City Council - Regular Meeting

K. I'll call to order the work session of Westville City Council for 03/16/2026 at 05:30PM. I'll start by asking council members for review of the agenda and items on consent. Are there any comments? Any concerns? Okay. Returning now to the work session. The Town Center urban renewal feasibility.

Good evening, Mayor O'Neill and City Council. Thank you for the opportunity to be here tonight and visit with you about urban renewal feasibility in Town Center. I'm joined tonight by Nick Poponak with Tiberius Solutions. He's our consultant on most things urban renewal in Wilsonville and helped us with the 2023 study and has also been instrumental in helping us with these revisions that we're gonna be talking through this evening. So he'll be here to really answer the technical aspects if those questions come up, and I'm certainly here to answer those questions more relevant to the programmatic aspect of Wilsonville Town Center urban renewal.

So tonight's agenda item is not asking for a decision on whether or not to create an urban renewal area in Town Center. Rather, we're asking for direction on whether to continue refining the feasibility analysis from 2023 in preparation for a potential ballot measure in twenty twenty six, November. Specifically, we're asking, should staff continue this work? And which set of development assumptions should guide the revised feasibility study, which would become the basis for a November vote? The council and the community have been talking about town center for a while now and town center urban renewal more recently.

As you know, the town center plan was adopted in 2019. And in 2324, the city convened the urban renewal task force, completed a feasibility study, and referred an advisory measure to voters in May 2024. That was measure three dash six zero five. That measure failed very narrowly by 54 votes. And since then, a new council has been seated, and this council adopted a goal to conduct education outreach about Town Center as well as completed outreach in the form of surveys, focus groups, and other channels to understand community sentiment about urban renewal and the town center plan more broadly.

Earlier this month, the council approved a communication strategy strategy to continue the education Earlier effort. So tonight, we're discussing potential revisions to the 2023 feasibility study in the form of alternate development assumptions and financial forecasting scenarios. To level set, I just wanna take a moment to discuss how the 2023 development assumptions were derived. I think that's an important important starting point. So you see a map on your screen with some handwritten notes, on the map and in the margins.

This was a scan from a working document from 2023, July 2023, where staff gathered to look at each property in town center, removing those that seemed very unlikely to redevelop in the next thirty to forty years. For example, the community college, town center apartments, city hall, and other newly constructed buildings. All others were categorized by town center subdistrict within the town center zone. Planning staff then created a map in geographic information systems or GIS in order to quantify and inventory acreage of potential redevelopment. Then the work from there is all in an Excel workbook, and this is where Nick and his team come in.

We went through the exercise of really taking a look at where redevelopment potential was, made some assumptions about a lot of different things, including floor area ratios, right of way dedications, unit sizes, and other factors that you see in the tables to your in the attachments to the staff report tonight. Nick and his team then take those assumptions and are able to translate that into forecast of financial capacity for a potential urban renewal area. The outputs of the workbook that Tiberius uses are those things that are most memorable, the takeaways that we often talk about or that have come up and become memorable here in Wilsonville more recently. Maximum indebtedness amounts and then projected residential unit counts has been a particular point of interest as well. What I'm trying to convey by walking you through our process is simply that the process we used in 2023 was thoughtful, thorough, and done in good faith.

It was guided with input from the urban renewal task force. But our assumptions were, as I noted in my staff report, bullish. So with that background established, let's discuss more specifically what we're presenting tonight and why.

Since 2023, we have a new

mayor and city council, and you've directed this work tonight. You're responding to concerns that have been raised by some members of the community. Several themes have emerged from recent outreach and the prior election. Questions about the 4,179 housing unit figure from the previous feasibility study, concerns about building height, concerns about residential density, and then just general interest in taking a more conservative approach to our development assumptions and redevelopment assumptions. So council's taken some steps.

You've directed a review of the code provisions allowing building height waivers. And tonight, we're presenting revised feasibility scenarios that assume less redevelopment. The purpose of this work is to test a new set of assumptions, evaluate financial sufficiency, and to potentially inform a November 2026 ballot measure. I'm gonna pause myself again here to reiterate a point that I think needs to be well understood as the discussion advances from this point forward. And I've captured a few quotations from the staff report on the screen summarizing, I would say a feasibility study is not a statement of what will be built.

And it is not a commitment about specific properties or a specific development outcome. Instead, it is simply an analytical exercise that asks one key question. Could redevelopment in this area generate enough tax increment revenue to support an urban renewal program, which generally includes infrastructure projects and sometimes real estate related activities such as the purchase of property and disposal for private redevelopment. So to answer this question, could redevelopment support a tax increment financing program? We use hypothetical development assumptions based on zoning, redevelopment potential, market trends, and conversations with developers who are building buildings in real life.

What we know is that actual development will almost certainly look different from than what we project. Property owners, private property owners ultimately decide what gets built and when. Indeed, the results of a feasibility study are illustrative rather than predictive. The revised scenarios that you have in your staff report respond directly to community feedback and new information we've gleaned through a couple more years of experience and dialogue with the development community, but both scenarios still use the 2023 analysis as a baseline or starting point. Compared to the 2023 analysis, the updated assumptions include less redevelopment overall in terms of acreage, lower floor area ratios, which is a function of the fact that we believe now that developers will voluntarily build more parking than what we had originally assumed.

We're assuming incrementally lower building heights because staff is working with counsel to evaluate the waiver process in code. We're assuming larger residential unit sizes incrementally larger, again, based off conversations with developers and pre application meetings, and then a slightly smaller ratio of residential space to commercial space in mixed use buildings. The two scenarios presented in the staff report both account for all the factors I just noted, but they differ in that they test different levels of redevelopment acreage. You can review attachment two to see tables that detail the differences in inputs between 2023 and what we used more in 2026, this month, this report, as well as the differences between the 10% and the 25% redevelopment acreage scenarios. This is small, and so for those that are viewing from a distance, I apologize, we can zoom in if we need to when we get to the discussion portion of this agenda item.

But briefly, scenario one shows a 10% reduction in redevelopment the lot

of

we've in output of what inputs we have assumed. 2,381 is not an input that staff has derived, but rather we've looked at the redevelopment potential, quantified that in terms of inputs and the number of residential units as an output of the Excel exercise. For maximum indebtedness in that first scenario, we're looking at $89,800,000 and that's in $20.26 dollars. Scenario two shows a 25% reduction in redevelopment acreage and that yields about nineteen eighty three residential units. In this scenario, the maximum indebtedness would be $78,500,000 again stated in twenty twenty six dollars.

So both scenarios assume less redevelopment and also less revenue than the original study. I also want to take a moment to call attention to the tables on the bottom of the slide. These are easy to overlook, but these tables demonstrate something really important to understand. Urban renewal maximum indebtedness can be a large figure, but those funds are not available the day after the plan is established. Rather, debt proceeds are only available as the increment in the urban renewal area builds over the lifespan of the urban renewal plan.

For example, under the 10% reduction scenario, Scenario one, we see that the urban renewal agency could only incur an estimated $3,000,000 in debt for the first five years of the plan. It's easy to get lost in the numbers with tax increment finance, but it's important to underscore what benefits urban renewal can bring to Wilsonville without raising taxes. Town Center today shows several indicators of economic distress, Large vacancies, underutilized properties, stagnant property values, and a widespread perception in the community that this area is struggling. For more than a decade, residents have consistently said they want a vibrant downtown, a gathering place that functions as the heart of Wilsonville. Urban renewal is a tool designed specifically for situations like this.

It allows the city to invest in itself, invest in infrastructure, unlock private development, and reverse the pattern of disinvestment. It helps to create the kind of town center the community has repeatedly asked for. Without public investment in town center, we're likely to see a frustratingly slow pace of change in this area. Without a dedicated funding source, the vision of the town center plan is very difficult to achieve without raising taxes. The Town Center Plan identifies a set of infrastructure investments needed to unlock redevelopment, including a main street extending north to south, acting as the focal point of Town Center with ground floor restaurants, and entertainment, parking solutions which could include a parking structure, intersection upgrades on Wilsonville Road to improve traffic flow from what we experience today, local streets and the relocation of underground utilities, the extension of Quartzsite Drive to the West and funds to catalyze development and support business retention and recruitment.

In the previous feasibility study from 2023, the urban renewal share of these projects totaled about $101,100,000 or $107,600,000 inflated to $20.26 dollars Under the more conservative scenarios presented tonight, the total borrowing capacity would be lower. What that means is that not every project could necessarily be funded, but staff still recommends keeping the full list of projects. This is common practice in urban renewal throughout the state as the list of projects functions more like a menu of potential investments that can be implemented over time based on opportunity, partnerships, community priorities, and available funding. Tonight, staff is seeking direction, not a final decision. Specifically, should staff continue refining the feasibility study in preparation for a potential November 2026 ballot measure?

And if so, which development scenario should guide that work or should staff test a different set of assumptions? Your direction will allow staff and consultants to refine the analysis, continue community outreach, and prepare clear information for both counsel and the voting public. To stay on track, work sessions on April 6 and April 20 could be used to further refine the feasibility analysis exercise. Ideally, council would provide direction on a preferred scenario by April 20. That timing allows adequate time for a comprehensive revision to the feasibility study document and potential ballot measure language.

With that, staff is seeking direction on how you would like us to proceed. We're happy to answer questions and review any of the tables included in the staff report attachments.

Thanks for the presentation, Matt. You mentioned that through further conversations, developers said that they would voluntarily increase parking. I guess how I'm trying to wrap my head around that. I have to go to the first example we have, which is the Sherri's Building that's permitted and has plans that anyone can view on our website. And that I believe it comes with it's 114 units and 53 parking spaces. So is that kind of emblematic of what we're thinking for the future development or more or less?

Yes. So that project we used as a case study, and it influenced a lot of the assumptions we made in 2023, which led to those higher unit counts and those higher densities. We've had a few preapplications meetings since then. The one that comes to mind specifically is on the Kaiser property to the north of us here. It's about seven acres, and they were proposing a mixed use development with multifamily.

The parking ratio on the Sherri's redevelopment project is about 0.5, about space for every two units. For the project on the Kaiser property, they were proposing a ratio above one, one point two, 1.3, something like that. They made a strong case for saying that in a suburban environment like Wilsonville, it's tough to secure financing with parking ratios under a one point zero. And so they sort of taught us in a way that although developers could park a property under one point zero, it would be less likely that they would do that.

That's good to know. Going back through the multitude of work sessions that have been held on this in the past, I went and I watched pretty much all of them. There was a conversation around the vertical housing development zones. And I guess looking at those, I came away with more concerns about the VHDZs than I started with. In one of the work sessions, you mentioned that suburban mixed use projects are actually riskier on the riskier end of projects and that it seemed like giving out these gifts to developers of 80% tax abatements on the buildings.

