project. Oh, there we go. Now it's going to go maybe slow and it may jump forward too far, but okay. So this slide is just a snapshot of a work in progress. If it were modern art, I think I would call it nailing jello to a wall. It is our effort using a virtual whiteboarding tool called Mural that we have been capturing our best guests at different milestones, thresholds, deadlines, so that we can see them starting to line up. The first thing that comes to my mind when I look at this is the fact that 100% of the projects that we're really thinking about right now are in the planning phase. As I mentioned earlier, that's an investigative phase where we are really trying to think about the best product that Washington County could possibly have. Those plans will get whittled down over time as they meet the barriers waiting for us in reality. It is the most cost-effective way to develop a project is to have that wide open visioning and planning on the front end so that by the time we get to design, we've already thought about our needs, prioritized what we really can have and can't do without. So the Strategic Capital Finance Committee is meeting monthly to update this information. And then they're working backwards from some of those immovable deadlines to help us identify the most appropriate funding mechanisms and to create the best timing to balance competing demands in a resource restricted environment. So important things to note, I think, are the little green Cost estimate dots that we talked about earlier in each project, those are identified as places where we will step forward with a little more information. We also have a couple of these little one-way signs in purple that show us when funding runs out. So you can see that in JACE and in the courthouse, which we'll talk about in the next presentation. And then the little red stop signs are places where the team is identifying plausible moments. So places where you do not lose investments that you've already made, but could take that project and either set it aside for future planning efforts, or if you make it all the way through design, have yourself a shovel-ready project at the ready for opportunistic funding.

I think that's it.

This slide is a very provisional timeline of future board actions, and it really illustrates the left to right timeline that Laurel spoke about in slide seven and puts it into a list with the color coordinating phases from top to bottom and describes some of the future board actions. This slide shows an estimated dated timeline at a very high level. It does not provide the detail of work sessions, board meetings, or all the decision points. It's just really designed to assure you that staff are returning to your board at each phase of the project and sometimes multiple times. We expect this timeline to evolve as stages may be faster or they may slow down related to the slide that Laurel just reviewed. I will draw your attention to the first bullet of the project plan approval in late 2026 as it is connected to the policy question that we're asking your board about today. I will also point out that this timeline assumes that funding is secured as noted above and that the construction period is expected to take three years, which highlights the point that we will continue to have forced releases and capacity issues in the interim. And then finally, that concludes the Jail and Community Corrections Center expansion project presentation. This slide reminds your board of the policy questions we started with, and of course, we're happy to answer any questions.

So at this juncture, I suggest that for QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS TO THESE TWO QUESTIONS AND ANY OTHER COMMENTS THAT COMMISSIONERS EACH TAKE FIVE MINUTES, MAX EACH, THAT WOULD LEAVE US FOR FIVE MORE MINUTES AND WE'LL TAKE STOCK FROM THERE. SO, BRETT, IF YOU COULD PUT THE TIME KEEPER UP, THEN WHO WOULD LIKE TO GO FIRST? I'LL GO FIRST. THANK YOU, JERRY.

CAN WE GO TO PAGE 15? NUMBERS, MY FAVORITE THING, IT WOULD APPEAR UNDER 2627. WHAT I'D LIKE TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO IS TO GIVE A TOTAL AT THE BOTTOM.

SURE.

BECAUSE IT APPEARS, IF MY MATH IS GOOD, 2627, WE'RE ABOUT 7.5 MILLION SHORT IN FUNDING. IS THAT WHAT I'M READING? AM I READING THAT CORRECTLY?

It is not possible for me to answer that at the top of my head because of the way that this is built. I'm not sure how you're doing the math with the funding sources. Are you subtracting the funding? Isn't the whole CIP as well?

No, this is just a snapshot of the CIP. That's what I was trying to get at, what we budgeted versus. So in other words, I just took $75,000, $950,000, $1.8 million, $300,000. 4.3 MILLION. ADDED THEM ALL UP IN MY BRAIN. 7.5 MILLION. MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT'S OUR SHORTFALL FOR THESE PROJECTS IN THE 26-27 BUDGET YEAR. AND HOW DID WE BUDGET THAT SHORTFALL?

So it's not exactly the shortfall because the way the CIP works is that the revenue sources sometimes come in previous fiscal years. So in order to know exactly what our shortfall is in 26-27, I would need to go back and do some careful math to make sure that we're accounting for everything that we've already received. So a place to start looking is that very first column where it says actuals. You can see money that we've received in previous years. The Walnut Street Science Center is a really good example of that. In some previous year before I was hired, we received $2.5 million worth of Gainshare dollars. And it's in there, but it's not going to show up in that column of 26, 27. But it is in there and it is supporting that project. And that is actually how we are working to create a shovel-ready project in hopes of receiving federal dollars for that particular project. So each one of the projects have those funding sources that were received prior to the last fiscal year, and then you would have to add to it the money that they received in 25-26 and the money that you allocated in 26-27 in order to know the shortfall. A better way to maybe look at it is each one of those projects has a line called unfunded. No, not each one. Some of them are fully funded. But the Walnut Street Seismic, for example, it starts with that unfunded line. That's the revenue that we don't have. And it's showing up in 2728. So that's where we have a known shortfall. When we bring the CIP to you, it is fully funded for the budget year that we are building. So 26-27, even though it may not have all the pieces on this page, will be fully funded because that's in an approved budget year. You can start to see gaps in the 27-28 when those unfunded amounts show up. And if we don't have a plan for those dollars by the time we get to the budget bill next year, you'll see the expenditure and the revenue pushed out.

The unfunded line you're describing for Jerry, that THAT SUMMARIZES ALL THE PRIOR MONEY THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN RECEIVED VERSUS WHATEVER THE CURRENT PROJECTED GAP IS?

NEW SPEAKER Correct. IT SHOWS WHAT WE ARE STILL SEEING.

NEW SPEAKER I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS MAYBE WE COULD DO TO MORE CLARIFY THIS. THIS IS KIND OF A RUNNING REVENUE AND EXPENSES OVER THIS FIVE-YEAR PERIOD OF TIME FROM 25 TO 31. And we get out to the far right and it says total. I'd like to be able to see what we're looking at there. I mean, I added up those two because I was thinking, okay, that's how much money we got raised between now and then. I'm not sure that's the correct.

I think that's why I brought my CIP document. Oh, well done.

Yeah. It shows more.

They're there. Right, okay. It's that fiscal year balance that came in. There's what was there at the end of that year. Yeah, it's this. So that you could meet that expenditure total in this calendar.

Yeah, okay.

So this is the appendix section.

So this is a really, to me, this is a really good snapshot of financial side of this, because everything else in this was really good. It was good information, things like that. This particular thing confused me more than answered questions. Sure.

Still have to answer question one and two.

Yes and yes.

So as a follow-up, staff will just send to the board, so it's readily available in your inbox, a link to the capital improvement plan. And Commissioner Willey, I think that you can have some fun diving deep into the capital improvement plan, because I know I do, to get a more holistic picture, because this is just one page.

Yes. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay. Yep. And yes.

Who's next?

Yes and yes on the two questions.

I can go. On the policy questions, my answers are yes and yes. I do have some I have questions and comments specifically about the bed need assumption. We've had discussion about that before. I will state again that I do not want to build something that's already undersized by the time the construction is completed. We need to figure out how to do the right thing. And with that, I want to know, there was a comment, I think, from Erin about the bed assumption or the assumptions being given to the DLR. So what is being given to them as an assumption, and is that going to be being re-evaluated as part of their initial work or not?

That's true, and Laurel, you can help me with this. They were given the matrix report and looking at that. But if you might remember, the matrix report did produce some numbers with a whole bunch of different scenarios, and we are taking that information and using that again through visioning, like putting it back into the equation of conversation. was not a finite or final bed number. I don't know, Laurel, if you want to add it.

That's correct. I think that DLR will be taking that matrix report and they will be using it as a baseline place to start asking questions. But through the visioning process and the stakeholder interviews and even the site visits, that number will be refined to make sure that it's meeting our needs and the sheriff's office goals and values.

Or the future.

Yeah, if I can add to that. Yes. Yeah, staff were very intentional about the timeline slide that they had within the slide deck of the jail was full when it opened. And so we heard that feedback from the board. Let's not repeat what we have experienced of opening and being at full capacity and then having the same challenge. At the same time, wanting to be mindful that it is public dollars that we are using to build a facility. So the size of the facility needs to be backed by data and current and future use needs.

I will hold my comments on co-location after the second presentation.

That's all I've got. First question, yes. Second question, yes. My comment is, I don't know if this has gone back, but the leadership team, and I think Brought my attention, Sheriff, when you mentioned the DAs, the district attorney. Is that one more? No, one more. One more. There you go.

Yes.

