City Council - Regular Meeting

Music Music

I'll call to order the work session of the Wilsonville City Council of June 1st, 2026 at 5 p.m. I'll start by asking council members to review the agenda and items on consent. Are there any comments? Are there any councilor concerns? Okay, I just want to report on my end. I've completed the board interviews for the Arts, Culture, and Heritage Commission. diversity equity inclusion committee library board term promotion excuse me tourism promotion committee in the wilson metro committee enhancement committee in order to avoid any serial meeting concerns i want to provide counselors an opportunity to give me any applicant names you wish me to consider just for those does anybody have any names that they want to provide Do you have any names that you want to provide for boards and commissions?

I think that Susan Hanson applied, and I know that she worked really hard on her committee for the city library, and I think she would also do a great job for this upcoming committee if you were to nominate her.

Okay. Anybody else?

Are these people that you've already interviewed?

Yes, they're just the applicants.

I would like to put forward Jim Warren. Who? Jim Warren. I think he was a Metro community. I've worked with him for several years and know him very well, and I think he would be a great addition to that committee. Anybody else?

This was not on my agenda, so I was not prepared for this.

Okay. Well, these are just for the, uh, those committees. So did you, do you have any names for any of those people that for those boards and commission?

This was not on the agenda.

So, uh, I don't think anyone's going to be on counselor concerns.

I don't think anyone's prepared for this. Uh, this is not quite what was described a few months ago.

I just, I disagree with it, but that's okay. Um, I'll take those names under consideration. Turning now to our work session, the 2026 Town Center Urban Renewal Feasibility Study. Mr. Lorenzen.

Mayor O'Neill and City Council, my name is Matt Lorenzen. I'm the city's economic development manager. We have joining us by Zoom, Nick Popanuck of Tiberius Solutions, our consultant on this project and many things urban renewal in the city. This is from the staff report. These are the two items staff is looking for guidance on this evening. Confirmation that what we're talking about tonight, the 2026 Town Center Urban Renewal Feasibility Study, as it's included in the packet and as it's presented now this evening, is to serve as the basis for a potential ballot measure in November of 2026 this year. And then additionally, if that's the case, to further provide staff with direction to start working on the language that would appear as the ballot title for that ballot measure. So those are the two items just to sort of be thinking about as we work through this. I do have a few slides. I want to reserve a good amount of time for discussion as well. This slide should look familiar at this point, but I'm revisiting it again. So what you have tonight as attachments is the revised 2026 feasibility study, but it is really an iteration of work that was completed in 2023 with some adjustments. THOSE ADJUSTMENTS ARE NOTED IN THE BOX ON THIS SLIDE. AND THE THING IN PARTICULARLY THAT I JUST WANT TO CALL OUT IS WHY WE SEE SOME NUMBERS SHIFTING BY IN SOME CASES MUCH MORE THAN 10% WHEN REALLY THE LEAD ITEM HERE IS A 10% REDUCTION IN REDEVELOPMENT ACREAGE. So the reason why some numbers are moving by more than 10% is attributable to these other bullet points. The adjustment of assumptions around floor area ratios, the unit sizes of residential units, and then the mix within mixed use buildings. So it's not just one lever that's being pulled. There are several different areas where we're pulling levers to make adjustments. translates into the numbers in different ways. But in particular with residential unit counts in particular, which is an item of interest, we see that number coming down much more than 10%. And that's attributable to these other adjustment areas that are not just acreage. Questions on that before we move further? Okay, just wanted to clarify that point. So when we complete a feasibility study, we make assumptions and those go in to our calculations as inputs. And then from those, we work those numbers sometimes based on state mandated formulas. In other cases, it's just technical best practices. And that's what we lean on our consultants for, for example, too. build out a pretty sophisticated spreadsheet workbook to bake in all sorts of things from assessed value tables that are currently on the tax rolls and projecting that growth over time, projecting new development and again using some sophisticated formulas to model that over a period of time and how that then translates into an urban renewal program, debt financing, debt capacity, So as far as inputs go, we're talking about a total area of 171 acres. That includes both private property as well as right-of-way. We assume in our calculations that about 55.7 acres of that 171 will redevelop over the duration of a proposed urban renewal plan. The current assessed value of the town center area within the boundary that I'll show you in a couple of slides and which is included in the feasibility study is roughly $207 million. And that note of increase should be captured on the next slide, but disregard that for now. As you know, there are different development types that we've accounted for, and that's based on the town center plan and the town center zone and the different development typologies that are allowed under that zoning code. You see those listed here. And then as far as development intensity, we're projecting floor area ratios that range from 0.5 and at their highest go to 2.0. I know that might not be really meaningful to you as we sit here right now, but that translates to two to five story buildings as we've been discussing all along. Floor area ratio is a ratio of the lot size to the square footage of the building itself, spread across all stories. This is the proposed boundary that we've been working with since 2023. The odd shape over to the west of I-5 are both temporary and permanent easements required for the construction of a landing of the proposed bike and pedestrian bridge over I-5. For outputs, once we work with the numbers, we estimate that some 2,381 residential units could be created. And again, I say could be because the zoning is flexible, and so we do our best to estimate. It's an art and a science. As far as commercial square feet, 1.1 million square feet. That would be office as well as retail, restaurant, and other commercial uses, including hotels. So that's one that sometimes is overlooked. 1.1 million sounds like a pretty large number, and it is. But if you consider that a hotel would be constructed at some point, that accounts for a lot of the square footage just in that structure alone. Future AV, and this is where that 7.2 times increase in parentheses should have appeared. We see about 7.2 times increase in the assessed value over time if new development occurs at the scale that we're modeling here. A maximum indebtedness of $92.3 million stated in 2027 dollars, that number is slightly different from the 89.8 that we talked about in April just a couple months ago. The reason for the difference is simply that 89.8 represents a value in 2026 dollars. Once we carry that to 2027, it turns to 92.3. $164 million represents the total amount of maximum indebtedness after adjusting for inflation. And now that measure 3-632 has passed, this $164 million is the number that would be legally required to be included in public disclosures for purposes of the vote. The net TIF is the amount that will be collected in total over the duration of the plan, and that represents both principal as well as interest on the maximum indebtedness. One other key difference between what you saw last and where we are today is the reduction in the duration from 30 years to 28 years. There was one small error found in our workbook, and if there are additional questions about that, Nick especially can speak to that change. But fortunately, it worked out in such a way that we believe that the debt could be retired in 28 years rather than 30. Another disclosure that will be included in any potential ballot measure is foregone revenues to taxing districts. And I just want to pause for a moment to think about $164 million of debt and foregone revenue. I think one way it can be framed is that it's a loss to taxing districts. And there's more nuance to the conversation than that. unhelpful for proponents of urban renewal to act as if this is free money. I also feel that it's unhelpful to frame foregone revenues as a reduction in revenue to taxing districts. In reality, it's a more nuanced conversation than that. And that's what I'm trying to tease out here with this quotation, which appears in the feasibility study. It says, to the extent that urban renewal investment is successful in stimulating new taxable development, not all of the foregone revenues should truly be categorized as impacts to taxing districts. Successful urban renewal areas cause new development to occur above and beyond the level that would have occurred without urban renewal. In these situations, the property taxes would not have existed but for the urban renewal areas targeted investments. So even though these tax revenues show up as TIF and as foregone revenues, they may not be negative impacts to taxing districts. And I might change the last part of that to say they may not be losses to taxing districts. And this is perhaps best depicted by this graph, which also appears in the urban renewal feasibility study. So when you look at the dark blue line, you can see the trajectory of assessed value growth is much steeper than what would have occurred without urban renewal investment. So that isn't to say that taxing districts are not co-investing with the Urban Renewal Agency. I think that's a critical and very true point. We are asking for partnership from taxing districts and appropriately have included them in the process of developing this plan. They all had a seat at the table. were able to participate in the process. And so there is a co-investment going on here. It is not free money. But to the extent that urban renewal is successful in achieving what it sets out to do, the foregone revenues represent a number that would not have existed but for the investments being made. I don't intend for anyone to be able to read this. I just want you to be able to see what this table looks like so that you can find it in the study document yourself if you'd like to. This is the list of projects and allocations, potential allocations between SDC fund contributions. The SDC funds are collected as fees from developers at the time of development. uh... private contributions which could be anything from development exactions that is when we require developers to build something as part of their development project that will then be dedicated as uh... a public improvement it could also be grants and other philanthropic contributions and then finally the yellow column you could see as basically gap financing and that's where we see urban renewal being able to bring more projects to the table by filling in that gap that SDC funds and developer contributions alone cannot accomplish. Those projects are identified in the town center plan and seen on this map here, which is also in the feasibility study and in the town center plan. And with that, Just remind you of the two questions we're looking for guidance on tonight, and we'll open it up for discussion.