And then if they have one floor of affordable housing, then they also get an 80% tax abatement on the land, which is a new thing that I learned today that it's gifts on gifts. Is that something, I guess it's a question for counsel whether or not counsel is willing to look at these vertical housing districts or development zones again because an 80% tax abatement, I mean, can speak to it on the TIF front. What does that do to getting that TIF rolling?

Yes, it's a really good question. I might ask Nick to join me in answering that question, but it is something that we accounted for in our model and it does have an impact on our increment revenue for sure. And so that is the trade off. Do we get some redevelopment and part of the revenue or less or no development and no revenue? It's kind of the calculation. When I I I would have to go back to that meeting and see what the exact context of the conversation was. But in calling a suburban mixed use project risky, the residential component doesn't usually meet that description, but the commercial component.

Right.

And so developers are looking for help to support the operational costs or revenues depending on how you look at it for the building. So it's not a front end relief, but it helps them through the operation of the building to make it more solvent. That remains true. And yeah, that's the primary reason for having a VHDC in Wilsonville is to try to give developers more a sense of security that even if the commercial space doesn't lease up right away, that their building will still operate profitably. The other thing that I would say, you know, I'm sensitive to the perspective of incentives being handouts to developers.

I'm not a huge proponent of incentive based economic development, generally speaking. That's just a personal opinion. But if an incentive is being used to make an infeasible project feasible, that seems justifiable in my mind. Whereas if we're talking about just adding gravy to something that already pencils out, that's probably not what we want to be doing. I believe the VHDZ in our situation falls into the first category where we're pushing projects from infeasible to feasible.

If the market dynamics in Wilsonville become such that the VHDZ incentive is no longer needed, I'd from a staff perspective be highly supportive of doing away with program. But I don't think that we're in that position now and we certainly don't have enough knowledge or experience to know if we're in that position today. Nick, is there anything you would add to what impact VHDZ has on tax increment?

Yeah. I I support everything Matt said, and I think it's a great question to ask. I think we're seeing a lot of communities. You know, I do I do work. I think I have 30 active communities I'm working in right now. A great many of them are asking those same questions. You go back in time, ten years ago, there were very few tax incentive programs focused around getting housing built. And the region the the the nation, but the region realized that there was a significant housing shortage. Everybody wanted to do everything they could to incentivize more housing. I think folks are starting to look at that now and say, alright.

Can we dial this in a little bit better? Can we make sure that we're still generating the property tax revenue that we need as the lifeblood of these public services that we provide. So lots of folks are looking to make sure they've got the right balance. As Matt was saying, you know, one of the things that will help prove that whether or not vertical housing incentives are needed or not is when you get a few of these projects to actually come out of the ground. So if your town center does have completed projects, they don't just have hypothetical rents on a spreadsheet.

They have real rents that they're charging to real households. And that's gonna set the market. What is market rent for a new product mixed use development in town center? Once that rent has been determined, that's gonna really shift the financing discussion for the private developers that are looking at town center. If folks are able to get market rents that are at a certain price point, they're gonna have projects that are gonna be penciling without additional incentives warranted. The early adopters, the first folks in the door are often setting that that price point, and their lenders and financers are a lot more skeptical that they're gonna be able to get the numbers that they're hoping to get. But once you have a few of those projects in here, the market is set and you could find that there there certainly is no longer a need for these types of incentives.

Okay. City Council President Berkey.

Yeah. Thank you for the report. It's helpful. So the question on the table is, do we prefer scenario one as opposed to scenario two? And so can you help me understand the advantages of one over the other? Or is it just pretty much reduce the number of residential units because of the outcry that we've been hearing from the public?

Yeah, I don't know if I would frame it as advantages, but the council has expressed a desire to be responsive to what has been expressed. So if they're a disadvantage, it is certainly that the council is being responsive. In terms of other considerations, these scenarios tonight have less financial capacity than what was presented in 2023, but that may be appropriate given that we have learned a little bit in the in the interim period. So I mean, to state the obvious, the 10% reduction scenario, scenario one has more financial capacity than scenario two to the extent that you see that as an advantage, then I would say scenario one is the more advantageous plan or scenario.

Matt, to to add on to that, the previous ballot result, 54 votes, you know, showed the community basically completely split on the issue. In my experience, in literally hundreds of other urban renewal areas that we've worked on, the community rarely has a strong opinion about urban renewal. The community has an opinion about the vision that urban renewal will implement. And so we see that the community was split on that vision the way that it was pitched the last go around. So communicating a different vision for the downtown here is really what these different alternatives are looking at.

Neither one of them controls the future, but it's setting those expectations. What is the community planning for? What is the city planning for in terms of the amount of units here, and which one of those visions do we think is going to be the one that the community most wants to see take place here. And, of course, balancing that against the financial capacity. Because the financial capacity is the one binding element of of picking one of these alternatives right now.

You're not you know, you can't control exactly how many units get built in the future or which projects are funded in which dollar amounts at some specific point in time. But the choice here will determine what the financially feasible maximum indebtedness is, and that is a binding figure. So that that's really what you're choosing is the the balance of vision versus financial capacity.

Councilor Scholl?

Two questions. One regarding parking. First regarding parking. Is the parking, you know, there's there's been a lot of discussion about that and how much and not enough. Is the parking external to the structures? Or is it actually internal to the structures or both? You know, where the parking might be on a couple of basement floors versus surrounding the units?

I want to make sure I understand your question. I think your question is where is the parking going to be in the future Town Center?

Perfect.

So it's gonna be a little bit of a mix of everything. There will be ironically more streets in the future town center to the extent that the town center plan is implemented. There will be more local streets that will all have, with rare exception, on street parking, whether that's angled or per the word I'm looking for? Parallel parking. Thank you.

There could be instances where a developer elects to put it underground like we see in some cases in Lake Oswego. That's usually cost prohibitive, especially in a suburban environment, and that may be where urban renewal could help offset some of those costs and bring an infeasible project into that feasible status. There could be an allocation of funding at some point in the future to a city owned parking structure. And then I guess the fourth source of parking is that developers will put it on-site either in a structure or on the surface or sometimes they call it tuck under where spaces that come partially under the building. It's going to be a mix of just about everything you can imagine.

So based on design? Based on design, yeah. But it's important though to remember what what I was stating earlier and that is that developers are saying that in order to secure financing for projects in a city like Wilsonville, that's not Downtown Portland. They're gonna wanna provide a fair amount of parking for their residents or for their customers on-site. Perhaps more than we had originally anticipated in 2023.

Incentives are the incentives. Adjusted over time? The incentives that are awarded early on, are they adjusted over the time over the next twenty or thirty years? And then the incentives themselves, are they adjusted from what someone early on in the project might get versus someone, you know, twenty years down the line? Are they modified, adjusted? You know, how does that work?

Are you speaking specifically about the vertical housing incentive? Yes. So the vertical housing program is authorized through state statute and it's administered locally. So hopefully that makes sense. I'm not speaking in too jargon. It's allowed by state law. It used to be managed by a department. I can't remember which, at the state level. It's been since decentralized to cities to operate on their own. With that decentralization, they also allowed cities to create some of their own rules.

To that extent, we have influence over the program, but the baseline structure of the incentive, how much is offered and for what and how you calculate that incentive, that is in statute. And unless it's changed in statute, we can influence that locally. Either now or at any time in the future that I'm aware of. Unless again that statute were to change.

Okay. So there's from a if I understand what you're saying from a local perspective, there's not that much flexibility in a in in the in the incentive system. Correct?

Yes. We influence more the rules for eligibility, project eligibility. But once a project is eligible, it's really the state financial framework that is applicable. Alright. Anything you would add to that?

The only thing I would say is that these incentive programs in our forecasts, they're static. In the real world, they change frequently. And I I mentioned there are a lot of communities out there that are looking at fine tuning the way their incentives work. So I wouldn't be surprised if there was a collaborative effort at some point in the future to give cities a little bit more leeway to dial in these incentives to fit them better. Right now, it's you know, once you're in the program, the magnitude of the incentives, the the timing of the incentives, that's all set by the state. It would be nice for cities to have more control over that, and you aren't the only ones that would find that beneficial.

Thank you.

Councilor Cunningham.

So to clarify, does the state sets that 20% per floor? Right. Okay. I guess getting to the question that you came here to ask tonight, you know, my criticisms of this all along have been that the plan that was approved in 2019 says 1,600 residential units. In a work session or a council meeting, I think it was four weeks ago, I asked, well, what can we do to ensure that the plan that we've promised our citizens is the plan that we deliver?

And the answer I got was basically, there's not a lot we can do about that, that there's legal issues and takings issues and things like that. And so when we look at this financial feasibility study and the numbers as if for anybody who's interested, there's all the all the meetings are linked on this agenda. You can go back and you can watch all the work sessions. And you can see that at the beginning of 2023, I think we started with somewhere between 18,500,000 to $79,000,000 at the low end and $79,000,000 at the high end of capacity of $20.23 dollars to take on. As that year went on and as we got to September, that number jumped to $101,000,000 in capacity, which also happened to be the maximum amount of indebtedness that we could take on requiring concurrence from our taxing districts without going back to our fire department, the library, schools, all these different taxing districts and ask them for concurrence to let us take even more on.

Am I right so far? All right. We'll come.

I'll just say it didn't happen to be that number. Financial forecast was constrained by that limit on maximum indebtedness. So if that limit didn't exist, we would have been forecasting greater potential capacity in that same time frame that was limited by that number.

Right. Yeah. I remember I remember that being said as well that it was actually could have been higher unless we went for concurrence. If we got concurrence, which was also said that it was a political hill to climb to try and go get these taxing districts to give us the go ahead. So that number was the maximum number.

But looking at that, though, that's quite a jump. And when the I understand that this is supposed to point out what could possibly occur. But when we can't give our citizens any kind of assurances that that's not what occurs. When there is the possibility that we get to 1,600 and we just keep right on rolling. And the next thing we know, we're we have as many people in town center in 100 acres as we do in Villabaugh on 500 acres.

You know, I don't think that's the kind of town center that the residents ask for. Residents Our were very clear in the survey and very clear in the focus groups that they're ambivalent about housing in town center. And this whole plan centers around implementing mixed use development, which is a riskier type of development. And, I mean, heck, it it has it has higher costs based on what has to be built. It has to have certain things that are built in it because you're mixing commercial with residential, so you need those extra fire barriers.

They need to be podium types construction instead of wood frame construction, various things that are gonna drive up these housing costs. And as our citizens have talked about having affordable housing and things like that, I mean, some of the numbers that were presented in those twenty twenty three meetings too were looking at $400 per square foot of construction, and that's before we even get to land costs. The the we've heard conversations about people wanting homeownership. And based on the numbers that are in this agenda packet, I mean, condos are right at the bottom, right along townhomes. I don't see a lot of homeownership in this plan.