Yes. The leadership, I think, of the one Washington County approach caught my eye. And I feel like obviously this is a project that the county commissioners will have to sell. And following what worked for me in the past is having a commissioner as part of that process. For example, being with you, Sheriff, and the District Attorney as well as the Chair and Commissioner Snyder was very helpful, as well as the subject matter experts, the staff. So I feel like this project leadership team, in my eyes, isn't complete. I see the Board of Commissioners missing. Yes, we are the decision makers that eventually will approve as well as the district attorney's office. I'm not gonna specifically say. And also what caught my attention is if you could go back one more, I did catch this one too. is I think we have to have a bit of a strategic foresight. And since we have the sheriff there as an elected individual, as well as this is your bread and butter, I feel like you have to be there. I see a bit of a power imbalance in this confirmation of it. So I just wanted to throw that out there to see, like, Is there a room for one of the commissioners? I didn't mean to volunteer you, but I'm pointing to you or anybody on this side. And then as well as the district attorney's office.

I'll hold that question to our remaining last five minutes.

I'm done. I'm going to donate my two and a half minutes. Commissioner Treece.

Thank you. I'm yes and yes. Could you go to, I think it's slide seven. So the scheduled development slide. Thank you. And I'm yes and yes, but I have ongoing concerns about the dollar signs along the way. So I just, you know, I want that as a caveat that you said that you will be coming back to us at each one of these dollar sign points to discuss where we are and what the future looks like and where we stand, correct? Correct. Okay. So we will be adjusting as we move forward. And I think the other questions, for example, making sure we're at a place where we've got capacity when we open up, we're not over capacity, those types of things, those questions are going to be dependent upon those I have a different take on that, but we don't have to debate that.

We need to build the right thing, regardless of the money. We have to figure the money out.

So we're going to end up with a 1998 scenario again.

Well, and I've just seen that way too many times in the public, where we're building the wrong thing because we couldn't quite afford it. And then people live with that for 30 years.

It's not a good decision making in my opinion. This is her time for questions and comments.

And I am going to respond to that. Because while I agree with building the ideal situation, I think we have to take into consideration as we get down the road what the issues are that might make it less ideal is to me, that can move a bit. So I just want to hold that out there is that I don't think we should hold ourselves to just one concept in terms of the ideal.

Okay, I'll go next. Thank you. I am yes and yes. This is great material. Thank you for the various improvements. The operation plan to execute the strategy is much clearer to me as a result. I would like to see that you include a couple of pieces of material in this packet and then with every subsequent work session or board meeting on this topic. One is from our January 30th work session, the updated slide that shows where clients of the jail come from. Then from the May 12th work session with the quarterly report from Q3 of last fiscal year, there is the public safety and justice stack and the information about the community corrections center information. Very useful. We have to keep educating everybody at every opportunity. You've done the work, just include it. You don't have to present it. And I have a few tags and questions I'd like to comment on real quickly. On slide four, I recall learning from prior Sheriff Garrett in 2021 into 2022 that in 2016, he made a request for the board to get moving on an expanded jail and that request was put in a drawer It's just always stuck with me.

Oops, I just went with the study that was six years old already.

Yeah, I mean, it was a problem. So my tag fell off of the next page. So I'm just going to keep going. I'm in support for the possible site visits of the project leadership team and just have them give us good feedback. SUMMARY TRIP REPORT AS A RESULT OF THAT. ON THE FUTURE BOARD ACTIONS, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE DONE A GOOD JOB OF REMINDING ME IN THE DIFFERENT SLIDES THAT AT THIS JUNCTURE, 2032 IS WHEN THE OPERATIONAL TIMELINE COMES THROUGH. SO THIS, AS YOU'VE LISTED, THESE KEY MILESTONES ARE MUCH CLEARER TO ME NOW. AND THERE'S A REAL DEPENDENCY ON HAVING AN OWNERSHIP BOARD FROM THE FULL BOARD, WHICH SPEAKS TO HOW THE FULL BOARD IS, THE LIAISON SET. BUT I'LL REINFORCE IT, 2032 OPENING DEPENDS ON THESE DATES, AND THAT'S AN AWFUL LOT. ON NUMBER TWO, ABSOLUTELY. not just yes or the whole timeline falls apart. Then in this political environment, I'm hearing lots of platitudes with regard to social justice while omitting the need that murderers, rapists, child abusers, domestic violence offenders come through our county jail and through our county state courthouse. So an ethical leader doesn't hide from these responsibilities. for our public safety and justice stack. The last comment that I would make is with regard to the project organization. I think it's important to, oh, that's where my tag fell off. I would add another circle with fellow travelers, where we have mayors and city councils and community would change from project informants. I think there are some community experienced members that go in project informants, but general community goes in that fellow travelers. Our community engagement groups are part of that as well. So there's community general and then our county district aligned engagement meetings. State legislators are also in the mix because there is a role between the jail and the prison and the jail and community corrections role, which I'm forgetting. I mean, I'm concerned they're forgetting all the work that was invested on the white paper. I also believe strongly in communications and engagement strategy and ops plan. usually fill Ms. Angie's white board with an ops plan that goes to that strategy. So I understand what you've presented here and that the project leadership team is the internal project planning group, as you described. Both the district attorney organization and the defense organizations are part of the PROJECT INFORMANTS AND NEED TO STAY THERE. BUT THE REASON WHY I'M OVER MY FIVE MINUTES, BUT I'M IN AGREEMENT ON THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE. OH, LOOK AT THAT. WE HAVE ALL TEN MINUTES. SO COMMISSIONER FI, YOU WERE THE FIRST TO AND ONLY to make a request that is not in line with this presentation of the Board being in the leadership role together. And I think that's worthy of some discussion. Also, you just talked about, in your opinion, The sheriff's office has a power imbalance. Well, they're the ones who live and breathe the jail every single day. And the district attorney's office, they're the prosecutors. They don't live and breathe the jail. So the way that the sheriff's office does. So that's why I don't agree with your suggestion there. And now is the time for full board discussion.

A quick clarification, Chair. The power imbalance that I was referencing wasn't particularly to the sheriff's office, as I said. But what I said is having the sheriff, an individually elected member, part of this leadership team, is there a perceived power imbalance there? To me, from what I read, That's what I took away. So there is an opportunity to entertain the idea of incorporating different elected officials that do exist in the county, as well as the district attorney, as well as a board member. Now, remember I referenced to the experience of the public safety levy, which was very helpful having all these electeds because when we do go out and sell the idea to the community members, then we can really do say we did our due diligence rather than just coming to the board and having this 30 minute conversation, top an hour, right? Then to really say, well, I'm missing the gaps where there wasn't any gaps for the individual members that were involved for any of the safety levies or public, any of the levies that went out to the community members. everyone can articulate not only the cadence, but the value for the county, for the community members, and what's in it for individually. So that's where I'm articulating right now. And then if you go back one slide, Erin, sorry to go back, is you have one elected official and staff member.

Okay, I'm going to call time because you've reached a minute. Somehow that wacko timer just went from five minutes to eight minutes. So please clean that up. I'm timing the selling of the idea a second time, and I'm opening the floor up to the other board members who haven't had a chance to respond to it.

Yeah, no, I hear you. You just mischaracterized what I said, and I clarified, and I hope I was clear. Please stop so we can get to the other board members. Okay. Stop it.

I'm good.

You're good with the proposal. Thank you. If I could respond just a moment to that. I think when I look back on our levy work and how we did get educated, I see that happening further down into that timeline that I think is on page seven. If you could go to page seven again. I see that happening further around 2029. This is pre-work getting ready to be able to go to the public for funding.

You have to see funding secure available. That needs to happen in 2028. So after there is a design, then you're going to know what that dollar sign firms up to for the board to then figure out how it's going to get that funding secured.

That's what I'm saying is in that process that definitely I would say commissioners need to be involved because we will be communicating with the public or any commissioners on the board at that time will be communicating with the public because staff can't. That's when it transfers into a campaign versus a project.

And this is much bigger than any of the levies.

I wonder if I might just add our steering committee. That's the parallel, I think, what you're thinking of, Commissioner Fye, the parallel process that we've done. There is a steering committee with a commissioner on it, the elected district attorney, a mayor, city officials. That's kind of that steering committee that I wonder if you're thinking about that.

So in your next presentation, you need to show us where there's a steering committee and who's on it.

Okay.

We'll throw that on to the

I was going to make that comment. Aren't I the one that's designated? Yes, you are. And it's in the perfect informant. I'm trying to figure out. You're right.

We can build that out.

On the eyeball, where that is.

Yep.

It's missing from the eyeball. Yep. Got it.

It's on the outside of the eyeball.

Outside the eyeball.

We need the outside of the eye. Oh, really? Just the eyeball. Yeah. We need to add. We'll build that out. We'll build it out for the next one.

That was my only comment or question in relation to that. I was like, aren't I designated now? Yeah.

OKAY. I THINK WE'VE GIVEN YOU ALL THE DIRECTION REQUESTS FOR TODAY, AND YOU SAID YOU'LL BE COMING BACK SOMETIME LATER THIS SUMMER WITH A PROJECT.

YES, BUT THIS INFORMATION WILL BUILD OUT THE ROLLING AGENDA, SO YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THAT COMING UP.