Council.

Councilor Scholl. So Matt, would you, also while we're discussing as we're getting into it.

Could you actually explain or define?

Good, thank you.

Define from your perspective what a financial feasibility plan consists of. Does it set the parameters for the number of units or does it set the boundaries for the financial portion of the project?

Yeah. if I understand the question correctly. Well, let me first make sure I understand the question correctly. Are you asking do we start with an assumption about units or do we make certain assumptions and then try to, from those assumptions, figure out how many units will be built?

Yes. In the world that I came from, I did financial feasibility studies or ROIs and I would basically look at the application and do a feasibility study to see what fits in there from a financial perspective. And that told me what I could do based on the parameters of that study. And that's how I look at this feasibility study. This tells us what the parameters are from a financial basis and actually versus what was published early on is the 1600 and 1700 units that would be built in the, in, within the urban or within the town center plan. Uh, it basically tells you that that would fit.

Yeah, I think, so I'm gonna answer a different question and then if we can come back, if I didn't quite get there, then happy to. There is a lot of question and sometimes confusion about why does the town center plan say one number and why does the feasibility study say another? The town center plan was, especially that table that calls out 1,600 units, is really looking at a scenario in which the city is not coming to the table with investment to bring about the, what would market forces alone bring about? This is looking at a scenario in which the city is co-investing with private development using urban renewal. So, and then as far as your other question goes, I think yes, the way you described that is pretty accurate. we make some assumptions about what the future could look like and go from there.

Yeah. So we frame it up from a planning perspective, from a financial perspective, and then the market will drive the actual design and the actual configuration over the course of 20 to 30 years.

That's right. That's right. We know what the zoning allows for, but because there is a lot of flexibility there, we don't know exactly what it will be. And so we do our best job at looking at the properties that are there. What's the likelihood of redevelopment? How old is the building that is currently there? Is there a building there at all? Or is it just a parking lot? These are the kinds of questions we asked ourselves as we worked through the development of the assumptions or the inputs for this exercise.

And the mix is basically just an estimate also. That's subject to change too, whether it's residential, whether it's commercial, whether it's mixed use. Right. That's subject to big change throughout the life of the project.

That's right.

Okay. Thank you.

Any other councillors? Councillor Cunningham.

Yeah, Matt question about the graph that was associated with the foregone revenue. Does that graph assume that no development whatsoever is occurring in town center that nobody on their own is, is purchasing and retrofitting or, or, remodeling a building and putting a business in where a building already exists? Or is it assuming that absolutely nothing is occurring?

So I'm gonna take a shot at that and then I'm gonna ask Nick to come behind me. The orange line, the 3% growth line, would really represent if nothing was happening and property values were just appreciating on an average of 3% annually over time, which is generally what we see. 4.5%, and this is where I hope Nick will correct me if I'm wrong, represents if something was happening Because we do see just through market forces alone that property changes hands, improvements are made, new businesses go in, additions are made, infill projects happen here and there. And I think that's what that 4.5% represents. Nick, is that accurate?

Yeah, this chart is not intended to say that we have a detailed forecast of exactly how much development would take place here without tax increment financing. We don't have two detailed nuanced scenarios. So we have the one forecast, the high forecast that we think will happen with the TIF investments. And then the other two are a point of comparison. So the orange line is that the absolute worst case scenario for development, nothing happens here. That's just showing the absolute bookend of how little assessed value could grow under that scenario. And then that lighter blue is, well, what if this grew at a pace similar to the county average? That would be the light blue. Not saying that either of those is a particular forecast for the area. They're just points of comparison to illustrate the but for argument. Some communities do choose to do even additional market studies to try to pinpoint what might happen without the investment so you can have a clearer picture of that but-for argument. But that takes more time, more consultant work to do those kinds of forecasts. And at the end of the day, it's just another set of long-term projections for what might happen here.

Thank you. And then another question on the Project draft list. I noticed on that list that the real estate activities and site prep, those reduced by more than half. What types of things were planned before that we've decided that we don't need an extra $10 or $11 million to do in those realms?

Yeah, thank you for that question. So first, the types of activities that are envisioned there are situations where the agency would be acquiring property or optioning property or doing other similar activities in order to try to promote development. Why would an agency do that? One of the main reasons is when there's critical piece of property that the community really cares about and there's a vision for it and a desire to create a vision for that if the city has control over the fate of that property the community can come together to be more prescriptive about what gets built there before it gets sold for private development to take over and actually build the that can be written into uh So similar to the Vuela project where the city owned that property, the city was able to issue an RFP that said, these are the basic parameters of what we need you to build. And then they came with their best proposal to actually build that. This would be a very similar situation where the city would be proactively acquiring or optioning property in order to more carefully control the development outcome on that site. Why has it been reduced? The main reason is because we're trying to balance the books. We knew that we only had a 92.3 maximum indebtedness, 92.3 million dollar maximum indebtedness to work with and where could we take a haircut? We looked in a few places and this was the one that stood out as a place where that might be possible. One more comment to add would be that these allocations are again a model of what could happen but if an opportunity presents itself that the city wants to act on and the amount exceeds ten million dollars urban renewal agency board the city council is not bound by these allocations. They could say, this is a really important opportunity we don't want to miss, and we want to use a certain amount of maximum indebtedness for this, and it doesn't have to match this table right here. What does have to match is the list of projects in the far left white column. We can't deviate from those if this is what is ultimately written into the urban renewal plan. So as long as we're doing those projects, the allocations to those projects can vary based on opportunity, timing, motivation, whatever.