So I don't think that it's accurate to say that this town center is what our residents asked for. I know that we did an incredible amount of outreach back in the late twenty tens, but outreach doesn't equal a proper conclusion. And I think that the outreach was great. The conclusion that was drawn from it was not quite as accurate as many people in town would have liked. And so I mean, if there's any way that the financial feasibility study can help to limit to ensure that we get closer to that 1,600 unit, I guess that's a long way of saying that I'm fully in support of option number two, which call it says that 1,900 is a little bit more of a feasible number.

So that's where I stand.

Okay. You, Councillor Cunningham. Any thoughts? Okay. Let me weigh in.

The so I know, Matt, I'm just looking at Item A, you know, which is the summary of units of new residential construction. So like Councilor Cunningham has mentioned, you know, I was focused on I have committee members saying, well, how come there's not more no more condos? But as I understand is we're looking at the best case from a financial best use look today of the best value that this has for development. So right now condos are facing a lot of uphill battles. Is that correct?

Based on developers don't really want to put them in. There's some issues problematic for liability. Is that correct?

Yeah. Oregon has some unique laws that frankly need to be addressed, but they are precluding the widespread construction of condominiums throughout the state of Oregon. And it has to do with contractor and developer liability after the project has been built. There was a recent law passed in the 2025 session that reduced that period of liability from ten years down to seven, but the market hasn't really adapted to that. We're still seeing a very slow pace of construction of condominiums.

It's a liability issue for developers. It's a liability issue for insurers who are either offering really expensive insurance or not offering policies at all. So until that's all sorted out, this model reflects that those policies will continue and condominium construction will continue to be slow. The units we have forecasted, we forecasted to be built down past ten, fifteen years, assuming that maybe that these things will get sorted out and we'll see more condo construction. But, yeah, I've emphasized that this is not a prediction of the future, but we do at least try to make assumptions based on what we do know.

And what we do know right now is that condominiums are a hard product to build and developers are not building them. Certainly, they're allowable and to the extent that policy has changed, think we could see a lot more. We just don't have any assurance of that right now.

Okay. Thank you. From my perspective, I'm looking at this, I can understand the condo issue. I see the apartments. I've noted a dramatic drop that from the 2023 projection 4 thousand one hundred seventy nine to the two options.

And there's a lot of there's a lot of confusion on that 4179 back in the day. You know, I'm all about making sure like OIT students have an opportunity to live here without the commutes. It's a huge issue with OIT. I'm also would like to see more workforce being able to live here and I can understand we need some apartments. To Councilor Cunningham's point though, we don't know at all what's going to happen years from now.

This is our best guess and we're trying to adjust things. And I think the options presented are definitely direction from what I've heard from community members. And I understand that councilor Cunningham has community members that speak with him. I know that other council members including myself have other folks that were one like that first option originally the four one hundred seventy nine and others that would like to see different scenarios. Ultimately the problem is that each time we look at this and take more time, there'll be more people that want to see different things.

We have to take a snapshot and make a final decision because if we keep postponing this, everybody wants a town center. And if there's a discussion of trying to do the town center plan all over again, we're delaying development for years to come. So to me this appears to be the better approach. The 10% rejection to me seems more feasible, but I'm still like input from the other counselors as well. Counselor Skoll.

So and the mayor reminded me of something in his discussion. During a meeting with with president of OIT back in December. And one of the comments that he made during my discussion with him was the lack of affordable or apartment housing in the area, you know, for students and all that and everything. And I can't remember what the percentage was, but it was probably about 60 to 70% of the students that attend the school actually live outside the area. So I think that, you know, with that said, you know, if we want to draw other educational opportunities to the city and employment opportunities to the city, I think that we should consider the higher number.

So I would the year. We're

made in from a urban planning background, I see the town center as the heart of the city that everybody's been talking about. But also a ideal location to have housing because it is close to transportation. Transportation. It's It's close close to to our our city services. It just makes sense. So I would also I'm I'm thinking about the value of a dollar. I would like to get as much money for the urban renewal as we can. So I would vote for scenario one with the maximum indebtedness of $89,800,000

you. Councilor Cunningham.

I guess for me, and I guess the question I would have for my fellow counselors is, what's the worth of a promise of our city? Our city put a plan out with the full glossy brochure that showed all the pretty pictures, all these maps and all these things and promises this emerald chain and this pedestrian bridge and all these things and said 1,600 residential units. I don't know why we'd shy away from a number or go towards a number that puts us further away from that idea. If 1,600 was the number, then that should be our aim and our goal and that should be what we're looking at financing redevelopment around. We shouldn't be looking at a pie in the sky kind of idea to get just get get more and get more and get more and pull pull extra maximum indebtedness to do extra projects and incentivize developers even further to build even more and come in and turn our town into their playground to build five story buildings.

86% of the what was it? 86% of of town center, not not town center. Trying to remember the vertical housing district development zone numbers. But I believe it was out of out of the the areas where five storey buildings could be built, 86% of it falls in a vertical housing development zone. Is that right?

I don't know off the top of my head.

I saw it in a work session earlier, but I know 86% was a number that dictated how much of that could be used to give incentives out. If our promise was 1,600, I'm not sure why we'd get towards a number of looking at redevelopment that's closer to 2,400. That's a bait and switch. And our citizens are not asking for a massive Trojan horse of residential hyperdensity in in Town Center.

So your position is you like the 25% reduction?

I mean, I think that's the only answer if we're going to be honest about what the original plan was.

Okay. So I you know, Kelsey Cunningham, we all can agree to disagree on things. I see that the promise made by the community depends on who we're listening to. And I understand that there are people that like the original plan and the urban renewal district as originally put out the vote. I don't tend to look back at that vote even though people keep saying to me it only lost by 54.

To me, it was a loss and that's all that matters and you start over. And then you take further reading. I do know that I have heard very strongly by the community that they wanted the Town Center Plan implemented and to move forward. And the urban renewal district is the only feasible thing in a way that allows us to do it. And so we have to make a decision. So my concern is that if we take too much reduction in some of the infrastructure and part of the plan that was originally devised can't be funded. Is that my understanding?

That's right. I mean the list of projects and the dollars that we assume they will demand exceeds the amount of maximum indebtedness in either the 10% or the 25% scenarios that we have here. So I think there's a couple of different ways you can look at this. Maybe I should I'll just stop there. If you want me to say more, will. But if not

Go

ahead. I I think you could look at these scenarios and make an argument that they're insufficient. I think that you could look at these scenarios and argue that they're more than sufficient. It's a matter of perspective. It's a matter of political viability as well. If something fails at the ballot box, then we have none. No maximum indebtedness. There is an opportunity for amendment at some point in the future that could be sub the subject of a binding vote depending on what happens in May. There's a lot of what ifs involved with all of this and a lot of calculations that have to be made both financial and and political. Yeah.

If the goal is to fund all of the projects, then neither of these scenarios work. But if the goal is to make meaningful progress toward the implementation of the town center plan, both of these would work.

Councilor Cunningham?

So we're looking at these three different options, 2023, 1025%. 2023 would offer a maximum indebtedness of $107,000,000 now, 106,000,000?

Inflated to $20.26 dollars

Right.

These other two options would have lower amounts. Why would the maximum indebtedness go down in these two other scenarios?

Go ahead, Nick. Nick, is his area of expertise.

The maximum indebtedness is is based on two things. One is the maximum limit that you can impose based on the frozen base of the area. And that wouldn't change based on how much new construction you're assuming takes place. But what changes is how much revenue you're forecasting over a reasonable time frame. So I think we said it thirty years of revenue collection.

This is showing how much maximum indebtedness we believe you could incur and pay back within that time frame. If you had the the lower amount of development, you could keep collecting TIF for a longer period of time. You could go for thirty five or forty years. There are plenty of communities that have done so, and you could still achieve a higher maximum indebtedness with that longer time frame. The key is that when you adopt an urban renewal plan, you have to make a finding that the the maximum indebtedness is financially feasible.

And so we wanna be able communicate to the public the expectation that this plan will be around for a certain number of years. And so if you chose a scenario a development scenario with fewer housing units, but you still wanted to have a $100,000,000, $107,000,000 maximum indebtedness, we would wanna make sure we're telling the public, we think it's gonna take forty years of collections to hit that instead of thirty years. That's not there's nothing preventing that from happening. We just looked at a thirty year timeline as what has been sort of the the sweet spot of collecting revenue long enough to make a difference without going overly long that you're really wearing out your welcome.

And so where does the revenue come from in these scenarios?

It's it's all from the increase in assessed value of properties inside the urban renewal area boundary. So it'll be the growth in tax revenues within Town Center.

So every time one more residential unit gets built, that's more revenue we get? Correct. So the quickest way to get there is to overbuild that residential those residential units. That gets us there in thirty years. If we build 4,179 units.

Well, I I want to just be careful with wording here. It's not just residential units, it's development in general that develop that builds the tax base. There's there's a what if scenario. We've we've talked about what if scenarios where residential development goes through the roof. There's also a scenario where it it the market dynamics are such that not very much residential gets built and more commercial gets built. That's also a possibility. But no matter what gets built, any any new development on top of the frozen base when the plan is established is what generates the tax increment revenue that we use to pay down the debt.

Right.

So it's not just a function of residential units. It's all development.

Sure. It's residential units and commercial space and all that. When you but when we have a number like 4,179 to get to that $100,000,000 threshold, I mean, that's I mean, I've always thought and I've always I've always gone about is if you want the answer to a question, follow the money. And money talks and BS walks. And here we have these things and and it's it's out here in plain black and white that the more development that occurs, the more of that indebtedness we get.

It's to me, it's a vicious cycle that ends up catapulting us well past sixteen hundred. And again, you talked about the market conditions and things like that. And I know from previous meetings I've had with you that the buildings wouldn't be permitted if the infrastructure to isn't there within two years to back up that development. But if we're generating the revenue and we're able to take out those extra loans because things are rolling, then there's no stop to it. Then it's it's it's it's it's a machine that will propel itself from the way I look at it.

And think that we have to be very honest about the the revenue is created by the development and the development will build a town center that our citizens haven't asked for. So that's I don't know if I if I've swayed anyone up here, but I think our promise was 1,600, and none of these scenarios say 1,600. And, you know, I'm even willing to even settle on the 25% because it's the closest one.

Anybody else? I'll just say I appreciate Councilor Cunningham's thoughts and all council's thoughts. I think, again, I think we all as a member of council all represent the community. We all hear from the community. So we all have different people that are conveying their concerns. From my perspective, the key thing that appears to be universal is that we need to move forward and get the Town Center plan actually moving forward and with an urban renewal district approved. So I hear 10 is by and large what I'm hearing. Is there anything else you need from us?