And just as a reminder for your August roundtable, that is when staff is to the best of our ability, having the set for the last six months of rolling agenda. So it'll be programmed.

I was remiss in bringing voice to a request that I've made to Ms. Angie a couple of times that the project updates that we get need to start including some of the other diagrams that are foundational to And then getting that to mayors and city councilors, those fellow travelers on a regular basis.

That's great. Thank you, Chair. We have started working on that based on the graph.

Fellow travelers. That's my first time hearing it, but I like it.

Thank you. Good work. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, we have another big one-hour topic. So we're going to move on to courthouse, but do people need a couple-minute break for water and bio? Okay, we'll be right back at two. Thank you.

Welcome back, Commissioner. We are back live.

Great. Thank you. Welcome back, everyone. And we are now on to our next big project, Courthouse Replacement Project Update. So here's the third one. Great.

Thank you, Chair Harrington. Good afternoon again, Chair Harrington and Commissioners. For the record, I am Erin Calvert, one of the Assistant County Administrators. And for this presentation, I'm pleased to join Laurel Brown, Director of Facilities, State, and Parks, and Brian Robb, Facilities Senior Planner, for a courthouse replacement project update. So while this is a completely separate and distinct project from the last hour of our discussion, you will notice some similar graphics and project organization as we just discussed as part of the Jail and Community Correction Center expansion project. And while we know presenting these two big projects to you on the same day is a lot of information, we also felt it was important for you to hear it all in the context and timelines of one another. We also know that these two large projects are not the only ones that your board is navigating at this time. So the purpose of today's presentation is to provide a proposed project summary and timeline, a planning phase update, discuss funding and application strategy for your consideration, and then of course receive your board direction. Our policy question for the work session today, does your board direct staff to submit a preliminary grant application by July 17th while the planning phase continues? So why does Washington County need a new courthouse and what is the courthouse replacement need? As your board is painfully aware, the ORS requires counties to provide suitable and sufficient courtrooms, offices, and jury rooms to ensure fair, timely, and accessible justice. I know your board is also aware of the concerns with the current facilities, but for those who may not be familiar, Washington County has inadequate capacity for the current caseload sizes and the increasing demands for our growing and evolving community. We have fragmented court functions across six buildings, and several of those lack purpose-built safety and security infrastructure. Our courthouse has architectural barriers to access and participate in hearings or hold case conferences or court-related meetings. There are dysfunctional layouts and circulation patterns within the building that aren't conducive to the workflow and function of a modern courthouse. And it has a substandard seismic performance for public assembly buildings. And as we know, oh, sorry. And as we still know, the replacement of a courthouse is roughly seven years away if the application is submitted and approved in this budget cycle.

State budget cycle. Right.

Correct. And of course, all of these concerns have impacts. In real life, this looks like limited space that leads to delayed justice, shorter hearings, and less consideration of case details. This isn't because the judges don't want to hear cases. It's simply because we are at capacity for judges and space to hold hearings, and yet caseloads and docket time continue to increase. Community members using mobility devices and serving on a jury are unable to enter jury boxes in many of the courtrooms. In-custody defendants move through public areas encountering witnesses and prosecuting attorneys. Attorney-client conversations happen in non-private or confidential spaces such as hallways and bathrooms. The jury selection rooms are cramped and flood-prone, and our inability to add courtrooms delays new judges being funded by the legislature. And our overcrowded and seismically vulnerable building creates significant risk in the event of a Cascadia Subjection Zone earthquake and creates a risk to continuity of operations in the event something could happen. Here's your timeline slide and a little bit of history. The Washington County Courthouse was constructed in three phases in 1912, 1928, and 1970. This slide highlights some of the key dates and milestones and this timeline is well captured in a courthouse memo that was submitted to your board on November 7th of 2025. In 2002, a seismic analysis was completed and it was determined that the facility does not meet seismic standards. In 2008, a statewide courthouse assessment was completed and the courthouse and the justice services building were placed as the 14th and 17th building respectively in terms of highest need in the state. In 2013, the state funding program was established. This was in response to a widespread seismic need throughout the state. In 2021, the board took local action by approving the courthouse planning process and engagement with the courthouse facilities task force began. In 2022, at the direction of the board, staff submitted an application to the task force to prioritize planning funds for 2023. And as part of that application and decision in 2023, the board committed to and took action by approving the capital improvement plan to identify $1.25 million in matching funds using strategic investment plan or SIP dollars. And as you know, also hired a senior planner, which showed the county's commitment to this project. As you also know, Washington County was not funded this year. In 2024, the legislature assigned a new judge to Washington County, and because we're out of space in the courthouse, your board approved the investment and construction of a new courtroom at the Law Enforcement Center. And then after another attempt at submitting an application for planning dollars in 2025, Washington County was awarded the 1.25 million in planning dollars. In December of 2025, Washington County submitted a placeholder application for construction funds using very early cost estimates. And then finally, as you know, this year in 2026, a space needs assessment has begun with the National Center for State Courts or NCSC. And NCSC has been out in May for their first site visit and will be returning in August for another site visit. And the report should be finalized in November of this year.

So this is the graphic that we've been using to show project lifecycle. It is, as I always say, deceptively linear. It shows us progressing from initiation all the way through to commissioning. And often we are able to progress in this fashion in a nice orderly manner. This is not that type of project. Because of the state funding timelines involved, which you will hear about more shortly, We are in a situation where we're formulating budgetary asks three to four years in advance of actual disbursement of funds, which means that we will always be a little ahead of ourselves in this project until we get to a fully funded construction phase. Currently, we are working through several of these phases at one time. But I would say that generally, we're moving from initiation into concept development and that we are right behind the jail and community correction expansion shown here on the chart. So because of the biennium cycle, today we will be here talking about applying for next round of funding to support the execution phase in blue before we've really kicked off the planning phase in green. That ensures that the state can reserve enough money in their budget development to cover our best case funding needs in 2029. It's important to note that we will be able to reduce our ask to meet more informed schedules, cost estimates, and local match strategy as those are developed.

This slide lays out an overview of the main planning work that's either currently underway or in some cases just beginning. So at a high level, we've grouped planning tasks into four buckets and we've categorized those as operational planning, facilities planning, financial planning, governance and communication. On the operational planning side, facilities contracted with the National Center for State Courts this past winter to conduct a long range needs assessment That work is ongoing, and NCSC is assessing courtroom needs, caseload and staffing projections, court operations and space program needs, all projected out of 50 years. NCSC completed their first onsite work in May, which included an entire week of interviews with our partners in the state courts, district attorney's office, sheriff's office, and other county staff. NCSC will be onsite again the first week of August to present their initial findings and get feedback with their final report expected this November. This assessment is akin to the jail capacity study, but it goes a bit further in that it will translate caseload trends and operational needs into a draft space program. Moving on to the facilities planning in the upper right, staff is preparing to engage consultants to verify seismic and structural conditions of our existing facilities, verify ADA deficiencies, develop site criteria based on the needs assessment data, and finally complete a financial analysis comparing the major renovation versus replacement costs. Those facility items are directly tied to state funding criteria. Ultimately, we need to demonstrate that replacement is more cost-effective than rehabilitation of the existing structure. Normally, that work would have already been complete before applying for funding, but because of the state funding timeline, and the guidance we're receiving from OJD, we're proceeding iteratively and we'll update the application as the planning work advances. In terms of financial planning, as Laurel mentioned, staff have convened a strategic capital finance committee already with a courthouse specific subcommittee that's met a few times as well. And we're beginning to look at state funding strategy, local match strategy, bond timing, and potential voter measure timing. On governance and communication, staff are developing a project charter, steering structure, stakeholder engagement approach, and regular board updates. Erin will speak more directly to the project organization and governance on the next slide.

Thank you, Brian. So this will look familiar to you now, but just like the slide that you saw in the Jail Community Correction Center project, this slide does show the project organization, and it really is structured just like what you just saw. So as Brian mentioned, some of these build outs are still in progress. This is not as far along as the jail capacity project at this time. But again, starting in the left side top of the slide, your board is at the top providing policy and investment decision making. The leadership team again provides the project oversight and direction. We have a senior planner, Brian, who's holding all of the coordination and planning right now. There will be a steering committee created soon, which will meet many of the stakeholders and partners and will provide opportunities for input. And again, I think that can take a parallel path of the steering committees that we're used to seeing. There will also, just like the jail, be focused work groups. And this is where the subject matter experts will be engaged on specific focus areas, ensuring the perspectives and expertise are considered as part of the work. So again, Looking then more specifically at the graphic, you can see the project informants and that the steering committee, judicial staff, facility operations team, work groups, those subject matter experts are going to be involved in that. And I imagine if we are building out that next layer of the last graphic that we will do the same for this project. The project will be executed by a team to include the capital project manager, trial court administrator, a project coordinator position that will be in recruitment soon, And then again, the finance committee will be looking at all of the major capital projects to ensure there is coordination and planning. And then project leadership from your board and the leadership team will ensure that there is oversight and direction and that we're able to reach our project goal.