And then the other big difference I noticed on here was the funding of the I-5 bridge going from 12 million in urban renewal money to 8.4 with 4.7 in private contributions. Can you kind of detail what those contributions look like, where they come from, and how we kind of shift that?

Certainly. I mean, it would be fantastic if there was a wealthy donor that wanted to come and donate $4.7 million and have the bridge named after them. It's probably not likely, but hey, we're open to it. The more likely source of funding for that project is grant dollars or a legislative earmark. And so, again, why 4.7 exactly? we're trying to get to a bottom line that is 92.3 in that yellow column. So we certainly hope that a grant for that project will exceed 4.7, but that was the number we used in order to get the yellow column to be where it needed to be.

So were we prepared to move forward with under the 2023 plan without receiving a grant?

I think the hope was always there, it was just that we were not budgeting for it, so to speak.

City Council President Berry.

Hey Max, thank you for your presentation. So two concerns that I've heard several times is one is that I'd just like you to talk about both of these. One is that the money for the school districts and the fire department, that if the taxes are frozen, they're not getting their money. They'll be recouping that later at a higher rate. Can you explain that? And the other one, I kind of slipped my mind while I was waiting. I'm sorry. If you talk about that, that'd be great.

Sure. The conversation around foregone revenues is a nuanced one, as I was mentioning before. With schools, for example, school budgets are really affected quite indirectly by urban renewal. The state per pupil formula is what drives school revenues, and That is calculated at a state level. And so foregone revenues from an urban renewal area does not impact the school district only to the extent that urban renewal across all jurisdictions statewide affects statewide revenues. So it would be incorrect to say that it has no impact. It would be more correct to say that it has no direct impact. WILSONVILLE'S SCHOOLS ARE JUST AS AFFECTED BY WILSONVILLE URBAN RENEWAL AS IT IS BY PENDLETON'S URBAN RENEWAL, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. AS FOR THE FIRE DISTRICT, I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER GOOD ONE THAT YOU CALLED OUT. So you're saying the concern is that they'll be losing out on revenue or?

Yeah, well, the taxes are frozen, right? So they won't be getting money above, like the property values and taxes increase each month. And so they're not going to keep getting that money while we have the urban renewal district.

That's right. Yeah, so there is a foregone plan revenue element to this, and that 3% annually is probably an accurate descriptor of the minimum of foregone revenue. And then to the extent that urban renewal is successful at creating new assessed value within the area, those are dollars that are, yes, foregone to the taxing districts, but those dollars, at least in theory, would not have existed but for urban renewal activities. The other thing that I would add as far as a nuanced conversation around taxing districts is that say with Clackamas community college or the fire district or any other jurisdiction that has an area that is much larger than just Wilsonville. Again, to the extent that other communities within that boundary are using urban renewal, You know, that's impacting revenues as well. So it's not just Wilsonville that's having an effect there, if that makes sense. So by not using urban renewal, you're almost affording an opportunity to other jurisdictions and not taking advantage of it here locally. Kind of an interesting way to think about that. Yeah, there is a foregone revenue element to the conversation. But again, I think the more fair representation is that 3% that would occur with or without urban renewal. That's the truly foregone portion. Above and beyond that are dollars that are theoretically created by urban renewal itself.

Okay. And then the other question was that I've heard people are, why would the city provide the infrastructure for this urban renewal area instead of the developers themselves paying for all those costs?

Yeah, so that question could really be asked citywide and not just about town center, but let's talk about it within a town center context. redevelopment of an area almost always is going to require some form of public investment to augment or supplement private investment. And the reason being that, so if we look at any given project in Town Center, developers are going to be paying for a lot of infrastructure, actually. Not only the roads adjacent to their site that connect to their site, roads that go through their site, if that's the case, realigning utilities that are currently located elsewhere to now be aligned under those roads. Developers incur all of those expenses. Those are what we call exactions, and those appear in the gray column there. what we're proposing urban renewal fund is those items that we can't legally exact from developers. So this is getting in the weeds a little bit and the city attorney may need to help me here, but when there's a development proposal, the city can only exact or require that a developer build infrastructure that is proportionate to the impact that that development has on the city systems. So we can't exact, something that we can't point to as an impact of that development itself. And so the projects that you see urban renewal contributing to, not exclusively but primarily are projects that we could not exact legally from a developer. There are some where you see underground utility relocation and local streets. That's because we're seeing, and we saw this even before we started looking at urban renewal, when the town center plan was written, there were some pretty detailed feasibility studies done for what it would take for properties to redevelop. And it was pretty evident that in order for projects to pencil out, there was potentially a need for public investment in order to build out infrastructure that we couldn't exact from developers because the infrastructure needed would exceed that proportionate amount. So, did I?

Yeah, I think that's really helpful. I think that's what we need to communicate to the public if it goes to the vote.

Yeah. The biggest one on here that we can point to is probably something like the bike and pedestrian bridge. We couldn't legally force a developer to pay for that, but it is critical to the functionality of the system as a whole. All of these projects are not really bells and whistles as much as organs in the body that are all needed working together for it all to work systematically, comprehensively. Thank you.

Councillor Schell. Can we go back to the income curve, please?

Which one did you say?

I think it's the TIF income curve. Yeah, right there. Relative to the TIF forecast, is there inflation cooked in on both sides, on the cost side and on the income side?

That's right. I'm going to ask Nick to chime in on that one, but yes.

Yeah, we assume 3% inflation into the future, and so that is both on revenues and expenditures. Now, on revenues, that's a little bit more stable. We know that properties can only appreciate in Oregon by 3% per year, and they historically have, even if actual property values are growing at much more rapid paces than that. The assessed value is limited to 3%. On the construction side, we've also assumed values increase by 3% per year. We know that it won't be a smooth ride like that. It's going to be bumpier in real time. We look like we may be in for higher inflation than normal over the next six months, and hopefully that is transitory as much as that word gets thrown around and may not always come true. But long-term, we have forecast average inflation of 3% per year, which is slightly higher than historical inflation rates over the last 20, 30 years.

Thank you. Councilor Shadlin.

Thank you. I want to hop back on the discussion about what we can ask developers to pay for versus what we could hope to focus TIF money on. And you used the example in the packet, and that's a parking structure. we know that we've heard that there may not be enough parking. And so a parking structure is one that I would guess, maybe we could legally ask developers to pitch in for a parking structure, but I'm sure they're less likely inclined to build a parking structure when they'd rather have a building with mixed use in it. So a parking structure, it seems to me, would be one that urban renewal would be the perfect example of how we could use that. to make sure we have enough parking for not only the residents, but the visitors that come to town center as well. Am I correct?