Not unless there was a desire to revisit an alternative scenario. But with if if the guidance is 10%, then we would come back in April to look at projects and how those line up with an amount of indebtedness associated with the 10% reduction. The boundary confirmation is simply an up down, yes, that looks like what we're expecting. And then at that point, I think we'd have what we need in order to do outreach and prepare ballot title language.

Okay. So let me understand. If we go the 10%, you'll come back with showing us what impacts that 10% has in more detail. Am I understanding that correctly or

did I?

What do you mean by impacts, Meyer?

Well, you mentioned that taking reductions always will impact development. So and the scenarios what we have money for and what we don't. So you invited us to come up with another scenario. I'm assuming it'd be interesting to see something maybe more than 10%, but less than 25% from my perspective as an option just to see where that is. I'm willing to see that as an alternative.

Okay. I don't want to be flippant about this, but what's the number? Well,

you have 10% reduction in 25%. You take an average of the two at 17.5%. It would be interesting to see the split between the two. I'm not suggesting that's where I would go, but it would be interesting for me to see how that pencils out. That make Certainly.

Yes. So we can take that and come back to you in April and go from

there. Next is building code adoption.

Okay. Technology works. I love it when that happens. Good evening, Mayor O'Neill and members of City Council. My name is Dan Carlson, and I service city's building official.

I'm here tonight regarding the adoption of resolution thirty two fifty two, which proposes to locally adopt the twenty twenty five Oregon Structural Specialty Code, the twenty twenty five Oregon Mechanical Specialty Code, the twenty twenty five Oregon Energy Efficiency Specialty Code and the twenty twenty five Oregon Fire Code. This is a fairly routine code adoption process that we have to go through from time to time. The staff report covers this topic starting on Page 70 of your council packet. Tonight, we'll hit on these four areas: the resolution, local code add backs, stakeholder outreach and perhaps in the interest of time, I may need to cut very brief the highlight of a few code changes. So by way of some background, there are six statewide codes regulated by the State Building Codes Division, or BCD.

These codes get revised on roughly a three year cycle. Because of the work involved in updating codes every three years, the state splits the code adoption into a staggered schedule. The first three codes are adopted, then in roughly twelve or twenty months, the next three are adopted. The fire code adoption is overseen by the Oregon State Fire Marshal's office, and the fire code follows BCD's commercial code adoption, which is the Oregon structural specialty code. When locally adopting the statewide codes, each jurisdiction must adopt administrative provisions and technical provisions.

The administrative provisions were previously adopted in 2019 through a complete rewrite of Wilsonville Code Chapter nine entitled Building Codes. As for the technical provisions, the state Building Codes division establishes the technical building codes that must be used for adoption by each jurisdiction in Oregon. This is a requirement of ORS four fifty five. Regarding the local adoption of technical provisions, Wilsonville Code Chapter nine states that Wilsonville will adopt the state codes through resolution. That is why you have Resolution 30 two-fifty two in front of you.

Resolution 30 two-fifty two on Page 74 in your packet is proposing to adopt the twenty twenty five Oregon Structural, Mechanical, Energy and Fire codes effective 04/01/2026. We are also proposing to recognize and sync with the state's grace period where projects can submit applications either under the old 2022 code or the 2025 codes. Additionally, we're adding back technical provisions that are found in the model codes that the state has indicated are not under the statutory authority of ORS four fifty five for the state to adopt. We went through a similar add back exercise in 2022 when we adopted the previous commercial codes and again in 2023 when we adopted the residential codes. So to further explain, here is a graphic from the State Building Codes division.

If you look at the graphic, you see two circles. This is the state's view of their statutory authority to regulate construction activities in Oregon. Some of these apply specifically to commercial and some to residential construction, and some apply to both. The inner circle is what the state says it has authority under ORS four fifty five to regulate and under the shall banner. The items in the gray circle are what the state indicates local jurisdictions can adopt and regulate under the state adopted building code.

The items listed outside the circles around the border are those items the state says local jurisdictions are solely responsible to regulate if they choose to do so. As with the commercial code, as your building official, I'm recommending that we continue our current practices and locally regulate and add back 13 items in the gray circle and white fringes. Those items are contained in Exhibit one to the resolution in your packet. And for example, they include topics like demolition, dangerous buildings, protection of adjoining property, excavation grading, fences, retaining walls, flagpoles and then a locally homegrown option of fire safety during construction. This came out of the Villa Baugh fire.

It was directly a result of inadequate security prevention measures around job sites, particularly high tall wood frame construction projects. So we have local code for that now. The new twenty twenty five codes contain some significant changes. This is one of the reasons the state has provided builders, designers and local jurisdictions with a six month grace period from the original 10/01/2025 effective date until 04/01/2026. The state has been conducting outreach and training for local stakeholders, the various state governing boards that are made up of key stakeholder groups.

This is an example on your screen of the Building Code Structures Board, one of many boards, so you can see the composition of various seats on the board. The state has provided online code change training in video format. It is available to stakeholders online and free of charge for anyone to watch 20 fourseven. And lastly, the state has provided a summary and matrix of code changes. In order to make maintain state certifications, staff are working toward completing code change training and in turn, we'll be conducting outreach to local stakeholders.

In the meantime, we have provided links and referrals to the state training through the billing division's webpage, as you see here on your screen. With the code changes, the state has published matrices or summaries of the various code changes. The matrix or summary for each code are contained in Exhibit five, starting on Page 84 of your packet. Just for a few highlights, if you will. We have we heard a lot in this particular code change cycle about ADA accessibility.

We have some new ADA accessibility requirements coming for EV charging stations, particularly public charging stations, not just for the parking stalls themselves, but for the actual controls of those EV charging units for somebody that's disabled to be able to reach those controls. We also had in the last code change cycle some provisions for increasing the five foot or the 60 inches turning radius in a bathroom. Now that's been increased to 67 inches to accommodate more clearance for power wheelchairs, which are becoming more and more prevalent today. We also have quite a few changes in the energy code arena. There is now what's called an energy efficiency score, an EES, that projects have to meet.

And so there are 33 optional measures for individuals, designers to choose from things like providing 100% LED lamps, providing renewable energy sources helps to increase your energy efficiency score and the code specifies what that score has to be. We also have a commercial energy code that now must conform to the latest edition, the 2022 edition of ASHRAE 90.1, which is the most current national energy code standard available. So I'll leave the highlights there for now in the interest of time. Always happy to discuss them further. But in conclusion, staff is recommending the council adopt the 2025 Oregon Structural Specialty Code, '20 20 '5 Oregon Mechanical Specialty Code, the '20 20 '5 Oregon energy efficiency specialty code and the '20 20 '5 Oregon fire code.

By adopting through the consent agenda resolution 30 to 52 effective upon signing and operational by 04/01/2026. So with that, I will be happy to answer any questions and thank you for your time.

Thank you. Any questions? Questions? Council? You get away with no questions. Thank you.

I'm okay.

Thank you for the rest of the presentation. Thank you.

You're welcome. Thank you.

We're not. So, you know, we wanna embarrass you. So on behalf of the council and myself, fifteen years of dedicated service. Yeah. And I have I have some remarks that I was gonna I was gonna reserve to the city council meeting just to embarrass you more.

So but we really appreciate your service. It takes a lot, fifteen years for anybody in a profession is a long time for one location. And you've led this city with heart. The staff worships you. All your prior councils have as well. And we just want to single sing your praises. So but I'm not going to let those praises be done when there's too few people here.

On the right, it was literally a 128 degrees. Holy cow.

Where where was that?

That was somewhere in the desert in Saudi Arabia.

Oh my goodness. This is wonderful.

Yeah. I love these. Thank you. Appreciate it.

Well, the staff put all this together. They told me we could put on the agenda. We should keep it, you know, pretty mums the word. I think this really should be brought up in the City Council meeting. But You're going to be missed. You really are. And how fitting to have it. Just before Saint Patrick's Day, which Yes, sir. Your your green is a little bit better than mine. Anybody else wanna add some words and thoughts? Councilor Skull?

Fifteen years is a long time.

What the hell did you get that picture? Sorry, Sam.

That's alright. That's alright.

That's where spouses probably come in. Okay.

None of this Or family or Sorry, Sam.

No. Just wanna thank you for your time. It was a pleasure working with you, a pleasure learning from you, and I think you've done a great job, and we're gonna miss you.

Thank you, Sam.

And, you know, please enjoy retirement. It is an adjustment. And so adjust slowly and and work your way in and have fun with it.

Thank you. I I learned that from Scott Starr today. He took me out for lunch. We go way back. And he told me it's going be a three to six month adjustment

process. Probably a little longer. Longer, maybe. Yeah. Congratulations. Thank you, Sam. Appreciate it.

Council President Barry?

Just would like to add on congratulations. Good job. Well done. Thank you. You've just been a joy to work with, and I really appreciate all the advice that you've offered to me and the rest of the council. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you to for your service to our city, Brian.

Thank you.

So with that, I hear there the pictures have stopped flowing. I think we have

That was wonderful. Thank you.

I appreciate it. So do we have I think there's gonna be a little cupcakes in the back. Alright. So and then I'll embarrass you during

this. Perfect. Thank you.

We're adjourned till 7PM.

Oh, boy. Played against you. You did? Oh, nice. Alright. That was a long long time.

A call to order the meeting of the Wilson City Council for March 2026 at 7PM. Will the city recorder please call the roll.

Mayor O'Neill. Here.

Council President Barry. Here. Council Cunningham. Here. Councilor Schull.

Here.

And that Councilor Chevlin is excused.

Okay. Please stand and join us for the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Council President Barry, can I have a motion to approve the following order of agenda?

I move to approve the following order of the agenda.

Is there a second?

Second.

Motion has been made and seconded. All those in favor say Aye. Motion passes four-zero. Tonight. Marks the final city council meeting for our city manager, Brian Cosgrove before his retirement.

The role of the city manager is not always visible to the public. Much of the work happens behind the scenes, keeping the organization running smoothly, providing advice to the council, and leading the professional staff who serve this community every day. It is a role that requires sound judgment, consistency and a steady hand. For the past fifteen years, Brian has provided exactly that kind of leadership for Wilsonville. What I've come to appreciate in working with Brian is that while this work requires expertise and analysis, it also requires heart.

Brian cares deeply about this community and about the people who serve it. Staff see that and residents benefit from it. Brian is also someone who will tell people what they need to hear even when it may not be what they hope to hear. He does it respectfully, transparently, and always with the long term interests of Wilsonville in mind. Brian, as we're embarrassing him through this PowerPoint presentation, on behalf of the city council and the residents of Wilsonville, thank you for fifteen years of dedicated service to this community.