This slide summarizes the state program that makes the courthouse replacement funding possible. The Oregon Courthouse Capital Construction and Improvement Fund. was established in 2013, and it helps counties replace or update state court facilities, especially where there are safety, seismic, capacity, or access issues. The state uses Article 11 bonds to match county funds subject to approval by the Chief Justice and the Department of Administrative Services. The award criteria shown here are the same criteria we referenced on the previous planning slide, The criteria primarily look at structural defects affecting health and safety, whether replacement is more cost-effective than remodeling, and whether the new facility can co-locate with other state offices to maximize state matching funds. Previous replacement recipients, some of which are listed here, show that these projects often move through the state process over multiple cycles. It's not always linear. Washington County has a longstanding need, and in the recent Courthouse Facility Task Force ranking for replacement projects, Umatilla County ranked first and Washington County ranked second. The main point for today is that OJD and the Chief Justice are encouraging Washington County to stay in the current funding cycle rather than waiting until every planning detail is complete. The slide covers the state funding process at a high level. The dates are approximate and reflect a best-case scenario if the request continues to move forward without major delays. Applications are accepted once every two years. Having not yet begun planning, Washington County was encouraged to submit a placeholder request to the Courthouse Facility Task Force earlier this year. under the assumption that it would be updated for OJD's July 2026 budget deadline to help inform the Chief Justice's proposed budget request. If the request advances, legislative review would occur in the middle of next year. If bonds are authorized, OJD and DAS would later conduct a readiness review and bond sale. And with project funding potentially released in 2029, The important thing to understand is the timing gap. There's more than a two-year lag between applying and actually receiving funds. Because of that, we will always be one step ahead of ourselves in the state process. Applying now does not lock the county into construction on this timeline. It just keeps the door open while planning work continues. There are several off ramps. The request can be refined during the 2027 legislative process, meaning we can reduce our ask to meet us where we're at at that time next year. Then the next application cycle also opens in late 2027 for funds that would be available in 2031. And before any bond sale or readiness review in 2029, the county would have another opportunity to reduce or withdraw its request if we're not ready. So DAS would also review our project for readiness. and we'd have an opportunity to get out of that then. Each major decision point comes back to the board, project scope, site selection, local match decisions, design authorization, construction authorization, any voter supported strategy. It all require future board action. There are some limitations to the state funding. This slide's important because it really gets into the cost share math. State funds may pay up to half of allowable project costs for the state occupied share of local courthouse projects. Up to this point, I've heard several people say that the court or the state would pay for 50% of the courthouse no matter what, and that's not exactly true. It's up to 50% of the court's occupied share of the building. So the example on the slide shows the basic math based on very preliminary working assumptions. If the total project costs are $500 million, for example, and the state court occupies 80% of the building, their matching share would be $200 million and ours would be $300 million. However, the final funding split will depend on the space program, final occupancy assumptions, eligible costs, decisions about what county functions are included in the project. That's why our current numbers are preliminary. They'll continue to be refined as the needs assessment site planning, feasibility analysis and design work move forward. This also reinforces why the local match strategy is a separate and significant future board investment decision.

Yeah. So as we've mentioned, our developing funding strategy has been informed by the timing of the state budget process and the overwhelming support that we're receiving from OJD and other partners in the state who are encouraging us to submit iterative applications using best available data to support their own budget development. The primary goal of this funding strategy is to preserve options as long as possible while we continue developing the project for and planning for local match share local match strategy. Understanding that the applications we are working on now will not bear fruit until 2029. We are forced to forecast conditions three years in advance. And in 2027, we'll be doing the same thing for 2031. As we continue to use our planning funds that the county set aside in the capital improvement plan to develop scope and more meaningful estimates of schedule and cost, we will also be accounting for all of the unknowns and competing demands associated with the JACE project as it progresses. It is important to note, as Brian said, that we do have several off ramps over time as we proceed. The primary one is in 2027. It will be really important for us to have a better understanding of how this project is going to move forward because that's when we will have the opportunity to ensure that we have a second batch of funds coming in 2031 so that we can avoid gaps in the project schedule. The last opportunity for us to throttle back on the current ask will be in 2029 prior to their sale of the bonds. So the opportunities at hand right now are that we have quite a bit of momentum. We have interest and support from the state. The Chief Justice is in conversation and is expecting our request. We have also been encouraged to submit preliminary numbers and the amount can be refined in the future. The constraints that we are looking at is that we don't yet have our fully developed We don't have a site selected. We don't have firm costs or a local match strategy. And we are aware that the jail and community corrections will be competing for same resources, including staff time and finances. So the risks of a delay, if we are strictly adhering to a linear process that requires full readiness for each application, we could lose momentum creating delays now or gaps in funding availability in the future. We also, if the project is delayed, we will have negative impacts on the delivery of justice in Washington County. given that we are already at capacity and losing ground on case delivery. And if we do not keep our name in this hat and secure funds, we do run the risk of missing out altogether if the state can no longer support the 13-year-old capital improvement program that they have been supporting.

Where are we today? Staff is moving quickly and deliberately because the state process is moving on a fixed timeline, and we're trying to keep Washington County's place in line. First, the state planning funds have not yet been received. State budget timing caused delays, and we just received a draft funding agreement from OJD last month, which county council is reviewing. Second, the needs assessment is moving forward using county match dollars. As I stated previously, NCSC completed onsite visits in May with second round interviews planned for early August. We expect their final report and space program by November. Third, staff is developing early stage construction estimates. These estimates are being prepared without schematic design before the final needs assessment is complete, so they'll require refinement. The estimates are based on best information available now. our early NCSC projections, initial assumptions about court and county space needs, information from courthouse facility task force discussions, and what other counties are experiencing with courthouse construction costs. The cost estimate will remain a moving target until the project advances through design and ultimately construction drawings. purpose of the current estimate is to support a preliminary application and keep the state process moving, not to establish a final project budget. Finally, staff is preparing the application by updating the placeholder request submitted earlier this year.

And then after applying for construction funding, the next steps would be finalizing the governance and communication structure. We would confirm the state bond timing assumption with the Oregon judicial department, and we would continue the finance and local match strategy work. We would submit an updated application that would be informed by the results of the NCSC study and the next level construction estimates. We would plan for the feasibility and schematic design. And of course, these steps would begin in that regular and recurring cadence of board work, sessions, updates, engagement, and direction. This slide, similar to slide seven that Laurel presented in this presentation as well as the one you just saw in the jail presentation, also shows you the provisional timeline of future actions to include the coordinating phases, high-level decision topics, and proposed estimated timeline. As mentioned earlier, this project isn't quite as mature or advanced as the jail project is currently, and we're working through those steps. So later this year would include the project governance structure review and direction. And then of course, as you've heard, we will have the final NCSC report ready to share with your board. I know this sort of states the obvious, but until there is a new courthouse solution, we'll continue to wrestle with the fact that our courthouse is too small and not adequate to deliver justice services to our evolving community. So the staff recommendation today is to submit a state grant application by this Friday, July 17th, which is the deadline given to us by the state. As we've hopefully illustrated for your board today, the application would keep Washington County in the current state funding cycle. We'd be transparent about the early planning status. We will include a preliminary funding request that can be refined later. It will preserve future board decisions on scope, site, financing, and construction and will support continued coordination with OJD, DAS, finance, and government relations. That brings us back to the policy question. Does your board direct staff to submit a preliminary grant application by July 17th while the planning phase continues? And we're happy to answer any questions.

Okay. We're sharing the mic. So, commissioners, just like before, we each get five minutes, and if we have any remaining time, then we'll have board discussion on any remaining topics. Who wants to go first?

Great. I do support submitting. I understand we're in a place of kind of, I don't know if I'd call it uncertainty, but maybe discomfort with the order of things happening. That's just going to be the reality, I think, of this given the state funding. So I can accept that, but realize it may be a little messy and disjointed over not just now, but that's going to last a few years probably. I did want to make a couple comments and maybe one question or at least one comment or question on the importance of colocation. From my perspective, and you've already heard me say it once, but from a financial efficiency perspective, I think it's imperative that we figure that out. Even if it costs more capital-wise, I was thinking about how many FTEs, I don't know if the sheriff doesn't need to comment on this today, but you think about how many FTEs we might have, not now, because we're spending a lot moving people now, right? We're spending a lot in the form of sheriff's deputies and time and all that. For every five deputies on an annual basis in the current model, that's a million dollars. And that's not a million dollars once, that's a million dollars every year in the future. And I make that point because when we're making the decision about co-location and how much that may or may not save, that's the kind of analysis I want to see over total cost. If we can spend a bit more in capital, but then not be having to spend a bunch of additional operational dollars in the form of, I'm going to call it waste because that's what we would call it in sort of process improvement land or world is it's waste. It's you're spending to move somebody or something in a secure way when that could be done a different way by co-locating. So I absolutely want to see that kind of second level or third level analysis on on this and the costs associated with that in the long run, and make sure we're making the right financial decisions around co-location and the scoping of this work. The other thing I wanted to just explore a little bit more, and this is more for me and for the public to better understand the 50% cost share as described, like, you know, the DA himself is a state employee. And the DA function is a state function, but most of the assistant DAs are our staff. So is that an example of, like, is that one in or out? Out. Okay.