I get the city attorney to weigh in on that.

Sure, I think what the mayor was going at is we can't require parking anymore under state law. And so probably anything where we're talking about parking is something that we wouldn't be able to require a developer to implement. So I think the example is appropriate.

And I know that there's a concern about parking out there and this is just an anecdote and unfortunately it probably won't be very satisfying because it's just an anecdote. But as we meet with developers, and there are quite a few expressing interest in developing in Town Center, what we're seeing actually is that they're wanting to provide more parking than we had originally thought in 2023. Whether you view that as a good thing or a bad thing doesn't matter. What we're hearing across the board is that developers are wanting to build more surface parking than we thought they would want to. Yes, the Sherry site has, I think, 0.5 or 0.6 spaces per unit. that's an anomaly compared to what we've seen proposed on other potential development sites and town center. Again, I realize it's just anecdotal, can't provide you with anything other than that. But yes, parking structure is a possibility under that line item. Yes, also one thing that, for example, Lake Oswego has done in their downtown is to partner with developers to help pay for the cost of integrating structures into the building itself. underground parking. Urban renewal in Lake Oswego is used for that purpose and that's something that could be explored as well.

Councillor Cunningham.

I believe that the parking ratio for Sherry's is actually less than 0.5. I think it's 54 for 114 units if I remember right. So you were talking about the bike ped bridge a minute ago and about why, how it's such a high priority to, to make town center work. And I guess, you know, I was, I wasn't in these meetings when, uh, the I five pedestrian bridge was dreamed up, but I'm trying to understand why in a city where we have 80 to 90% of our trips are done in personal vehicles. where we're talking about town center being something that would attract people from out of town to come and visit our, our amazing new town center. It's, it seems like there's a, a high priority being placed on that bike ped and, and not so much on, on this parking. If I remember right to the Sherry's building has zero parking spaces for their retail. So it, it begs the question of where people even park when they go to go to shop at at that building. Um, so I don't know if you have any insight on, on why the, the bike ped bridges is such a, it seems to be such a point of focus and, and, and meeting I recently had, I was told it's, it's not, it'll, it'll wait for, uh, a grant. So I'm kind of getting mixed messages now. So I don't know if you have anything that you can clarify on that bridge and, and where it sits in the priority list and, and why it seems to be such a, the way you were kind of just talking about it, a pivotal piece.

Yeah, I think in the long term it's a critical piece. I think it would be disingenuous to say it's critical tomorrow, 100%. I have no reservations saying that. As the area evolves and as there is more housing that's served by public transit, I think the importance increases over time. It appears first on this list, but all of these projects listed out are in no particular order, and decisions on spending would be a decision of the agency, the council. So I apologize if there's some sort of insinuation here that as being top of the list that it's the number one priority. I don't think that's the case.

Okay. And then earlier you were talking about how the numbers, you know, we were talking about a 10% acreage reduction. How much was the square footage of assumed residential units increased in order to take a 10% reduction from 4,200 and get down to 2,381?

Well, like I said, the equation has multiple variables in it, right? And that's just one of them. But... Let's see here. I'm looking in the feasibility study on... Well, this is page A2, so that's in the appendices. At the bottom of the table... Excuse me, the bottom of the page, there's a table, residential unit size assumptions...

And page 63 of the PDF.

Thank you for that. 1100 square feet for apartments 1200 for condos 1350 for townhouse and 1025 for mixed use apartments. Those square footages represent the units themselves as well as common areas that would be allocated and on a prorated basis per unit. Nick, anything you would add to that?

I think that accurately describes what those assumptions are. We'd have to compare that to what they were in the 2023 analysis and then could say what the weighted average increase was from how they increased three years ago to where they are today. I can't recall off the top of my head, I was trying to look it up right now, what those figures were three years ago.

Yeah, I don't have that in front of me immediately, but it's found as attachment three, the 2023 feasibility study in the packet. We moved them up incrementally, and again, this was based on dialogue with developers.

Sorry, I'm trying to find the old numbers. So it looks like the old numbers were apartments at 900, condos at 1,000, townhomes at 1,000, and mixed use at 900. But then these are just all assumptions too, right? They could end up being built on the smaller side. There could be more units than what we're assuming. This is just kind of guesswork, right?

Absolutely. I mean, I don't know if it's... completely fair to say guesswork. I feel like that suggests a shot in the dark, but we're doing our best to think about what the future could look like across 28 years. I'm sorry?

Educated guesswork. Thank you. Informed by experts, our consultant, things like that, discussions with developers and what they're looking for. All right, that's all I have. Thanks.

Anything else? So can you pull up the questions you wanted us to answer tonight? So the first, City Council confirmation of the revised 2026 Town Center Urban Renewable Feasibility Study is presented as to serve as a basis for November 2026 ballot measure. And for me, I'll say yes. and then from my perspective to direct staff to begin the development about measure language for City Council review, yes. I'm consistent with the new changes in the law, which I understand are being sorted out, but that's the answer from my perspective. Anybody else? Council President Berry?

I agree with what the mayor just said.

Councilor Shevin?

I support.

I support both bullets. I believe we should move forward, thank you.

Councillor Schell.

I also support.

Councillor Cunningham.

I will revoice my concerns that these numbers don't reflect what the community expected to see when they were given the glossy pretty pictures in the 2019 Town Center Plan. I have some, I have continued reservations about how we went with the 10% redevelopment of acreage and decreased our assumptions on residential units by nearly half. It seems like there's a lot of different moving parts in those equations and that leaves a lot of parts that can be manipulated to make these numbers look a little bit better or palatable. Um, but I think 2381 is still a higher number than our community expects to see. Um, so I don't think that, I don't think these numbers are going to get the job done in November. and we're going to be back at square one. So I would be hesitant to move these numbers forward as the assumed numbers to present to the public.

Thank you, Councillor Cunningham. I'll just hear my thought process and ask staff to correct me if I'm wrong. We have a new law. There's only two options to put out. to vote on an urban renewal district concerning town centers, either this November or waiting two years to November of 2028, I believe. And also the town center plan is a plan essentially fixed in stone. We've tried to, when I ran for office, I thought we could have town halls and examine, you know, GET FURTHER INPUT ON THE TOWN CENTER PLAN BUT STAFF TOLD ME AND TOLD COUNCIL ESSENTIALLY IT'S A LEGAL DOCUMENT ESSENTIALLY THAT'S SET IN STONE AND THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT WE CAN TRY TO TWEAK BUT WE OPEN OURSELVES UP TO LITIGATION AND EVERYTHING ELSE. SO WE'RE KIND OF LIMITED TO EXPLORING THE HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS. AND THEN WHEN IT COMES TO THE URBAN RENOVAL DISTRICT DISCUSSION when we reduce the numbers too low to the numbers reflected into the town center plan that went into place in 2019, it's as if we're buying a Rolls Royce without an engine because if they're too low, there's not enough in the way of financing to actually complete the plan. That's how I look at this. So I understand where Councillor Cunningham is saying. I also think that voters want to weigh in. And I don't think there's much you can do between now, this November, and the one, two years from now, because we're going to be back here under the same scenario. So for my purposes, I think it's important to get it out to vote. Let the Citizens weigh in and make a final decision on this now. And then whatever that outcome is, we move forward on the best way to move the city forward. But I don't see a reason for waiting until November of 2028 if we're limited in what we can do since we're doing everything we can do now. But that's my two cents. If staff is saying that I'm wrong, I'd like to know, but I'm understanding there's very limited things we can do on the plan itself without triggering a problem.