Your leadership has helped shape this organization and strengthen our city for not only in the past, but now and the futures to come. And he deserves a standing ovation from all of us. I should have said we should stand for ten minutes just to see him get embarrassed. Do you have any thoughts?

I do, Mayor. So I'm going to get rid of my city manager's business right now and just as I reflect on the last thirty one years and the last fifteen years here, The things that I will remember most are people,

not

projects or sewer plants or senior centers or any of that stuff. There's been plenty of infrastructure projects. But I just want to say thank you to everyone in this room and to folks that brought me in as a city manager from Silverton, that first city council that said yes to me. And to all the elected officials I've had the pleasure of the year. Very the city and the city councils and mayors that I've worked for is that.

And Even if you disagree on something, you figure out a way to move forward to the next thing, and I think that's what any community should So I just want to say thank you to all four of you. I didn't really get a chance to get to know some of you as much as I'd like to. But I do appreciate what you do. It's not an easy job. Your life can change overnight when you get elected because people want to tell you how screwed up the city is on this issue or that issue.

And you never please everybody all the time, right? But local government depends on good people like each one of you to raise your hand and carry out your oath of office. So I just want to say from my heart, thank you. And to the original council and to every mayor and city councilor I've worked for, it's been a great ride. I could not have asked for a better city to spend the last fifteen years of my professional career within Wilsonville.

So I just want to say from my heart to you, thank you very much for everything that you've done for Wilsonville and to every elected official that I've worked for. And to my staff, I honestly, I've said this in almost every setting that ever been in, and and I mean every word of it. This this city is fortunate for the people that we've brought here, the people that I I met when I first got here, people like Martin Brown, Chris Namsu, Gina Troja, I could go down. I would leave more people out than I probably should. Ms.

Gyle Hinman. Everybody is in it for the right reason. They care, they're professional, they care about the community, and they're all trying to do the right thing. And so city managers don't do anything on their own. It requires City Council to give good direction, provide resources and then it requires dedicated professional customer service driven staff and we have the best of the best. And I'm proud to have served with them for the last fifteen years. And then to the nonprofits and the folks at Wilsonville Community Sharing and the Rotary and everybody that just pitches in, Little League. I mean, you can go down to youth sports. Everybody is building this community together. And it's just it's been a pleasure for fifteen years to be part of it.

And whatever small part I had in it, it was anything I ever did was because of the efforts of many. So I just wanna say thank you to the community. You've provided support to me and my family. And I'm eternally grateful for that support that I've received from everybody in this community. Again, I know that there's some people that maybe disagree with this decision or that, but I've always brought recommendations that I thought were in the best long term interest the city.

And then it's up

to you dispose of those decisions, as we will tonight on several issues. I could keep rambling on, but I won't. I'll be short. And I'll just say thank you again. Thank you to the community. Thank you to everybody in this room and to the folks that I've met throughout the years here. I've you've made my life richer. Thank you.

Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay. Any other councilor comments or anything? Okay.

Brian, typical, you get a statement that's always about others. You're just that's your heart. Here and we're lucky and fortunate to have you all these years. Appreciate that. I just want to take a moment to acknowledge what I conveyed in last Thursday's special city council meeting regarding the concerns of many families in our community regarding the sudden closure of the Siemens Child Development Center.

The center has been part of Wilsonville for more than thirty years, dating back to the days of Mentor Graphics Mentor Graphics, excuse me. Over the time, it has served generations of families. Many of the children who began their early learning there have gone on to thrive in our schools and our community. For working parents, a trusted early learning center provides more than childcare. It provides peace of mind knowing their children are safe, learning, and cared for while parents are at work supporting their families.

Early childhood education is foundational. Access to quality care is important not only for children and families, but also for the stability of our workforce and the health of our community. While I understand that corporations sometimes face difficult decisions, the closure of a long standing center like this understandably raise raises concerns for the families who rely on it. I've already reached out to regional partners and state leaders who share an interest in early learning and family stability, and they share in these concerns. City staff has also been in touch with the community members and regional partners.

We'll do the best to work within where we're at on this. Wilson has always been a community that values Children and families. When something affects that foundation, it deserves to be acknowledged. And the only other thing I would add is that I'm going to put the rest of my business report in the written record. I went into several meetings over since our last council meeting, not last week's, but the normal council meeting.

And I'll let that record speak for itself. The next City Council meeting will be on Monday, April 6 starting at 7PM. There is nothing in communications, so we will now move to community input announcements portion of the City Council meeting agenda. This is an opportunity for visitors to address the City Council any matter concerning city business or any matter over which the council has control. It also is the time to address items not on the agenda.

It's also the time to address items that are on the agenda but not scheduled for a public hearing. Staff will make every effort to respond to questions raised during committee input and quickly as possible as quickly as possible following the council meeting. Please limit your comments to three minutes. Please when conveying your remarks, whatever they may be, speak to the council as a whole and not directly to any one member of council during your comments. Also, please note you can use the podium or sit at the tables in front of counsel.

Whatever makes you feel more comfortable. Please make sure you talk into the microphone at either location. To comment before council in person or virtually, you must sign up either by completing a speaker card at the side of the room or by using the raise hand feature in Zoom. You'll need to provide your name, address and topic you'll be discussing. Information on engaging with the city council can be found on the city council's webpage, willsnoworegon.gov/citycouncil.

As a reminder, when you begin your comments, state your name for the record and address state is provided on your speaker card. Please note this is not the only way to communicate with the counsel or me. You're welcome to submit information writing or via email. Additionally, I encourage you to schedule a meeting with me or any of the other counselors to discuss your concerns further over a cup of coffee. With that, I have two councilor two comments or two citizens, John Ludlow.

Well, for the record, I'm John Ludlow. I've lived here for fifty years and, you know, for fifty years, the city hall has always had ways to reach me. I mean, my cell phone, whatever. What's ironic in this whole situation I'm currently going through is with the water department, they don't have the same information city hall has. So so I must have signed up for water fifty years ago, gave my home number, which was the same, and that's all they care to use. So an updating of how they get that information would probably really help. My water was turned off. I'll talk about it in moment. But I want to thank the council and the mayor because, you know, I have been there, and I know all the reading and the meetings and the criticism. And then, like me, you might get canceled a few times.

So I really mean that. It's a heck of a job and I appreciate you doing that. People around Edge Fitness have been calling me Moses. You can probably figure out the reason why, but I thought that gave me great license to bring you these 10. But it scared you, didn't it? Know, collegiately, I was the all American wrestler. I won't tell you the weight. It was unlimited. I guess I'll tell you that. But right now, I'm disabled.

I have been for six months. I went through heck of a time, and then my wife and I left town for five days, came back, and, you know, the main thing when you come home for a mini vacation is you unpack. And since I couldn't do much, my wife was doing it all. We didn't check our home number, which we hate and don't hardly use. We didn't check our mail. All we did was unload it, and at one time, we washed our hands and she flushed the toilet. That was the last time she got to do it. So I didn't have water. I found something on my front door, which had been put there without a knock, without a ring, and it said my water had been turned off on the twenty fourth for nonpayment. Now it's true.

I lost my January payment my pain and suffering. I lost the payment. But I got my February 1. At no time did they say the word delinquent, or does on any of the billing say delinquent. It says past due. So it said past due. I paid two months. I mailed it on the thirteenth. I got 2,000 feet between here and my home, and it took till March 4 to get it and cash it. I'm not saying anything about the city. It's just pretty outrageous that I mail it on the thirteenth, and it gets here on the fourth of the following month. So I didn't have water. Got ahold of somebody at the city through the emergency line. They said it'd be a short time. Somebody call me back.

They did call me back. The gentleman told me, I've already checked with my supervisor. There is no way, mister Ludlow, you'll have your water on before Monday at the earliest. Now that kinda hurt my feelings. Is that the way they treat everybody or just me because of the name? I was really disappointed at that. And maybe you could work on that attitude adjustment, and maybe you could actually call them an emergency number that works. You call there and it's an emergency and they actually do something about it, and they didn't do anything about it. I offered credit card, I offered to pay special payments, I begged the man and told him I was handicapped, I was disabled. It didn't matter.

And I had to hook up my water to a neighbor, a good neighbor's property for three minutes. Remember, I I complimented them, you can add that. But, you know, something has to change. I'm like I'm gonna adopt what Obama said. It worked for him. Hope and change. I hope that you change these policies because they're wrong. That when they knocked they didn't knock them out. But when they served that notice and turned on my water, they didn't know that I was dying, that I was dead, or other people may be in the same situation. PGE turns your power off after months.

Northwest Natural turns your gas off after months. We turn off 30 people's water a month. You need those three things to live. You need power, you need heat, and you need water, because we're 60% water, and you guys strangle people with that. Ten days after your payment's due, you can zap them. And you do. And it's got to hurt, especially handicapped people that call in time. So hope and change. Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you. Tristan Rollin?

My name is Tristan Roland, and my information is on file. I'm here to speak on the affordable housing resolutions. And I'd just like to start by stating that Oregon has a major housing and affordability crisis right now. I I actually recently came across an article in Willamette Week and also part of the Oregon journalism project that went deeply into how rent burden Oregon residents are. And they define rent burden as paying spending 30% or more of your income on housing or on rent specifically.

And a shocking figure of that was that half of those who are rent burdened spend over 50% of their income on housing, which is, I mean, pretty serious a pretty serious situation in this state. I I these these amendment or these resolutions seem to be no no brainer to me. They'll provide housing. It'll push us in the right direction to providing housing for potential workers or current workers in our community. And and I didn't it didn't hadn't occurred to me, but mayor or members of the council mentioned students at OIT.

And as a a student at a similar institution or former student at a similar institution, that that's a very critical issue that every single higher education institution deals with, affordability for their students. Many cities in the state have taken it upon themselves to go through processes that involved sort of circumventing the state efforts at providing affordable housing. So the state passes legislation to make it easier to create affordable housing and the city sort of using their own autonomy circumvent them. And and this is I think this is a great opportunity for us to be on the opposite side of the issue, which is to be a leader in providing affordable housing in this community. And I look forward to seeing the results of the vote tonight and thank you for your time.

Thank you. You.

Is that that looks like it's everybody. Anybody on Zoom? Okay. The next item is our consent agenda. Will the city attorney please read the items on consent? Oh, I did it again. Strike that. Gosh, I don't know why it jumped there. City Council President Barry, do you have any councilor comments?

Yes. Well, congratulations again on your retirement. Really, really proud. So it's been kind of busy. Counselor Chevlin, who's not here with us tonight, but she and I had the opportunity last week to get to call a bingo for the Wilsonville seniors over at the community center on March 4, and it was even more fun than everybody told us how much fun it was gonna be.