His office is out.

What are some things that are in besides the judges and their offices and courtrooms? Okay, so the courtrooms.

Public defense as well.

Is out or in?

Is in.

The DA is not, but the defense is. This is getting real clear, real fast. Yeah.

The defense actually, and correct me if I'm wrong, qualifies us for the higher level of match from the state. So in order to get that 50% match, we have to have somebody in addition to courts. from the state in the building and the defense attorneys would qualify.

Okay.

As someone in addition to court.

All right. Someday, somehow, not here today. You're going to have to go over that. Give me more details, but it doesn't need to be now. Thank you. That's all I have.

Thank you. Just to add that, so where are we today in that? What's the percentages? Yeah. I mean, you're asking the question, who qualifies on Sam Barrow?

Court House building. That's a good question. It's a little... We are for another time. Yeah, okay. We'll follow up in the next. Sounds good. We do have county department. Okay, who's next?

I can go. Great presentation. Thank you very much. I feel like your portfolios, you guys are busy. Two big topics today. I support... The question you posed to us, absolutely go forth. I really hope we get a good news back. When do you expect to hear, if you apply the July 17th, what is the deadline?

Well, there'll be little steps in between, but the final word will happen in September. Very similar to our

Wait a second. It's got to go through a whole next biennial budget. It has to go through the state legislature. Correct. We won't know until June 25th. Thank you. And even then, we got granted this past March, and we still don't have the dollars.

Laurel, were you meaning the OJD recommendations will be made then? Is that what you're saying is September?

Well, it's I have to look at the timeline every time I talk about it, because there are a number of steps along the way where we get information about it. You know, it has been included in the judges ask. And then similar to our process, it has to go to a next group of people who confirm that they're going to include it in the proposed budget. And then to the chair's point, it has to make it all the way to final approval in the next.

We've been through the cycle three times. Yeah. Yeah, just for the planning dollars.

Wow. And then the last question, I'll be quiet after this, is I noticed that the approval for the local match happens towards the end of, and I don't know why I'm only making eye contact. I should diversify where I'm looking. But I noticed that it's towards the end of 2026, but then there's the legislative, when you were going off the slide that had the STATE FUNDING PROCESS. I THINK IT WAS 2027. SO AM I MISSING A STEP? WE HAVE TO IDENTIFY OUR LOCAL. YEAH, THIS ONE. BUT ALSO SLIDE 17. YEAH. APPROVAL OF LOCAL MATCH STRATEGY LATE 2026. AND THEN THERE'S THE LEGISLATIVE SIDE OF THAT. So we have to have our local match strategy identified, then the state.

This happens before. Well, I think we will want to identify our strategy as soon as possible. So we are currently.

It has to have a credible legislative review in October.

So we're shooting for that date in order to be able to. Okay.

Yeah.

Like it or not, I think you're going to need to take this timeline and have it added on your slide. Does the two play together?

They do. That's all.

Thank you. Great. I'm yes on the request. I, again, underscore the fact that I recognize the relationship with the state that we have here. The other thing that is becoming really clear to me is just the interfacing of these two projects together. And I really appreciate the fact that you're bringing them forward on the same day. You started out, I think, earlier saying this is a lot for one day. It's my request that we continue when we talk about either one. TO TALK ABOUT THE OTHER JUST IN TERMS OF UPDATE BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH INTERDEPENDENCY HERE IN RELATIONSHIP TO HOW WE GO OUT FOR MONEY AND HOW WE LOOK TO THE STATE FOR MONEY AND THE CONVERSATIONS THAT HAPPEN. SO THAT'S A REQUEST THAT I WOULD MAKE AND ASK IF THAT'S SUPPORTED BY MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HERE. BUT THAT'S WHERE I STAND. SO THANK YOU.

I'LL COME BACK TO THAT.

Finally, and I'm a yes to this, my concern is that this is an optimistic time. And we are already, those of us who have toured the courthouse and certainly met with our consultants on the courthouse, it was pretty dire. This is a seven-year program, optimistically. Probability is eight or nine or 10 years, can we actually maintain services 10 more years with our current situation? And if not, should we not be developing a potential point as to what do we do? I'm just anticipating that there may be another facility opened up somewhere downtown here.

And we could... Emphasize the point. in the summer meeting with the judge, the legislators, and with the Chief Justice and the judges, they did not like the fact that I said that we weren't going to have a new courthouse out into the 2030s.

I'm just saying that I think as much as it is, I'd love to say, okay, this is a good timeline. Now we've got to come up with $500 million better than that. I'd really like us to have a plan B because that facility is just not functional for the temperatures, I don't believe.

I don't think it's plan B, though. You're calling it that.

It's really how do we survive? Yeah.

It's a both and.

Yeah, it is. You're right.

And we're doing some of it with our other courthouse spaces that we have, whether it's the Family Peace Center, whether it's the jail. I don't disagree. I'm just saying that we are shoring up.

Okay, so I'll go next. This is a really good update. Washington County has a number of big projects that need to meet community service demands. These are two really big ones. The jail and community corrections expansion and the courthouse replacement each illustrate the need. Both of these projects need to be planned with extensive site scenarios or site options. PROXIMITY RELATIONSHIP IS VERY CLEAR TO ME BETWEEN THESE TWO PROJECTS AND MUST BE ACCOUNTED FOR AND THAT INCLUDES THE IMPACTS TO OPERATIONAL COSTS. RIGHT THERE WITH YOU, COMMISSIONER SNYDER. I RECALL AT THE MEETING THIS SUMMER AS I JUST NOTED THAT ONE STATE SENATOR EXPRESSED THE EXPECTATION THAT THE WASHINGTON COUNTY courthouse site was already secured with the parking lot right there on First Avenue between Lincoln and Jackson Streets. Nope, it's potential, but certainly not certain. So I have five pink tags to get to. Slide five. In my AOC involvement, which included these courthouse task forces, Even though OJD rep Don Lemon, he was awesome. He's now retired, I believe. He spoke eloquently at the task force meetings on time and a project's visibility drops out because counties are working on the local match. He had to say that numerous times, but it still went against us. AOC commissioners participate, their viewpoint gets clouded, and I've spent a lot of time with them inside conversations about what is truly the nature of work here in Washington County. What it boils down to is new board, keep at it. You all have to do it together. As I mentioned in 2016, The county chose to not participate in the state court planning process, which led to mixed message politics. Our AOC peers discounted Washington County. Even though we made the course correction in 2021, it still held us back. Page nine on the project organization. Good project org, but now we need two new circles. One for selected major users, past jurors, city police officers, defense attorneys, prosecutors, sheriff deputies, and that includes sheriff deputies jail and sheriff deputies law enforcement. The second circle we need is the general community. THIS ALSO REMINDS ME WE NEED A COMMUNICATION AND ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY AND THAT OPERATIONAL PLANS MATTER. NO, WE WOULDN'T TALK ABOUT THIS STRATEGY IN THE OPERATIONS PLAN IN PUBLIC MEETINGS. ON THE STATE FUNDING LIMITATIONS, I ALSO WANT TO HEAR IN THE FUTURE ABOUT STANDARDS FOR DEFENSE SPACE AND OTHER MODERN FACILITY EXPECTATIONS FOR THE NEXT 50 On slide 17, approval of the local match strategy. What if we don't have enough information to commit to this is the question, though not for today. But we're going to have to come back to this. And there's a straight face test, and I'm not sure it passes yet. Slide 18, I would suggest that you take the Multnomah County courthouse cost and double it as worst case. They went through a process starting in 2013. Construction began in 2016. They used CGL architects. Construction cost $324.5 million, and it was completed in 2021. 17 stories, 460,000 square feet, 44 modern courtrooms, DA office space, detainee holding facilities. That's all public information I got by Googling. So am I ready on this policy question? No. The straight face test information needs improvement that's still needed to make the why now clear. But board governance and financial responsibilities requires us to participate and move forward. We have to participate. So, yes. But at this juncture, I have no clue what dollar you put in the December pre-app. I asked that be shared with us before today. Still don't have it. I need to know what the number is in order to be a firm yes for Friday. I don't know if it's take the Multnomah County case and double it or if it's $500 million. But I need to know because we're going to be held accountable.

I think the application that we submitted in December is $500 million was the placeholder amount that we put until we could.

You heard it here, folks. Me too.

$500 million is total costs or $500 million is our costs?

Total costs as an estimate.

That's a seven-month-old. We're not going to bill $44 million.

We will, I don't know because we don't have, NCSC is the one who is going to start us. 50 years. Correct. I know years.