Yeah, if you'd like me to weigh in, Mayor, I'm happy to. I would. Yeah. And I think I'd have to go back. I think it was either one of the February or March meetings where we have a staff report that lays out all the... What I would say is the impracticalities of an update is that the steps that would be taken is basically a complete... over a do-over of our housing needs analysis, our housing production strategy to even consider doing any of that. And the last time that those were adopted, which was in 2025, they were under old rules. The new rules are even more prescriptive on what cities can do. And those are all reviewed by the state with the state being able to weigh in and say that we need to do something different than what we even put forward. So there's the regulatory hurdles that are in place make it very highly unlikely that we could significantly change what is currently in our plan and our development code as far as housing is concerned.

Thank you. I mean, the way I'm looking at this is more of, you know, for my one vote on what we can do within the law we have now, and I think that Voters, whatever they decide, have to make that final decision. And I don't think it's best for us to wait another two years. But that's my view. Councillor Cunningham.

Yeah, I don't know that we've explored all the options on Town Center. I think that we can't, when we've given five stories to a district and somebody's bought property, It's a little bit of a difficult thing to put back in the bag. There are other options, I think, though. There are options to lighten up zoning on existing properties and allow more uses to come in those and develop on their own without requiring urban renewal dollars to go and take a building that already exists and retrofit it. and turn it into something using that same building. It's the cheapest, easiest way for a developer to make money. When I was looking through the 2019 financial feasibility studies that were put before planning commission, it was the thing that didn't require higher rents. It didn't require public money and it didn't require reduced parking. Those were the three options that that financial feasibility study pointed to and talked about how can we make things pencil for different projects for projects like Suburban mixed-use multifamily residential it was the hardest one to get to pencil besides I think it was office buildings Office buildings are really difficult So there are ways that I think we still could go back and look at that plan and open up more opportunities for redevelopment to take some of what exists now and Redo something with it because it is cheaper and it's easier to do it doesn't require as much public money That's just my part on it your point. Mr. Mayor about The Rolls Royce and the lack of an engine is well taken, and I think it's well said that if we underfund the project, we could run into some problems. Now, I personally think that there's some fat that could be trimmed off of this. I don't know that we need a nearly $30 million bridge built for something that is the vast minority of people's trips in Wilsonville, and it's not going to get people from Tigard or Tualatin or Canby to town center. It's just they're not gonna bike all the way up here and then cross the bridge just to get there. So I think there's some fat that could be cut. I think there's some wiggle room here. I'm afraid that the city staff is being a little bit rigid about some of these things out of our planning department. And I think that we need to get a hold of that and look for other opportunities rather than again, putting these numbers in front of voters. Um, I want to see town center redevelop just as much as anybody else. And I, I raised these warnings and I, and I say these things because I don't think that these numbers are going to get people excited in November. And if it fails in November, we're back at square one and our voters are, our residents have waited a painfully long time since may of 2024 for us to do anything with this. And I hate to see us set us, I'd hate to see us set ourselves up for failure on this thing going into November. Um, but if, if there's not going to be anything else that we look at other than just going full steam ahead with urban renewal, with, with these numbers that are still 50% above the residential units promised in the original plan, then, um, I guess we'll see what our voters think in November and I guess we'll see what happens.

Thank you, Councillor Cunningham. I think from my perspective, I'm listening to what you're saying, and the plan itself and what's in the plan, that document is a document that can't change, at least without triggering what I understand as particular litigation and issues at the state level. And it's not something that can be easily done. I'm not a zoning expert. I defer that to the city attorney who may know more, but changing zoning to me is potentially problematic. What I will say, in all fairness to all of us, including you and me and council, that the plan itself went into effect, the plan, by a prior city council and mayor, And then the new council with a new mayor tried two years later, uh, craft a proposed urban renewal district, which went out to vote in 2024 and failed. And now this mayor on this council is trying to, we've inherited this, all of us, and we're trying to, all of us tried to take another look at it and I had a wider scope of what I thought we could do that I'm being told we can't just for the current state of the law. In all fairness, none of us knew that when we were out of office, when we were running. So there's the plan that we can only tweak and there's the financing tool that we're talking about now. And I've heard people say we can pass a bond in lieu of urban renewal. Bonds are a direct tax to people, and I see that as an unlikelihood anyway. We do have people calling to vote for this, and based on what staff has told us, I think this is the best way to go. But I do see your point. I really do. I'm just saying... the only option would be to wait for two years. And from what I've looked and talked with staff, what we can do over the next two years, we're going to be back to where we were now. But I appreciate your thoughts, I really do. Councilor Skoll.

The mayor just basically said essentially what I was thinking, but I'd just add to that the fact that yes, if we don't move this forward now, and this is just a financial feasibility plan, it's the framework for the financing of the project, not the actual project. If we don't move it forward now, then it sits for two years and we'll have to come back at it. Inflation will be higher, construction costs will be higher, There'll be a whole different set of ideas and everything. This plan was originally passed in 2019, and here we are seven years later, and we're still beating it up and everything. I have looked at the plan. I've looked at the older plans. I have a pretty good vision of what this would do, and it would make Wilsonville a really nice and special place. I'm not looking at creating another shopping center or something of that sort. I've heard all kinds of comments about, let's just go paint what's there and put new lines down. That's not the point of this. And I've taken this position from the beginning. We need to figure out, we need to kind of plant the flag in the sand, figure out what's best for us right now. And per 362, which the voters voted in, let's move it forward and see what happens. and let the voters make the decision, okay? And then we'll go from there. My understanding of 362, which I hope to get a better definition of, even as we go down the line, if this changes up, it puts additional risk into the project. Uh, right now it's immediate from, you know, in my opinion to get this thing off the ground and get it moving and let's see what, uh, what we can do. We need a financial package to do that, to get the urban renewal, uh, started. And, uh, and, uh, I just say, you know, let's put it on the ballot and, uh, get it moving forward again. Thank you.

Councillor Shevin.

Thank you. You know, we, as a council have a unique opportunity. to join together over the next five months to really help our citizens embrace the town center plan. We've listened, we've adjusted density, we've expressed concern about parking to the extent that we're finding that there's more opportunity for parking and structures or additional spaces, etc. It's not perfect right now. It's a feasibility study. We have to have some numbers in order to be able to plant that stake in the ground. Our citizens voted. They said they wanted a voice in urban renewal. I honor that 100%. I honor that. But we as a council can unite together in making sure that our citizens have that opportunity in November to start making decisions about how HOW URBAN RENEWAL IS APPLIED TO OUR TOWN CENTER. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT. AND I CALL ON ALL MY COUNCILORS TO DO THAT WITH ME.

CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT BURRY.

Just would like to reiterate that I also agree with what was just said. I'm mostly concerned about construction costs and inflation. We've seen 53% not to, you know, distance pass. We have a town center plan And it can't be changed very much more, if at all. And I think we need to move forward with it. Let the voters decide what they want to do. Thank you.

I think we have to move on. Is that all right, Council, with everybody? Oh, Councilor Cunningham? Sure, that's okay.

Just wanted to clarify that I'm not against putting it on the ballot. I think it should go on the ballot. I'm just worried about these numbers. So let's move forward with putting it on the ballot and we'll see what the voters think about it in November. Thank you, Councillor Cunningham. Do you have what you need?

Yes, sir. May I make one concluding comment? As quick as you can. I will. I think it's important to note just a few things really quickly. In my position, I talk with developers. I talk with folks who are wanting to do cool things in Wilsonville. And I think it's important to note that while I can't share those details due to confidentiality, we've missed some opportunities for lack of funds to co-invest. Things that I know based on what I see in the chatter I hear that the community universally would want, but that are not working for lack of co-investment dollars. So there's opportunities we're missing while we kind of languish in indecision as a community. Yes, what is affordable and what is cheap is an important consideration. I think equally important is return on investment as well. And then finally, again, thinking back to decisions, excuse me, conversations with developers, one thing that they're needing, and I know that there's a perception, why hasn't anything happened in Town Center yet? there's a real need for a clear signal from city leadership that we're going in a certain direction. Lacking that is causing concern or not confidence to bring those investment dollars to the community. So I just think that as voters vote, they need to consider those points as well.

Thank you. Next up, Statewide Transportation Improvement Fund. The plan for the 2028-2029 biennium.

Hello, Mayor and Council. My name is Kelsey Lewis. I'm your Grants and Programs Manager for the Transit Department, SMART. And here with me.

And my name is Diana Codler. I'm the Transit Operation Manager working for you at SMART.

Great.

Can I get my slides up here? Bear with me. So we are here to talk with you about the next iteration of, thank you. Sorry for the pause there. We're here today to talk with you about the Statewide Transportation Improvement Fund for the next two-year plan. So these plans happen at the state level on the biennium schedule. So we are currently here in the middle of the current two-year plan. So ending this June 30th would be year one of the current plan we're in. We'll have one more year. And we're talking about the plan for the next two year period. So, first we just wanted to start with talking about the planning process. Here we are, summer 2026, I can say that now, it's June 1st, so it's officially summer in my mind. We have a draft plan that we've developed based on our Transit Master Plan. That plan would go into the Qualified Entity Plan. So the City of Wilsonville's plan would be part of TriMet's plan overall for the Tri-County area. And then in next January, the Oregon Transportation Commission will approve or likely will approve those plans for the whole state. So we're here at the beginning of the process and just want to talk with you, Council, and get any feedback from you on our plans. The estimated funding that we have here in the staff report in this presentation are certainly round numbers. The reasoning for that is that the estimates have not come in yet, the updated estimates. So we're working off some kind of old numbers. That being said, we're not anticipating huge changes from this for when we do get the final. These numbers for that first row, stiff, that would be stiff new funding, 3.1 million, That is flat, we're not assuming any increases. That's approximately what it's looking like. Then there's unspent from prior years. That funding is, again, funding that's in our current plan that we know that we likely will not be able to spend in this timeframe. That's not really money left on the table. It's just funding that is restricted into certain categories, and so we can't spend it right now. A good example of that is we, We had money that we set aside as a match for a grant. We didn't get that grant and so that money's kind of stuck there in this two year period. We'll be rolling that to the next plan and that's what that number is that you're seeing. Regional coordination is funding that is stiff from TriMet that's used for two projects. One is the 2X to Tualatin, that route, and the other is the 10X to Clackamas Town Center. Those are, again, assuming basically the same numbers as in this plan. So adding up to approximately 8.9 million. The projects that we're looking at are really, honestly, it's not like a huge change from anything that we're doing right now. Really, we're going to be focusing on continuing high-quality service, the service that we are doing now, and just continuing that. leveraging outside funds by using this money as match for federal grants. Typically we use that for buses, buying buses as they're large investments. And then also having a little bit of funds for future service planning. So our transit master plan came out in 2023. We're always interested in looking at additional feedback from the community about where we want to keep going from here. And so we wanted to set aside some funding to talk with the community again about where we're going. I won't read everything that's on the slide, but as I said, we're really talking about continuing. We've just started two new routes. We're very excited about that. We want to kind of settle from here, see how that goes, and continue with the same the same kinds of projects. So there aren't a lot of new projects in here. The only thing that's mentioned in the staff report I believe that would be slightly different is stiff rules have changed a little bit in terms of what kind of set aside categories you can put together. So we're putting a little bit more funding in the contingency fund this time around. And that's really just to give us flexibility in the timing of projects when they happen. because we do have to plan these so far in advance of the actual time of the projects. Sometimes the timing doesn't work out exactly the way we'd like, and so leaving money in contingency allows us to see when a project is actually coming and then be able to move that funding into the project. So it's a very brief presentation. We're open to any questions.

Yeah. Thank you for your report. We appreciate it, and we appreciate everything that SMART does. And as time passes, I'd love to get more feedback on your two new routes. But I think that you're heading in the right direction. Thank you for sharing all that. You're welcome.

Along the same line, thank you very much. No questions, kind of understand what you guys are doing, and glad to see that the new trolley is out running around town, and hopefully we can find more grant money up somewhere along the lines as we continue to move forward. But thank you. You're welcome.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Last item on the work session is the city attorney performance evaluation.

Good evening, council. Thank you for your time this evening. I'm Andrea Villagrana, HR manager for the city. And while I'm getting this set up, I'm gonna see if I can do this without Kim's assistance. I may have done it. Or not. There it is. Today I am bringing forward the last form that was used for the city attorney evaluation. This was also emailed to you in April. Our city attorney's contract did expire at the end of April and we extended it until the end of June. And our recommendation today would be to extend it for another two months so we can continue with the process of the evaluation and then also negotiating a successor contract. So one of the items that I'm seeking from council tonight is direction on whether or not we should use the same criteria that was used at the last evaluation that was done for the city attorney. which is in front of you now. It's a little small, so let's see if I can zoom in a little bit. There we go. And again, this was also sent to you, to your email, your city email. And the only piece that would be different for this particular evaluation form is that it does not include goals, as there was not time at the beginning of this performance evaluation period for council and city attorney to set those goals. criteria at the beginning. So that's the only piece that is different on this form that you see before you tonight and what you saw in April emailed to you. My proposal would be that council, if council would like to move forward with this evaluation form, that we send this out tonight for council to complete by next Monday, which is the 8th. And then with that timeline, you would be able to discuss the actual performance evaluation responses in executive session on June 15th. IF YOU DID THAT, YOU WOULD PROVIDE AND ALSO WITH AN EXTENSION, ANOTHER EXTENSION OF THE CONTRACT, YOU WOULD HAVE TIME TO ALSO NEGOTIATE THE TERMS OF THE SUCCESSOR EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT WHICH COULD TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF TIME ESPECIALLY WITH THERE BEING ONLY ONE MEETING IN JULY WHICH ACTUALLY I DON'T BELIEVE THE CITY ATTORNEY IS ATTENDING. And then also, it's summertime. You all might be on vacation. And it does take a little bit of time to sit down and negotiate. We would ask that you would designate two council members to negotiate the contract with the city attorney. And that is done just between those three people. We don't typically include any other parties in that negotiation process. Any questions for me?