So I hope we get to do that again soon. We also, along with my fellow counselors, we attended the Frog Pawn Primary School ribbon cutting on March 11, and that was really exciting. The school looks beautiful. I did learn that when we think about Frog Pond, that frogs represent transformation, renewal, and good luck. And I think that's really awesome that we have a primary school that has that as a symbol.

Upcoming, I have the Metro Community Enhancement Committee on March 18, which is Wednesday. And then later that day, I'm going to attend the PGE Integrated Operations Center tour. So that will be very interesting. I also wanted to announce that the French Prairie Pathway Project is going to have a community meeting in Charbonneau and the activity center on March 30. And for all these announcements that are going on for activities and events in the city, please refer to the city's website for details.

Upcoming events and activities for the city include, on March 31, is the Hygiene Drive. The city's partnering with the Wilsonville Muslim Community Center for the third year in a row to collect hygiene items to donate to the heart of the city and the Wilsonville community sharing. The drive aligns with the acts of service for Ramadan. And items needed include deodorant, shampoo, laundry soap, toothbrushes, toothpaste, and diapers. The library is also celebrating their Passport Adventure Program that is going to explore all 13 libraries within the Clackamas County Consortium through March 31.

There's a spring break scavenger hunt between March 21 and March 31. And so it's also looking out for frogs. So if you find all 16 frogs in the building, you can solve a riddle and win a prize. There's a learn to ride bicycle clinic between March 21 and March 26. It's offered by our smart transit.

And if you want to learn more skills like balance, pedaling, stopping, bicycle safety, that you have to be at least five years old. But bring your properly fitted helmet and appropriate sized bike without training wheels and be ready to learn some skills. So on the DEI cultural calendar, there's different dates that are coming up. We wanna note that March is the Women's History Month, and Tuesday, March 31, is Cesar Chavez Day. March 31 is also the International Transgender Day of Visibility.

And then I also wanted to note that in the council packet that you can find on the website, there's always, once a month, the city manager has different depart different departments offer their monthly reports. And one of the ones that caught my eye was, the police department is bidding farewell to our mental health specialist, Brenda Evans. We hired her three years ago. She's, partnered with the police department to go out with the officers and kinda help, you know, calm down when there's some challenging situations. She's done an awesome job.

We're so proud of the work that she's done. We wish her well. And then, of course, we're looking forward to welcoming her replacement. That's the report.

Thank you. Councillor Cunningham.

Thank you. Again, thank you, Mr. Cosgrove, your service to the city. Well, appreciate it. Well earned.

To just respond to some of the testimony, I saw Mr. Ludlow stepped out. But I think that his situation, it does offer the opportunity maybe for some considerations for our city about what we might be able to do to change that situation a little bit. I'm not saying that the city necessarily acted inappropriately or anything like that. This policy, as our city manager informed me, has been in place since before he's gotten here.

But a friend of Mr. Ludlow's did reach out to me with some information about some neighboring cities and about how they operate their water and their turnoffs and things like that. And I think there's always, you know, room for consideration and room for improvement. For example, believe it's Sherwood will leave a tag on your door a week before the water is actually shut off at a cost of $11.9 for the time and effort of staff to go out and do that, which I think is a fair in between. I think that could be an option.

I believe they also offer a weekend reconnect for triple the price of a regular reconnect, which again, something that could be considered by our city. So there are some options out there. There are some ways that other cities are doing it that I think just offer some off ramps for a similar situation happening regardless of how it came about. So all these things we can learn from, what we can do better and provide just top notch customer service as is the promise in our council mission statement. So with that, and then to Mr.

Rolland's testimony, he's referring to the issues that are on our consent agenda tonight, which are to grant a tax abatement to six properties in the city that have lower rents to keep rents affordable for the people who live there. The tax abatements for those six properties, four eighty five units total about $57,000 and they've been an ongoing thing in our city for several I don't even know when it started, but for a while. I remember I remember approving it last year. So I don't I don't think that it's in any danger tonight, and I think it's a a good program that helps to try and address some of those affordable issues, affordability issues that we hear so much about, not just in Oregon, but around the country as prices have skyrocketed. We'll have more conversation about that later on this evening.

So that's all I have. For my voice goes away. Thanks.

Thank you. Councilor Skull. Let's see.

The meetings I attended and the forthcoming meetings will be submitted to the record. For the sake of time. One thing I would like to mention that I really had a good time with is on 03/11. March 11. I participated in the Crest Jane Goodall Science Symposium at the high school.

It's a very, very good program and basically participated as a project judge. It was very educational, very engaging, and inspiring also. The symposium featured a 130 projects from middle school and high school students from both the Wilsonville and Westland school districts. They covered 12 categories including life and behavioral science, medicine and clinical science, engineer or electrical and mechanical engineering, and energy and environmental engineering, which is the category that I judged. Our judging team reviewed 12 projects ranging from energy production concepts to innovative methods for removing forever chemicals and recycling microplastics from the environment to planting plants in lunar soil.

So it's quite quite the diversity in projects. The projects were thoughtful, very thoughtful, well executed, and clearly presented. Biggest take my biggest takeaway was seeing the students approach environmental challenges with practical thinking and creative solutions. It was an incur it was encouraging to see the next generation actively actively exploring ways to address issues created by past practices and past materials. So I look forward to seeing how some of these ideas will continue in the future.

It was a great, great opportunity, and so proud of the students and the things that they did. They were well prepared. They went through the process appropriately. They had all the documentation in place. And the most fascinating and actually the most pleasing thing about it was their presentation. The enthusiasm was beyond what I expected, and they did a great job. So I'd like to congratulate all of them. And. There was quite a few awards awarded, and I won't go through that right now. You can actually find that online if you if you look up the Crest Jane Goodall Science Symposium.

But they did a good job. And I look forward to continue judging that off into the future as far as I as long as I can. This year happened to be their twentieth twenty fifth anniversary. So I look forward to another twenty five years. Thank you.

Thank you. Next item is our consent agenda. Will the city attorney please read the items on consent?

Resolution number 3245, a resolution of the city of Wilsonville granting an exemption from property taxes under o r s three zero seven five four zero to o r s three zero seven five four eight for Autumn Park apartments, a low income apartment development owned and operated by Northwest Housing Alternatives Inc. Resolution number 3246, a resolution of the city of Wilsonville granting an exemption from property taxes under ORS three zero seven five four zero to ORS three zero seven five four eight for Charleston apartments, a low income apartment development owned and operated by Northwest Housing Alternatives Inc. Resolution number 3247, a resolution of the city of Wilsonville granting an exemption from property taxes under ORS 307540 to ORS 307548 for Creekside Woods LP, a low income apartment development owned and operated by Northwest Housing Alternatives Inc. Resolution number three two four eight, a resolution of the city of Wilsonville granting an exemption from property taxes under ORS 307540 to ORS 307548 for Rain Garden Limited Partnership, a low income apartment development owned and operated by Caritas Community Housing Corporation. Resolution number 300249, a resolution of the city of Wilsonville granting an exemption from property taxes under ORS three zero seven five four zero to ORS 307548 for Weederman Park, a low income apartment development owned and operated by Accessible Living Inc.

Resolution number 3250, resolution of the city of Wilsonville granting an exemption from property taxes under ORS three zero seven five four zero to 307548 for Vuela Apartments operated by Level Field Community Development Corporation. Resolution number 3252, resolution of the city of Wilsonville adopting the structural specialty code, the mechanical specialty code, the energy efficiency specialty code, the fire code, and repealing the prior city adopted structural specialty code, mechanical specialty code, energy efficiency specialty code and fire code. And minutes of the 03/02/2026 City Council meeting.

And was that in one

breath? City

council president Barry, can I have a motion to adopt the consent agenda?

I move to approve the oh, wait a minute. I move to adopt the consent agenda as read.

As read. Is there a second? Second. Motion has been made and seconded. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Motion passes for zero. Now we turn to continuing business and ordinance number nine zero one on second reading. I would ask the city attorney to read the ordinance title.

This is the second reading of ordinance nine zero one in ordinance of the city of Wilsonville adopting the 2026 economic opportunities analysis E O A and the accompanying economic development strategy. E D s as a sub element of the Wilsonville comprehensive plan.

I called to order the Wilson City Council concerning the second reading on ordinance number nine zero one as has been read. Does any member of council have any questions for staff or the city attorney on ordinance number nine zero one? Okay. Seeing none, do I have a motion on ordinance number nine zero one?

I move to adopt ordinance number nine zero one on second reading.

Okay. Do I have a second?

Second. Okay.

A motion to adopt ordinance number nine zero one on second reading has been made by president Barry and seconded by councilor Skull. Is there any further discussion? Okay. Hearing no discussion or I hereby ask the city recorder to make a roll call vote. Those in favor of adoption of the ordinance was their names are called answer. I. If they oppose answer no. Those who wish to abstain from the vote will answer abstain. The city recorder will now call the roll.

Council President Barry? Aye. Councilor Cunningham?

Aye.

Councilor Schull?

Aye.

And Mayor O'Neill?

Aye. The motion passes for zero. Now tonight we will have a continued public hearing on resolution number three two two nine which was continued from the 12/15/2025 and 02/02/2026 meetings. I'll ask the city attorney to read the title of the resolution.

Resolution number three two two nine, a resolution establishing and imposing just and equitable sewer user fees and repealing resolution number two three two five and resolution number one nine eight seven.

Okay. The order of procedure for tonight's hearing is set out in detail in our city code. In brief, we will start with a staff report. Next, the public will be asked to provide testimony. I'll ask everyone who signed up in advance to testify first in the order in which they signed up.

Then I will ask if anyone present in council chambers would like to testify. And then I will ask anyone who is on the Zoom meeting who has not testified but would like to testify to do so. For those in the audience, please fill out a speaker card and provide provided to the city recorder. For those on Zoom, if you want to provide public testimony remotely during the meeting, please use the raise hand feature in Zoom or press 9 on your telephone to notify the city recorder you wish to speak when the time for public testimony is called. If you're having difficulties with these instructions, you may call +1 (669) 900-6833.

And when prompted, enter webinar ID number 81536056468. Both numbers are shown on the screen. When you begin your testimony, please state your name and address for the record or you may state that your address is at as provided by as provided to staff. After each person testifies, counselors may pose questions to me to be addressed by the person who testified or to staff to clarify any information that was conveyed in the testimony. Once the city council has heard from everyone and the city council is satisfied, it has all the information it needs to render a decision.

The public hearing will be closed, council deliberates, and I will announce the result. We wish to hear from everyone who wants to testify. However, we request that you refrain from repeating testimony already given by someone else. If you agree with what someone before you has said, please provide your testimony indicating that you concur with what has been previously said. Public testimony will be limited to three minutes.