Initial estimates are 30% growth in cases. And we're over the 50 years and we're five judges down now. So if you look at the total, we're looking at upwards of 30 courtrooms.

Growth and lack of what it is now, lack of capacity now. CORRECT. I GUESS JUST FROM A I LIKE THE CHAIR'S APPROACH TO JUST SORT OF BACK OF THE NAPKIN DOUBLE THE MULTNOMAH COUNTY AMOUNT LIKE I LIKE THAT GENERALLY BUT THERE'S PROBABLY A PER CAPITA RATE THAT MAY NEED TO BE APPLIED TO THAT TO SOME EXTENT ON AGAIN If it's 30 or 35 courtrooms, it's still not 44 or whatever it was in Multnomah County. It might be close.

30 more courtrooms or just 30?

Total. And this is just very, very preliminary.

That seems totally, it might even be a floor versus a ceiling because they have 44 now.

Honestly, the double might not be that far off in terms of cost. We're seven years out.

And don't we also have cases that are going to Multnomah County that should be here in Washington County?

Is that true as well, my remembering? I think the numbers there are really small, though.

I'm just wondering if you can choose what kind of file, but for criminal, I would have to... And the reason I'm bringing that up is that I think that raises that number a little bit, too. Not a lot, but...

So I'm assuming that... we would be going in with essentially what we consider a reasonable max, and then it would be refined down versus here and go up. So that's why I was thinking, okay, take their number. We know steel, concrete, glass, labor, professional services have all increased since their estimates. And as you say, that we're not gonna start the best seven years out. So I'm very comfortable with at least 500 million. But, you know, am I comfortable with a billion today? Makes me cringe. But I don't know enough to argue with you. Is it 600 million or 500 million? So you're going to have to use your best judgment and then We'll come back to this, I'm assuming, at some point later this, well, going back to your timeline, and I tagged the page because I love timelines. That approval of a local match strategy is where I'm assuming we'll have some further It's only a little bit more.

Of course, yeah. You know, I've been thinking while we're talking about this, what we're looking at is this future end date of maybe 8 to 10 years out here. In the interim, as Commissioner Willie was talking about, we have to make accommodations along the way for our own growth and lack of capacity. Do any of those costs, for example, remodeling A LOCATION LIKE WE DID AT THE JAIL. DID THOSE GET EMBEDDED IN? WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY I WOULDN'T ASSUME SO, BUT ALL OF A SUDDEN I'M THINKING, WELL, WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO THE END POINT HERE. DOES THE STATE CONTRIBUTE TO SOME OF THAT?

ARE YOU SURE THE ANSWER IS NO?

NO. HOW DO WE SHOULD WE BE LOOKING AT THAT AS PART OF THE BUDGET?

I think we absolutely should be looking at that. Facilities right now does have a short list of alternate locations. If we did have MAGIC and received a judge where we squeezed a courthouse into LEC, we do have a short list of other locations where we could do the same. It will be similarly spendy at around $5 million for each location.

THE STATE PROCESS DOES NOT ALLOW DOUBLE DIPPING OR HAS NOT ALLOWED DOUBLE DIPPING IN THE REMODEL NUMBERS AND THE NEW BUILD NUMBERS. AND THERE ARE SOME COUNTIES THAT ARE TOTALLY DECREPIT BUILDINGS.

SO I WAS JUST TRYING TO THINK ABOUT MAKING SURE WE MET OUR NEEDS ALONG THIS. BUT REMEMBER ON SLIDE 14.

it shows, you say pushes, I say it shows best case construction start date of 2031. So I added three years. At best, you're opening 2033 or 2034. So that's a lot of years out. I'll give another comment too on slide 10. I understand that the bonds follow the match, but I don't, I guess, is it just understanding Article 11, Q bonds is enough of what we're supposed to understand. And then on slide 15, needs assessment funded with county planning match, because that's only the planning match. Right. Different from the building match. Correct.

five million dollars for roughly what you say one courtroom at a time would cost at that time that's how they like right now that's

Correct. We just completed LAC one year ago. So it's a pretty...

I'm just trying to keep... I'll keep that in the back of my head.

And I think that's where we're going to continue to have the tension that you're all identifying here is OJD needs to continue to ask the legislature for judges because we are down at least five judges. And we, the county, will be faced with where do we put them? Yay, we got another judge. And also, oh no, what do we do? Where do we put them? And so that's going to be this kind of continued tension, pain point.

And I think part of that planning for sustainability while we try to get this off the ground and executed involves partnering with our state court, local trial administrator and others to think creatively about how we're using the existing space now.

So we have one more outstanding board question that Commissioner Treece brought up, and it is for the board. INTERFACING OF THE TWO PROJECTS TOGETHER. YOU PROPOSED THAT WHEN WE GET THESE MAJOR UPDATES THAT WE GET THEM IN SIMILAR WORK SESSIONS LIKE TODAY VERSUS DISJOINTED. IS EVERYONE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT?

NEW SPEAKER YES, WITH THE CAVEAT THAT THERE MAY BE A TOPIC THAT'S MORE DIRECTLY RELATED TO ONE OF THEM, AND I THINK WE'LL ACCEPT THAT. IN MY MIND, WE WOULD ACCEPT THAT, BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT IT HAS CONTINGENCIES OR DEPENDENCIES ON THE OTHER PROJECT, WE WOULD ALWAYS WANT TO BE HEARING ABOUT THOSE TOGETHER, TO ME IS THE POINT.

NEW SPEAKER SO IN CASE YOU DIDN'T HEAR A CLEAR YES FROM ME, I WAS YES WITH ALL THOSE TROUBLING THINGS ON THE SCREEN.

NEW SPEAKER IS MULTLOMAH COUNTY CODE LOCATED?

NEW SPEAKER I DO NOT BELIEVE THEY HAVE JAIL FACILITIES. THEY DO HAVE A STRONG JAILS ACROSS. It is near, yes, correct. And they do have holding facilities on site. I have toured that courthouse.

Holding facilities.

Yes.

And they have the DA offices are all in that building.

You know, I was just thinking about referring back to when I visited the Capitol, you take a train to get to the other side of either the House or the Senate or different buildings. Maybe that is the 21st century or beyond. state-of-the-art jail and courthouse co-located, where there is a train where you take it.

And all kinds of security comes with that.

Yeah, we dream about that.

We'll leave that to our expert team.

I think it's Zipline. That's even more fun.

Okay, anything to finish up this update today? Okay, good job. Thanks again. So at this juncture, here I misplaced my, here it is, we'll take a 15 minute break and reconvene at 10 past three for board and leadership communication. Thank you.

Welcome back, commissioners. We are now live.

Oh, thank you. I'm sorry. We're having a side meeting that shouldn't have gone that long. My apologies. Okay, we are back from break and in board and leadership communication. I also want to note that we have the final version of our letter to the federal OMB. So thank you for getting on that right away, Commissioner Snyder, with your return. So who wants to go first? Want to do leadership first? That's great.

So I only have one item to cover with you this afternoon, chair and commissioners. In your email box at 1.24 p.m. is an update on elections after public testimony at last week's Tuesday meeting. Ms. Latre, spoke and provided testimony regarding information provided by Dan Forrester, our then elections division manager during the June 23rd board work session. She communicated that there was incorrect or incomplete information provided to your board at that time. We wanted to provide clarity on the first item she identified as we believe more specific details not provided in the work session would be helpful. And this is regarding the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. So you will see that information within your email. I do want to state in review of the testimony that she provided, staff continues to believe that we follow the law and also Secretary of State guidance. Marnie Kyle will be responding to reply to all to your board and just affirming that. So that is in writing to your board. I WILL BE ATTENDING THE NACO CONFERENCE IN NEW ORLEANS FROM FRIDAY, LEAVING ON FRIDAY EARLY MORNING AND RETURNING LATE SUNDAY NIGHT WHERE I WILL BE PARTICIPATING IN THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FOCUSED SESSIONS AND THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BOARD MEETING DURING THAT TIME. AND MARNIE KYLE WILL BE SERVING AS ACTING. THAT INCLUDES MY UPDATE.

Having just flown through the New Orleans airport, and I just mentioned this to Commissioner Snyder during the lunch break, when there was a major flooding with a tropical storm that went through during the night, and my husband's cousin who lives in Baton Rouge let us know that One day last week, they had seven inches of rain in one hour. I just want to tell you that if there's such weather forecast, please prioritize your health and safety, and we'll just deal with the cost.

Keep your floaty in the car.

Flexible and nimble is the name of the game when traveling. Don't drive through floodwaters like we did. Thank you for those tips.