Given, I'm going to, if I can weigh in first, I don't usually do that, but given where we're at, I think we should use the evaluation that currently exists. I think we should extend the contract for the city attorney for, you were suggesting, two months?

Yes, for the end of August.

And third, do you need the input tonight of council who the designated people will be on council?

Correct.

Okay. Um, I would like to be one of those, um, and we'll join anybody else that also would like to. Um, and, uh, as far as goal setting or the lack thereof, you know, um, this is my thought processes that I think city attorney is an overachiever and probably could come up with their own goals without our input, but that's my personal opinion. But maybe that's something we can discuss next time. So if that's something that we could do. And if she's okay with it. Knowing her, she may want goals. So anyway, that's my thoughts.

Mayor?

Councillor Shetland.

I'd like to be on the committee that works on the contract, but I'll be joining remotely on July 19th. So I don't know if that's a hindrance, then I'll certainly take my hat out of the ring. And then I agree with all the other points, extending the contract for two months and not changing the current document. My comment about the goals was I think her goal ought to be just to try to keep up with the workload because she does a great job with that, and then also to be able to take care of herself and have some time off as well. That should be a goal. Mental health is a very important goal and there's a lot of work to be done and she has no problem keeping up with it, at least what we see on this end. So anyhow, if some of my other fellow Councillors feel that it'd be a hindrance of me not being present in person on the 19th, I will be attending remotely.

Thank you.

Councillor Cunningham.

I concur with the mayor, all points. And if council sees fit, I would be happy to serve on that as well.

Councillor Skoll.

I'll forth that motion. And city attorney does a great job, and I think she basically really does an outstanding job. And I was going to say I'd be backup, but there's two backups, or there's a backup there. So if need be, I would be available to help too.

City Council President Berry.

Thank you. So I agree about extending until August, like you suggested. In the past, you have provided goals, so I was a little unclear why we don't have goals this time.

So the goals that were provided in the last form were from 23-24, I believe, that cycle.

Right, so why weren't they provided this time? Because we didn't do them as a new council, right? Well, no, I mean, I think, didn't you, I thought you set up the goals.

I think there was a mixture. I think part of it is one of the goals that the city attorney set for herself when she was first hired was to work with a consultant who would help with team building and goal setting for her group. And so that was done as part of, her initial, that initial, I think, first year period. And that's why we did have some of those goals set. I don't think that that was necessarily, I think you're still doing the same work with the same consultant, but that they're not necessarily formalized as they were before. but I will state that the city attorney and I did have a short conversation about what Councillor Shevlin just mentioned. One of the goals being keeping up with current work and the workload that is coming across her desk now as being the main priority. And then other goals also that she includes for herself and her team, but the main priority being keeping up with the work.

to answer your question.

Yeah, thank you.

Councillor Scull?

I didn't pick up on all that. Wasn't there just a goal session for you and your team you had recently?

Yes, Councillor Skoll. So to Andrea's point, when this council onboarded, we never did a formal goal setting between the council and myself of the outcome from the goal setting that I did with that consultant. We did just go through that process again in May, I think. It all blends together. So I do have two individual goals that I've developed for myself from that, and I'm happy to provide those to the council as part of this process. But what I would say is those are, the two goals are for this next fiscal year, essentially. So they're not goals for prior, for the prior time. But I'm happy to share those with the council. If you're familiar with SMART goals, it's under a SMART framework, SMART goal framework. Thank you.

Anything further? Yeah, well, we have two volunteers, or three volunteers, I guess. I could be.

Well, I'll step down since I won't be in person on the 19th. I'll just be remote. Are you okay with that? Absolutely. You can be the back. I'll do it next time.

Okay. Yeah, I'm worried that she's going to focus on your golf class. you know, playing golf goals and the priorities. But anyway, okay. So Councillor Cunningham and I will be primary on that. All right.

Thank you. I will send the evaluation to you this evening.

Okay. Thank you. With that, the work session is adjourned at 6.22 p.m. The City Council will meet in executive session pursuant to Oregon Revised Statute Section 192.660, subsection 2, paragraph F, exempt public records to consider information or records that are exempt by law from public inspection, and paragraph H, legal counsel and litigation to consult with counsel concerning the legal rights and duties of a public body with regard to current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. Members of the public, outside of representatives of the news media, please exit council chambers. We will adjourn for five minutes. Well, we'll adjourn until 6.30 p.m.

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

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

Called over the meeting the Wilson City Council for June 1st 2026 at 721 p.m. Of the city recorder, please call the roll Counselor Shevlin here council president very yeah councillor Cunningham here councillor school here mayor O'Neill here 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. City Council President Berry can 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's been made and seconded. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Motion passes 5-0. Good evening. As we begin the month of June, I hope everyone had an opportunity to enjoy Memorial Day, spend time reflecting on those who made extraordinary sacrifices in service of our nation. June is also a busy month in Wilsonville. Schools are preparing for graduation. Families are looking ahead to summer. And our community continues the important work of planning for its future. We have a full agenda this evening. Since our last council meeting, I've participated in a number of meetings, events, and community activities. Rather than take time to review those individually, I will provide my complete mayor's business report to the city recorder for inclusion in the written record at the end of the meeting. Our next city council meeting will be on Monday, June 15th, starting at 7 p.m. I'll jump right now to communications. This evening will be an update on major priorities and ongoing work at Metro. by Metro Councilor Garrett Rosenthal. Councilor Rosenthal represents Metro Council District 3, which includes Wilsonville, Sherwood, Tualatin, Tigard, and Beaverton. I ask Councilor Rosenthal to come forward.