We will time the testimony and provide you with a visual warning when there is one minute remaining. The continued public hearing on resolution number 3,229 is now open at 07:37PM. Mr. Weigel and Mr. Katko, is there any additional staff presentation on Resolution 3,229? If so, go ahead.

All right. Good evening, Mayor O'Neill and members of council. My name is Zach Weigel. I'm the Wilsonville City engineer. And with me tonight is Keith Katko, Finance Director and Zach Hazel and Taghi Aker with FCS Group.

They're the financial consultants that's been working with us on this update to the sewer utility rates. As you mentioned, Mayor, there this is a continuation of a of the resolution number three two two nine from the 12/15/2025 council public hearing. It's a it's to establish sewer utility rates and an implementation schedule and to institute an annual inflation adjustment once that implementation period has elapsed. So just as a reminder from the council direction to staff on December 15, there were three things that you asked us all to take a look at and come back and report on. One of those things was considering implementation of a utility assistance program.

So people who qualify under certain incomes would be able to receive a discount on their monthly utility rate. We you also asked the staff to look at population growth estimates. There was some review of what was included in the master plan, and it had looked like population growth had slowed since that time. So we took a look at the growth. And then if that growth changed, what did that do to the capital program?

Did that change when those major treatment plant projects were going to be needed? And how would that impact the utility fee? So the city and the staff and FCS group have done gone and done all that work and are reporting back to you tonight on what we found. So I'll turn it over to Keith. He's going to talk about kind of that utility assistance program that we were asked to investigate.

Thanks, Zach. So this will be an option for your consideration tonight. There's two options you'll be considering. This is the customer assistance program. It's a simple and streamlined program.

It would provide eligible City Wilsonville residents with a reduction in sewer base fees to help lower income households manage utility costs. So households with incomes at or below 60% of the state median income would receive a 50% discount, while those 30% below would receive a 70% discount applied only to the sewer base fee, which encourages water consumption. So it's not on the consumption portion, it's just on the base fee. Residents must live in their home as their primary residence and hold a city utility account. Applications would be processed through Wilsonville Community Sharing with approved discounts applied for one year, after which customers can reapply if they continue to qualify.

So it's a pretty simple streamlined discount program kind of displayed a little bit more in detail up there, but that will be an option for your consideration tonight.

So jumping ahead a little bit, we'll have two options your consideration for adoption. One of those options show is utility rates without a utility assistance program, and the second option is with. So you'll see that the rates vary a little bit depending on implementation of that program. But I'm jumping ahead. So next, I just want to talk about the population growth review.

I included this chart that's from the wastewater treatment master plan that was completed in 2023. You can see that those dots represent the actual population growth in Wilsonville between 2010 and 2022. We were hitting about 2.9% annual growth during the 2010s. And so that was what was used in the master plan to project out. Within the last few years, we know that population growth in Wilsonville has slowed.

So we did take a look at what other information out there is there to help dial in those numbers and have better projection over the next twenty years. So luckily, in June 2025, council adopted the housing needs and capacity study. And in that study, it did look at what is the population growth gonna be over the next twenty years, and it was between 1.82% annual growth. So quite a bit lower than what was in the master plan. So the red line, the red solid line that's on that chart is now what that 1.8% to 2% growth is projected to be.

So population growth isn't the only thing that determines when treatment plant projects are needed. So we did take a look at commercial and industrial growth that's anticipated over the next twenty years. And we looked at the components of each of sewer that makes up the sewer that those uses discharge, flow rate, BOD, TSS. And what we found is that the growth in industrial and commercial is not going to we don't think it's going to outpace the housing, so population growth. So all that to say is the population growth is going to control when those projects are needed.

So we took that information, looked at when those treatment plant projects are needed, and it did have a significant impact on the schedule for those projects. So I won't go through each one of these on the list, but just want to point out that the MBR Phase one project, that's the major treatment plant expansion that was estimated at $87,800,000 It has been we're able to push that project out eight years, so 2038. So that's a good thing for giving more time to implement the utility rates that are needed. We can do that over a longer period of time than what we originally had proposed That's good news for the utility rates. A couple of things to keep in mind, there are cost increases associated with pushing those projects out.

Because there's eight more years of inflation, particularly is more expensive, right? So now, instead of $87,800,000 it's projected to be $102,300,000 Also, keep in mind that a lot of these projects were going to replace equipment and treatment processes that are already at the plant. So there will be some additional capital outlay and maintenance costs to extend the life of those existing equipment So all of that is figured into the new rate that FCS is going that Zach is going to walk you through. And I'll turn it over to Zach.

I'll present on a couple of slides, and then Zach will get into what the rate structure options will be without and with a customer assistance program. But just putting Zach's numbers on a graph here, you can see the previous capital plan is shown in blue, and those were the costs used in the financial plan presented in December. With that eight year delay, we have the revised capital program, which is used for tonight's financial plan forecast. So it does buy you some time, eight years, but as Zach mentioned, that's eight more years of potential inflation that could push up that project cost. But that time that you do buy with the eight year delay does have an impact on what the rates would need to be.

So on this slide, we have the updated financial plan forecast. The financial obligations of the sewer utility are shown in those stacked columns in the different colors. We have the operating costs shown in blue, existing and planned new debt service in the green and orange components and then planned rate funded capital in yellow. So as you can see, as you plan to execute the capital program, there's some borrowing associated with that, some cash funding associated with that as well. And current rates are insufficient to cover executing even the revised capital programs.

So that's where potential rate adjustments come into play. The current year's rate revenues are shown in the solid line. Those are at today's rates. And with the proposed adjustments, you can see the revenues in that dashed line would be what would be generated under the rate options that are proposed in both Option one and Option two, which will be in just a couple of slides. Above that dash line, you can see debt service coverage, which is a measure of the city's ability to repay its loans.

Anything above two, I'd consider to be a strong positive result. So no issues there. The other data label there is the monthly single family sewer bill, assuming 500 cubic feet of consumption. So under today's rates, which have been in place for well over ten years, it's about $46 per month with that first year of rate adjustments that could go into effect as of April, that bump up to just under $54 per month. To give you a sense of what's changed since the December presentation, if you look on the far right in 2034, what is projected to be a monthly single family sewer charge of about $117 that was over $145 using the original capital plan.

So you can see about $30 per month savings the quarter we'll we'll 19. First

forecast? So we use some conservative assumptions when And we're setting up the low income assistance program. The city hadn't quite settled on exactly the program they wanted to use when we were modeling this, so we just decided to go with something a little bit a conservative end. So first off, as is the city's proposed policy, this would only be for customers with bills in their names, so single family customers. And the way we did our analysis is we just assumed that those customers who qualified would get a 50% discount on their entire sewer bill.

So a little bit more conservative than the city's proposed policy, as in it would be providing a bigger discount than the city's proposed policy. We tested qualification rates of the single family customer base, basically what percentage of the single family customer base is going to take this program. We tested 1%, 510%. And the results of this analysis was that even at qualification, that the rates would only need to increase by an additional 0.5% per year. Kind of missing a note there at the end.

But an additional 0.5% per year would be the additional cost requirement for that program. So before I show you the scenarios, I'll just remind you of what's going on with these. All of these scenarios implement the COSA, that's cost of service analysis modifications. If you remember, at our last meeting, I basically explained that single family is overpaying a little bit relative to the other classes, and that means that nonresidential and high strength are underpaying a little bit. And so if we implement those COSA cost of service analysis adjustments, we actually see a slightly below the across the board rate increases needed for single family.

So what that finally works out to be is in scenario one, which does not include the Low Income Assistance Program, that's flat increases of $3.07 to single family fixed charge. And then Scenario two incorporates the 0.5% additional adjustments for that program, and that brings the rate increases to $3.28 for those single family charges, for example. So this next slide shows you in three tables the alternatives that we're talking about today. The first one is not for consideration, but for comparison. That's the rate increases under the December 15 plan.

Now one thing you'll notice is that even that lowest rate increase to the base rate is $5.05. And the base rate increase actually increases as you go into the future years. That is because back in December 15, we were assuming flat percentage increases, which means if you're applying a flat percentage to a larger rate, you get a larger base rate increase in subsequent years. That proved to be somewhat undesirable when you're dealing with big rate increases. So for these posed options today, they have flat dollar increases, which seem to work a little bit better, especially with the stormwater rates that you guys just adopted.

So that's why you'll see a big difference as you go down to option one. We're doing $3.07 through 2030. So all of those rate increases are much less than the original proposed in December 15. And then under option two, you're looking at $3.28 and that's all to the base rate

then

question

the John Please redid the analysis, they came up with a ten year implementation period. And that's a really long time to implement a rate increase. So what staff is recommending and what FCS is recommending is adopting the first five years of that implementation schedule. And in the next five years, we'll be coming back with another analysis. We'll be wrapping up the sewer collection system master plan within that time.

And we'll have another set of twenty year projection on what the collection system needs are going to be. So just wanted to be clear that the rate increases are needed to continue for a ten year period. But tonight, we're just recommending adoption of that first five year period, and then it will be reassessed again in five more years.

So

I know we've talked a lot about the wastewater treatment plant and the plant, the improvements that are needed there just because the wastewater treatment plant master plan had been adopted in 2023, and that's really what the focus has been on this rate update. But I just wanted to remind people watching and counsel that this utility rate also pays for the collection system, the pipelines and the lift stations that transport the sewage from homes and businesses to the treatment plant where it gets treated and then discharged clean water into the Willamette River. So just like we talked about with the storm system, there's a lot of needs, pipeline needs, for the sewer system. And when it comes to the sewer system, the big issue is groundwater infiltration, right, or surface water infiltration. If you're whatever water from rainwater or from groundwater that gets into that pipeline and gets transferred to the treatment plant, that's water being treated.

We're spending money on and taking up capacity on water that doesn't need to be treated at all. So there's a lot of focus on keeping groundwater surface water out of the sewer system and taking up that capacity. And a lot of things that in pipelines that we see that cause that to happen are offset or leaking pipe joints. So wherever two sections of pipe come together, there's a joint there. And you can see in a picture at the top there, that's a pretty serious offset joint that you can see.

You can even see in the corner that there is gravel backfill coming in from the top of the pipe. So those are conditions that where we need to make improvements to that pipeline. Another thing, a lot of our older sewer pipelines are constructed of unreinforced concrete pipe. And a lot of times, we'll see when those start aging, they'll get cracks or the cracking will become bad enough that we'll get holes or broken pipelines, and those also let water infiltrate into the pipeline. And then also, we get another thing that we're looking for are pipeline sags.

You might hear the term pipe bellies. Those are low spots in the pipeline, and that's where a lot of debris can pile up and cause clogs. So those all require projects to improve those pipelines. It all requires funding through this utility fee. If we don't make those improvements, the consequences are like we talked about with the stormwater utility fee, sinkholes that develop over the pipelines.