Courtney, anything from you? Yes, Chair Harrington. I just wanted to highlight, and Commissioners, I just wanted to highlight you may be seeing some more updates from our office about how our office is supporting our land use transportation planning department in local appeal hearings on development actions. This isn't something historically our office has attended those hearings only when asked, but we're now starting to staff them ROUTINELY, SO YOU'LL PROBABLY SEE A LOT MORE OF THOSE UPDATES. SENIOR COUNTY COUNSEL IS HELPING THE DEPARTMENT IN THIS WAY. AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, AS YOU KNOW, LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS ARE USUALLY HIGHLY CONTENTIOUS, ESPECIALLY THE ONES THAT GET APPEALED. SO I JUST WANTED TO THANK HER FOR THAT WORK AND LET YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE QUITE A FEW, ACTUALLY, BUT THEY DO TEND TO, YOU KNOW, SEEM LIKE CYCLES. SO JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT WORK AND THANK VAMSHI FOR HER GOOD WORK THERE. I ALSO WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW, AND I WILL SEND YOU AN E-MAIL LATER THIS WEEK, I WILL BE OUT OF THE OFFICE ON FRIDAY. I WILL BE SPENDING SOME TIME WITH MY FAMILY. AND W.D. COUNTY COUNCIL JASON BUSH WILL BE ON SITE AND AVAILABLE.

NEW SPEAKER NO MORE VOLLEYBALL.

NEW SPEAKER NO MORE VOLLEYBALL. NEW SPEAKER OKAY. BOARD COMMUNICATION, WHO WOULD LIKE TO GO FIRST? NEW SPEAKER I CAN GO.

mainly because I want to talk about the New Orleans brain and what I should be prepared for because I'm going to be out next week attending the NACO conference in New Orleans. So some suggestions my way. In terms of what I've been up to, this week I attended the WCCC had their meetings. It was a as always, good discussions. We had an update, Metro, their transportation plan, work plan, and how they're doing public engagement overview, very robust, which also means that this week is also J-PAC, so that topic will also come over to J-PAC's team in front of that team. But it was really good, good overview and detailed timeline and They indicated keep deliverables. No concerns from WCCC table to raise. And then the other topic was West Side Transportation Alliance update. That was also a great conversation. Jeff came and gave an update and an overview of what they're working on and their core values. And that was a really good discussion and led to some discussion from banks, mayor, and so forth. And then we got an update on Council Creek Regional Trail update. That was, to me, that was a good refresher. So I don't know if that's going to come up here as well on this board. It is if you bring it. Okay. Thank you, Chair. I will talk to the transportation team before I commit to them and see if that's – but I'll take that back, Chair. Thank you. And then Jessica did a great job of presenting to the WCCC the Washington County Resilience Transportation Funding Options. More specifically, the last decision that came out of this board, and there were no concerns raised over there, too. And then this week, we have JPAC. The only action item that It's going to be on JPACs this week. Obviously, there's a lot of informational topics, but I wanted to raise to you to let you know that the action item that will be in consideration is a resolution for the purpose of amending three I-5 Rose Quarter projects to the 2024-2027 MTIP to meet federal project delivery requirements. and no concerns there.

Do you still need me to attend that meeting?

No, because my flight is later. Okay. And it's online.

Okay.

So I'll be there. Okay. And then, yeah, so I should be fine. It's a Zoom meeting. You're off the hook on 7.30 a.m.

So are we supporting amendments?

It's an action item.

Yeah, there's no... We normally have to do it.

Okay. And then the other thing that I really enjoyed, because there's a really dynamic groundbreaking, was the Meadowlark groundbreaking. That was fun and a really inspiring project. Yeah, Matt. the co-founder of SIPA as well. And I'm blanking on the name right now, but that was a great project, great presentation. Commissioner Schneider and Commissioner Willey, you missed out. It was fun. Had a bit of back and forth with the chair. That was fun. Made everybody laugh.

Beto Lark is the Oregon songbird. Osprey is the Oregon raptor.

tell you, nobody will ever forget. Anybody that attended will always remember that. They say people won't remember what you say, but they'll remember how you make them feel. I mean, that whole back and forth made everybody feel good. So I think everybody will remember. I don't need my 20 seconds.

I can go. covering a couple things from a few weeks ago since I was on vacation last week and a little bit of the prior week. I did want to report June 25th, which was a Thursday, Explore Tualatin Valley and the Tualatin Riverkeepers both held a joint event at Tualatin Community Park. Some highlights for me about that that I thought were important is I was able to Get on a by Moran, which I didn't even know what that was before that day, which is just two canoes connected together I got to go down and look at the new location or the new expected location of the Riverside Park in Wallaton that will be and in the future so that's very hard to see from anywhere Yeah, oh cool. I got to see that from the water on the by Moran by the FOLLOWING DAY WAS THE FIESTA OF HOPES. I WAS GLAD I WAS ABLE TO ATTEND THAT AND HB 2017 TRANSIT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING. MONDAY THE 29TH, CHAIR, YOU WERE AT THE AOC PUBLIC SAFETY AND VETERANS STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING. I TRIED TO LISTEN. I COULD HEAR VERY LITTLE OF IT.

I'M SORRY. WHEN HE HAD TROUBLE, WE TEXTED. went and tried to get things fixed.

That's okay. I mean, I think it's just hard when it's in that kind of a room and there's a bunch of people in person and it's not really... And it's a large room. Yeah, and it's not a room set up like that.

We'd try, but the next time, if we have somebody in the room at the table, like I was, text.

Sure.

And I'll get it legislated. Because I will fix it. Interesting. Hybrid meetings only have value if they work. Yeah.

So I tried to track what was happening, but that was hard. So I'm glad you were there. And I heard you speak up a couple different times. On the 30th, Tiger City manager candidates, there was an open forum for the candidates. And I can tell you, you haven't seen it already. Brian Rager, the public works director, was hired as city manager. And that was announced, I think, last week.

He's been with the city a long time.

He has. 30-ish years. Yeah. So that was exciting. I had a couple other events that day, including one that I'll note because it'll be coming before all of us for discussion is that at the ESPD levy planning meeting, we've got some decisions that the commission is going to need to make soon around timing and WHETHER THIS BOARD OR A FUTURE BOARD ARE GOING TO BE MAKING DECISIONS. SO THAT'S GOING TO BE COMING FORWARD SOON AND I WANT YOU TO HAVE A HEADS UP ABOUT THAT.

NEW SPEAKER IS IT IN THE ROLLING AGENDA YET?

OKAY.

ALL FIVE OF US ARE HERE.

CONFIRMED. NEW SPEAKER AND WHILE I WAS ON VACATION I THINK COMMISSIONER FYE COVERED FOR ME AT THE JUVENILE CRIME PREVENTION MEETING. LET'S SEE, ON THE 15th, TOMORROW, I'M GOING TO BE MEETING BRIEFLY WITH THE COALITION SUPPORTING THE LABOR TOBACCO BAN. IF THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT CONCERNS THAT THEY MAY HAVE OR IDEAS, I DON'T EVEN, CONCERNS IS PROBABLY NOT THE RIGHT WORD. AND THEN FRIDAY OF THIS WEEK, I HAVE A BRIEFING ON THE DISTRICT ALIGNED COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WORK AND THEN PUBLIC SAFETY COORDINATING COUNCIL MEETING. SO THAT'S WHAT went on while I was either gone or going on this weekend.

If it helps you, I can't remember exactly when we had the work session on where the question came up on the tobacco ban. I can't remember her name. Great staffer for that education. They're doing education for a year for all the retailers. So they've known since 2022 election that they had that time to work through their inventory. So just in case that date helps. I appreciate it. Sean Cleave to know.

That's all I got. Thank you.

Perfect. Thanks. Who's next?

I want to start off my board communication with a thank you. I received a letter from a constituent expressing deep appreciation for our Veterans Services team for their hard work when they assisted him. I'm pleased to recognize Sean Files for his excellent work on behalf of Mr. Kuharik. Feedback like this means a great deal to all of us, and I'm grateful when the people we serve take the time to share their experiences. I understand that Mr. Kaharek's positive experience is not unique. So I also want to acknowledge the entire veterans team from Chetra and Yvette in the front of the office to our six veterans services officers working behind the scenes on claims that include Sean, Sage, Matthew, Kelly, Deanna, and Colette. They've all received heartfelt letters themselves from veterans for their outstanding work. and their strong reputation reflects their dedication and Vicki Horn's leadership. So thank you, and thank you for sharing the letter. Appreciate it. Wednesday morning of last week was the Executive Committee meeting of the Work Systems Inc. Board. We have a new Executive Director. Miriam Holliday is there. What's her first name? Miriam. holiday. She comes from Washington County, state of Washington, Vancouver area, works at Students Collaborative. Good job. She led the meeting. We've got some organizational changes that are underway and we're meeting budget issues. So if you hear of people leaving changes and you have any concerns, feel free to contact

Is that related to federal funding changes? Yes. Some of it is. And some of it is streamlining. Yes. Adjusting. Yes. Making things more effective.

I attended the virtual District 2 community engagement listening session along with Chair Harrington. There are a few other people there as well. And that process is moving along, so to speak. On Thursday morning, I also attended the Meadowlark Place affordable housing groundbreaking in Beaverton. And I just want to call out the fact that this is affordable housing, senior focused affordable housing with Head Start on the main floor. So it's really pretty, it's pretty cool. And Chair Harrington was one of the speakers and you did underscoring Commissioner Fai's comments. You did a great job. Thanks. Thank you for that. And last week on Friday, I started my vacation. I came in today for these meetings because I felt it was important. I am going to be going out of town on Friday of this week. So I'll be away. But if you need to reach me, I'll be available by phone. But I am not calling in to the next week.