There's a picture of a sewage overflow happening in that photo on the bottom there. And when we have sewage overflows, there's things that happen because of that property damage. Whenever there's a sewer overflow, we get fined from regulatory agencies. So a lot of things to consider. And nobody wants to see raw sewage running down the road.

I thought it'd be helpful to cover a couple of the major pipeline projects that we have coming up where this utility fee is needed to help fund those projects. First is the Beckman Creek interceptor project. This project is in design, and it is replacing and upsizing the sewer pipe between Beckman Road along the Beckman Creek corridor to Memorial Park. So that project is needed to replace a deficient pipeline, also improve access so our maintenance crews can take better care of that pipeline, but also help serve frog pond development. So there is a major component of that project that is funded by system development charges that are paid by developers.

We've talked a lot about the Charbonneau consolidated improvement plan, where we're trying to rebuild the deficient pipelines and roadways for water, sewer, and storm in all these areas in Charbonneau all with one project so that we're making efficient use of funds and limiting impact to the residents in there. So Charbonneau is no different or the sewer system in Charbonneau is no different than the stormwater system. There's a lot of needs. This map from that plan shows where all the sewer improvements are needed over the next twenty years. And then finally, we have a lot of areas where the sewer pipeline is starting to approach its end of life.

So you can see some of these older parts of town. There's some older pipelines that we need to start thinking about addressing. We don't want all these pipelines to start failing at the same time, so we need a program to piecemeal replacement or rehabilitation of these pipelines. So recommendation tonight is to adopt resolution number 3,229. As we mentioned, option one is with the no sewer utility assistance program.

Option two is with the sewer utility assistance program. So that either option will adopt a set of sewer utility rate adjustments to be implemented over the next five years. After that, it will implement a annual inflation adjustment, unless, like we talked about, the the collection system master plan is completed, and we go through this analysis again. And then it repeals the resolutions, the previous resolutions establishing the sewer rate, resolutions three two or two three two five and one nine eight seven. And then as Taghi mentioned, the effective date of the implementation is 04/01/2026.

And we're happy to answer any questions you may have.

Counselors? Counselor Cunningham.

Thank you, Zach and Zach. That's always fun to say. You One of the things I was hoping to see in the presentation was a comparison of where we'd be at if we had just gone with a 3.5% index since 2014. Hopefully, my math from marine skills, was sufficient for this. I had Google help me.

But from what I came up with, it looks like in 2026, we would have actually been about $6 ahead of what option one or even option two is presenting. And by 2030, we would be a couple dollars behind what these current rate increases are proposing. So I think that's an important thing to take a look at and understand that we haven't had a rate increase since 2014. It has been twelve years, no rate increases, Your bills haven't gone up, which is great and I love it. And I wish that tonight we could just walk away from this and say, no rate increases.

But as I said, kind of towards my beginning of my comments on the stormwater system, sometimes the only decision you have is a bad one or one that hurts. And especially with the fact that we haven't had those rate increases in twelve years, I mean this is really a matter of catch up. The prices of things have gone up. I looked at the year over year increases on construction index and some years were flat or overall over a few years, some years were 7.5%, 7.5% and then especially the early 2020s, it just exploded. So things have gotten more expensive.

We haven't had any system in place for these rates to account for that. And I know that this hurts. And I know how expensive it is. It's going to affect everybody sitting up here too. But at the end of the day, we do have to do something with this to ensure that our toilet's flush. And like you said, we don't have sewage running down the streets. Thank you for the presentation. I had a couple of questions on this. Is there a difference between SMI and AMI, state versus area? Or are they kind of just interchangeable?

Thanks, Keith.

No, there is a difference. AMI is traditionally used by federal government housing urban development. SMI is, I believe, produced by the state. And the reason we AMI SMI in there because we're going to leverage Wilsonville community sharing to do the income verification. And they use SMI, which is the state medium income. So there's probably a little bit of different computation in there, but essentially it's

It's pretty close. Yeah. Cool. You might want to hang out. Got just probably two more questions right here that I heard from some community members. One question was, do we have any idea of kind of what the actual number of accounts that would be helped out by option number two would be?

Well, not really. But in FCS study, I think we put a conservative estimate of 10%. That's probably pretty high. We did contact some other cities, Westland. You know, city is different. So the the composite of the population is very different. But Westland said they had one accounts participate in there, which is a similar thing. They use 60% of SMI too. So but is that right, Zach, we did a 10 estimate?

Yep. Yep.

And then will this require any updates to our billing software to implement these discounts?

Minimally. That's why it's really quite easy and streamlined to implement for So but it'll do a little bit of work, but not too much.

Great. Thank you. I guess the only other thing that I guess would have been sorry, I got cold brain right now. I'll think about it in a minute and come back.

Okay. Councilor Schulp?

In terms of population growth and the industrial growth, so you guys are thinking that, that's going to parallel each other through this time frame?

Well, we don't see the industrial commercial growth in sewage outpacing. So those will those growth in commercial industrial will determine what improvements are needed. We don't think those will be come before what the populate growth will need.

Mhmm. Yeah.

So I'd like the fact of reviewing it in five you know, it's a ten year plan, but reviewing it in five years. I think that's good. You know, to say the least, inflation has been pretty squirrelly lately, and it promises to get worse here going forward. So is that five year zone too little

time? No. There's inflation assumptions built into

then

we'll

year.

Think that's all I have.

City And Council next President Barry?

Thank you for the report. I really appreciate that staff went took a step back and we looked at the numbers. The new numbers on the housing are based on the strategic housing master plan that was adopted not too long ago. Is that right?

Right. In June.

Yeah. I really like the approach also that we're instead of just projecting out ten years, that we're doing it in bite size of five years and then relooking at it when you have more information with the new projects that are coming in. And I also really like the illustration with the options where we can do the public the assistance with the utilities. To me, that those numbers make sense. And if we can help people for a small amount where we're spreading it out, I think that's really valuable. So thank you.

Councilor Cunningham.

I remembered what I was going to say. Okay. So again, my math for Marines, if it's right on this. The difference between Option one and Option two, the base fee is $1.05 per month. And then the difference between the cost per unit, if my math serves, is 45¢ per unit. So if it's 45¢ per unit, when we're talking about that five CCF deal, that would be $2.25 added with a dollar 5. So it sounds to me like it's $3.30 extra per month if we went with option two for a household using five CCFs of water. Is that is that math mathing? That sound about right?

That's what we were penciling out earlier too. Sounds about right.

Because I think putting it in a 0.5% idea, that's a small percent, but putting it in dollars and cents for people I think is important for people to see that difference between option one and option two. Now it's also important to point out that option two, the discount is only on the base rate, it's not on usage. So the 30 by and I'm looking at 2,030 numbers by the way. So by 2030, somebody who's making, I think it was $20,000 or less in that ballpark, a single person living alone, they'd be saving $18 a month. No, I'm sorry. It's more than that, 70%. So roughly, I don't

know, it's on this slide. It's on the slide.

Thank you. That helps. So $25.37 and then $18.12. So I mean, that's a significant amount of money for somebody making that level of income or supporting the number of people in that household under the higher incomes that are listed on that table. So I think I can give up $3.30 a month in beer money to help out. And and so for me, I think option two is a is a great option, and I appreciate you guys going back to the the drawing table on this and bringing us some different options that are much less painful than the initial ones. So thank you.

Thank you. Just to let you know, this is just counselor questions phase. So we will have more of an opportunity later. But with that, Counselor Scholl, if you can be the last person right now, and then we can move forward. If that's okay.

There was a question in there.

Yeah, no, no, no, wasn't. This is a general comment. I wasn't singling you out at all.

And I just have a quick question. I hope I I think I already heard the answer, but and so the intent after the five years is to basically go into an auto index, you know, indexing there, you know, after so that we don't get into the situation where this sits for a long period of time. Correct?

Yeah. That's correct. Unless, you know, unless, like we talked about, there is a study that shows that it needs you need to do another five year increase, right? Right. Yes. Otherwise, for no other reason, it would go into effect after that

five years. Just wanted to confirm. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. For public testimony, we'll start with the people who signed up in advance to testify. Please remember to include your name and address for the record, staff and people who have signed up in advance. Well, I already know who's testified. Is there anybody online at all or no? Okay. Doris Whaler.

So when the Zap initially put out the percentages for the low income discounts, he said 50% of the base rate. But then later in the presentation, one of the other gentlemen said 50% of the cost or something similar to that. So I think Adam already clarified it with you. It's 50% of the base rate or 20% or whatever it was. Okay.

That's one thing. So back in December, I testified on the school district's population projection numbers. And I think other people testified also on how Wilson will was projecting its population growth numbers. So I just want to compliment the council and the staff that they've come down to something realistic, and I don't think there'll be any more or much opposition to this. So thank you.

Thank you. Do we have anybody else who wishes to testify in the audience at all or Online. Does any counselor have any questions of staff? Anything further at all? Okay.

I'll just comment to staff that I think you did an excellent job of hearing from the council and the community and listening to us and some of the thoughts we had and what was shared and coming back tonight to present a very thoughtful proposed change with two options. I appreciate that. Seeing So no questions, no further testimony, I'm going to close the public hearing at 08:13PM. Is now counsel for to consider resolution number 3,229. This is a general discussion point.

It's what I always have to say, but we can also once the motion is presented have further conversation once we have a motion. Is there any further discussion? Okay. Do I have a motion on Resolution Number 3,229?

I move to adopt Resolution Number 3,229 with option two, the Utility assistance program.

Do I have a second on that motion? Second. Okay. Motion has been made and seconded with option two being selected under resolution number 3229. Is there any further discussion? Councilor Skull.

Just want to echo what counselor Cunningham had to say. I want to thank staff And counsel and the public for the input all the way around. We started this in a fairly large meeting in December and Basically, the council decided to continue to let staff look at options and work their way through it, and they were able to do the analysis in the technical work to get us to where we are. And I appreciate that effort. Good job.

Further discussion? Okay. Okay, I'll call the vote. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Okay. All those okay, it sounds like the synonymous aye. So that's it passes four-zero with option two of Resolution number two three excuse me, 3229 adopted. K. City manager business, anything further?

I just want to know for the record, your honor, that I came in with sewer rates. I'm going out

with sewer

rates. I don't know what that says about my career, but it says something. I have nothing else. Thank you.

Okay. Legal business.

I as the last person to say anything other than adjourning, I'll have more to say in another forum, but it has been a pleasure sitting to your left on all these council meetings, and I'm gonna miss it.

We still have you to the end of the month. Right? Alright. So we'll make sure if you have any complaints, get them in now. Just kidding. And compliments and all that. With that, we're adjourned at 08:15PM.