You're up.

Okay. I'm going to save the best for last, which is the SHS stuff. Yesterday I met with some individuals out in Forest Grove. One of them has one of the sentry farms and wants to convert some of the acreage into, and he had met with.

There's a private park and then housing development.

Right. And it's going to be very, very cool. And so they've got, some specific things that they wanted to talk about. So I'll be meeting with him again and with Stephen to have a better conversation. But their design is really very cool. So at the appropriate time, I'll bring some of those drawings back in and show those to you.

Can I forward you the email from Carol Johnson?

No.

Grace, can you forward that email from Carol to Jerry and make that? I thought I did.

I haven't looked at it.

No, it wasn't today.

So I am going to the online district for community engagement listening session. I've attended the one in person now. I'll be listening to this one as well. That is tomorrow. Thursday I'll be attending the Aging and Veterans Services Advisory Committee for a few minutes to give them an update on what we're doing here at the commission. Also on Thursday is the Delores. AFFORDABLE HOUSING GRAND OPENING. LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT. THAT'S AT 10 O'CLOCK. AND THEN, YEAH, SO ANYWAY, I WILL BE THERE. THEY HAVE A SPECIAL GUEST SPEAKER, EVIDENTLY, THAT THEY HAVE BROUGHT FOR THAT. AND THEN LASTLY, IN THE SHS ARENA, YOU ALL HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM MOLLY KIND OF UPDATING EVERYBODY WHERE WE ARE. WE'RE TRYING TO STAY VERY, VERY FOCUSED. is doing as good a job as he possibly can, considering he's got 22 people around the table who want to do lots of talking and have other ideas. But we're pretty focused right now on KPIs, KEIs, and goals. And we have fortunately got Metro Council to agree to push back the vote on that until September. So, Jason, I will be gone for that. You'll be at that meeting on September 12th. And so, yeah, and so we'll be needing to get you up to speed a little bit, but we've got two more meetings. I think they're going to have a special meeting and then the August regular meeting.

Are you going to be at the regular August meeting?

I can't remember if I am here for that one.

Ernie told me maybe not.

I don't think so. I think that.

THAT IS ONE THAT WE DISCUSSED THAT YOU WOULD NEED COVERAGE, TOO, SO THAT THERE CAN BE IN-PERSON VERSUS VIRTUAL ATTENDANCE.

NEW SPEAKER I THINK WE SHOULD PUT THIS ON A BOARD AGENDA FOR EITHER AUGUST 4th OR AUGUST 25th IN ADVANCE OF THE SEPTEMBER VOTE.

NEW SPEAKER LET'S DO THE 25th BECAUSE THAT WOULD GET US THROUGH THE AUGUST 12th MEETING WHERE THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS.

NEW SPEAKER I CAN EXPLAIN WHY, TOO.

NEW SPEAKER SO THERE'S BEEN A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT'S BEEN ADDED. YOU CAN SEE IT IN THE LETTER THAT MOLLY SENT YOU. THE MAYORS HAVE MADE THEIR REQUEST TO GET SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL MONIES. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN SPECIFIC ABOUT HOW MUCH MONEY THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHERE THAT MONEY WOULD COME FROM, WHERE THEY WOULD USE THAT MONEY. THEY JUST SAID THEY WANT TO BE IN THE QUEUE. WE'VE KNOWN THIS BECAUSE IN FORMER PRESIDENT PETERSON'S GROUP THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AS WELL AND IT DIDN'T GO ANYWHERE. SO THIS IS ANOTHER FORMAL ASK BY THE MAYORS AND SO WE'LL FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THAT. AND THEN SOMETHING THAT I DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT, I'D NEVER HEARD OF, BUT I UNDERSTAND IT'S A GOOD BANG. CONTINUOUS QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS, CQI. Tanya is certainly familiar with this and so are others, many others around the table. They want to implement that. After we get through the KPIs and then after that is there's another project and then I think CQI is going to come back to the table. But there was plenty of positive support for that. So that was pretty interesting. So that's all I got. 20 seconds.

Great. Okay. I just wanted to bring the Washington County Economic Recovery and Resiliency Report to life. It really does a great job in the key findings and underscoring the importance of programs grounded in community voice. THE IMPORTANCE OF RESPONSIVE PROGRAMMING DURING TIMES OF CRISIS, THE VITAL ROLE THE WASHINGTON COUNTY SMALL BUSINESS AND WORKFORCE SUPPORT NETWORK PLAYED TO STRENGTHEN REFERRAL PATHWAYS, SHARE INFORMATION AND OFFER CULTURALLY RELEVANT SERVICES ACROSS THE COUNTY, AND HOW WE WERE ABLE TO USE ONE-TIME ARPA INVESTMENTS TO ACT AS A CATALYST FOR TRANSFORMATION, ENABLING organizations, aka CBOs, nonprofits, to reimagine operations, expand services, and enhance their ability to meet community needs. Something that maybe our CEOs with SHM would benefit from. Key finding. Just saying. Went to the PAB last Thursday. We went over the CDBG policy framework, which will be coming back for approval next month. As mentioned, the Meadowlark Round Opening Project, major project that the City of Beaverton and SEPA are spearheading. There was funding from everyone, fed, state, metro, Washington County, City of Beaverton, including child care, preschool, Head Start, via community action. This week, as mentioned, the Dolores Grand Opening. I've been riding by that project on my bike all through the construction, and they're leasing up, and it's really exciting to see the families before they got to move in show their kids just the project from outside. I'm on vacation from Friday through all of next week. Don't call me. I won't answer, but I will participate in the board meetings on Tuesday remotely. You're running the meetings, pal. Okay. I WILL BE AT THE DISTRICT 4 LISTENING SESSION TOMORROW NIGHT ON METRO RPAC. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE MEMO. I HAVE THREE THINGS TO SAY. THE MEMO WAS GOOD ON THE KPIs. I HAVE THE QUESTION OF WHICH KPIs KEEP THE CURRENT WASHINGTON COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTION. together, and that includes the city-based shelters and the nonprofits. So which KPIs keep the Washington County solution set operating and effective in the use of SHS money? That's not clear to me at all. We've got something that works now and is meeting the demand. If these new KPIs threaten that work, we need to know that sooner rather than later, or they're going to be saying, why didn't you bring that forward sooner? Another one is a question of what impact federal funding has, and that federal funding change is also affecting state money, which would or might affect county housing, whether it's affordable housing or public housing. And so part of the KPIs, but also the KEIs, since it's a connected system, there's a dependency there. If we want to get people out of our shelter system, we need to have affordable housing. But at the same time, vouchers are being ripped apart. On the next slides, on the draft five-year goals, The first one, reduce the length of time people experience homelessness. There's a belief that some individuals may want or need to stay in the homeless shelter program long term. And that goal seems counter for allowing that. It's a policy question. On the second one and the third one, there's a risk. of the lack of affordable housing and vouchers to these two sub bullets under number two. Number three, the second bullet still feels like a stretch goal to me. And yes, I can repeat this, we'll have an August 25th, but on the mayor's letter, YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH SOME OF THIS. WE ASK THAT METRO STAFF DRAFT APPROPRIATE LANGUAGE, BUT PUT SIMPLY, THE STREETS CANNOT BE AN ACCEPTABLE STOP IN THE CONTINUUM OF HOMELESS SERVICES. SO TOO WITH THE COUNTY. WE AGREE WITH THAT POINT. SO MAYBE THERE NEEDS TO BE A KPI FOR THE PRESENCE OF STREET LEVEL HOMELESSNESS AND THE NUMBER OF CAMPING BAND INFRACTIONS. Then later in their third paragraph, they want cities are eligible for funding by the SHS measure. Mayors are committed to remedying street level concerns that presently betray the public's trust. Well, we would agree with that, right? The problem is that if they want funding, Where we're going to have a hard stop is that it's going to lose SHS county funding for the system that's in their city. So their camping bans won't work. And I'm afraid this letter isn't making that connection. So they're meeting, Metro supposedly is meeting with them this Thursday, I think. So that's why I wanted to articulate this in a public meeting today. That's all. Thank you for letting me speak a little over. Okay. Well, sorry, we're a few minutes behind. Oh, no, we're ahead of schedule. I think we're ready to go into executive session. So I would ask for a motion to adjourn to executive session pursuant to ORS 192.660-2-E That's real property negotiations. I forgot to ask if staff would be ready. We're ready. We have a motion. Do we have a second? We have a second. All those in favor, please vote by raising your hand or saying aye. Thank you. Any opposed? The motion carries unanimously, 5-0. We're hereby in executive session, but we're going to hold any verbal anything until the room is clear.

Thank you.