Thank you, Mayor. It's a pleasure to be here and introduce my staff. Jeff Kane is the policy advisor. I'm Michelle Ruffin, is the regional investment projects manager or something close to that. I don't have the words, but regional investment, regional investment manager. Strategy, excuse me, investment strategy manager. Anyhow, thank you for letting us come here and make a presentation. We're gonna present primarily on three major items that are going on in Metro right now, but we'll also cover, We encourage you to ask questions on other things. As you know, Metro is an elected government for the entire region. There's six districts. This is District 3, which is mostly Washington County, but includes East Tualatin and also Wilsonville, which is part of Clackamas County, so it's a little bit of an odd duck in that regard. We have three counties, 24 cities, 26 park districts, and a whole bunch of solid waste. Large-scale, long-term planning, transportation, We're the regional transportation planning agency. We have housing and land use and supportive services, garbage and recycling, parks, natural areas, the Oregon Zoo, and then the performing venues, the Convention Center particularly, and Expo, which I'll just touch on a little bit. One of the things I want to mention is we are having a council transition. the previous council president, Lynn Peterson, took a new position with the city of Lake Oswego, and we will be having tomorrow, we'll have interviews to appoint an interim director. However, one of the existing councilors ran for president and won the election. So it's pretty much foregone conclusion that that person will be appointed the interim director until their term starts in next January 6th, I think it is. And that'll be Juan Carlos Gonzalez, who is currently district four metro representative. So that's just the situation. It's a little complicated, but it'll all work out pretty easily. I want to talk a little bit about, or just to mention a little bit of work about Metro's work in District 3. This is a slide, and you can just read through it. I won't go through everything. Obviously, some of the important stuff, one of the most important things is the opening of the Vuela housing facility, which ties in with your transportation network. It's close to parks. and provides a very safe space for people. That was just last week. That was a very important event. We had a lot of people talking. I made a few remarks myself. That's one good thing. The Ice Age Tonkin Trail and the Coffee Creek Wetlands is another big project that we've been working with. And then, of course, I think you all are aware of Graham Oaks Nature Park. We have done some updating from last year from the comments from your local community about some concerns over fires. We have done some updating of our processes and procedures so that there's We're looking like we might have a dry summer, so being proactive in preventing fires or keeping them from starting is something that we're gonna be very concerned about, particularly with Graham Oaks. You know, dry grass burns pretty easy, so we're gonna keep some of that mowed close to the edge so it doesn't cause problems. At any rate, the first thing I wanna touch on is the future vision. One of the things, it's required periodically that we come up with a future vision. And the last one was in 1995. 2040 plan is really what was developed from that. And we are now embarking upon a new future vision. The questionnaire, I think, just closed the 31st. But there's going to be lots of opportunities for engagement. There's a future vision commission, which is about, what did we say, 23 people? 23.

23 people.

Yeah. About 23 people, and that's meeting on a regular basis to talk about future vision. There's a youth cohort that will meet and advise them, and they all have a big symposium this summer. We will be meeting out at... and I will furnish them because I get the Boone's Ferry Messenger. I will be giving them all the public events that happen, and we will be tabling at a lot of those, maybe not all of them, but most of them, providing information so we can get Wilsonville's residents' input and ideas about the future vision for the entire region. It's 50 years, well, it's 2050, is the vision, so we're looking at big-scale kinds of things, what kind of life do people want, what kind of... you know, parks and nature do they want and sort of, you know, large scale. What you see now is a slide based upon people in Wilsonville of the things that are the most important to Wilsonville from basically from the questionnaire that was sent out. And you notice that there's a lot of emphasis on things that are beautiful. Parks, access, nature, spaces, green, natural. There's a lot of things that people want. This next slide. I just wanna highlight three things on there. One is where we are right now, regional values community engagement, that's at the little red dot on the top line. Then there's gonna be expert panels coming up in June and July particularly. And then the final result is going to be, the draft version is gonna come out in February 27 with the final version sometime around March or April, depending on if everything goes well. So that's gonna be the future vision process going forward. It's about a one year, year and a half process. So any questions you may have about that? This is just basically a summary of what we learned when we did the Questionnaire for the Wilsonville ask people what they love most about living here. They say nature you have a great park You have some beautiful streets that are tree-lined streets And so people people like the nature and they like the fact that it's close to the coast close to the mountains Close to the valley goes to wine country. So there's a lot of opportunities here Anyway, that's the future vision I think I'll turn it over to Michelle and talk about parks. I

Yeah, and that was a great transition. I want to say thank you, Mayor, thank you, Councillors, for having us for the update today. I'm going to talk a little bit about Parks and Nature, Parks and Nature Program, and a little bit about housing, and then I'll pass it back to Councillor Rosenthal to share a little bit more. But I'm sharing both the Parks and Nature and housing because they are within the three top priorities of housing. match of Oregon Metro and the counselors have sort of had some retreats in recent months that have solidified that. some of which in common with cities like yours. So I wanted to share a little bit about our Parks and Nature core services. They're based in three main things, protect and restore lands, regional parks and nature experiences, and community grants and funding. And regional park operations, where we host nature experiences, operate 34 parks, boat ramps, and cemeteries. These are places where over 2 million year visitors come so it is not they're not just beautiful places that I think folks continue to say this is why I love living here so much but they're also incredibly important to our livability and incredibly important to the region I'm gonna let's go to the next slide which this is just a quick snapshot of how we maintain this through bond and a local option levy, which work hand in hand. The bond for large-scale capital investments like land acquisition and the levy provides the day-to-day funding to maintain and operate the places, these beautiful places.

If I might just add one thing. The bond measure, it's about halfway through the expenditures and the hope to get it all done by 2030, 2031, have it committed. So it's a process. The bond gets paid off over a much longer time, of course.

Yeah, and then to that same note, the local option levy is done in 2028. So again, we're getting to that time where we're having the conversation about what does the next phase look like. So that's a good note, 2028 and 2030. This next snapshot is, it is just sharing a little bit about how all of this is split amongst these three areas. 40% habitat restoration and land management, 35% regional park operations, and about 15% go to community-led investments and education. Let's see here. I think that, I'll leave it at that and we'll keep moving forward.

One of the things to note is, Last year we had to cut staff because the more parks we get, the more land we have, the more we have to manage. It requires a little bit more money. So we have this question of extending the levy or extending the levy with increasing it to manage all these different properties. I'm not saying the decision has been made, but that's one of the questions. The more land we have, the more we have to pay attention to and take care of.

20,000 acres, wonderful. Okay, I'm gonna pivot over to housing and Metro, we manage a regional approach to creating new affordable housing and reducing homelessness. Thanks to voters who've passed these measures. The 2018 affordable housing bond and the 2020 supportive housing services measure are the two here that voters have approved that really work also in tandem. to really get at this continued issue and help build housing for a region. So we struggled with regional housing affordability crisis. We know that these issues have gotten worse and worse, and so these voter-approved measures are meant to really tackle that. And you can see up there on the affordable housing bond a specific snapshot of where we are.

I just want to mention the previous slide you noticed was a picture of the Vuela which was recently opened. We recently had the opening last week. This is a picture of another one just up the street on Boone's Ferry Road. This is the Planbeck Gardens in Tualatin. So now we have two really good facilities that came out of the bond in this area.

Yep. Um, the bond is generated 652.8 million is on track to create an estimated 5,600 affordable homes. Um, 1700 more than its initial goal. Uh, Metro's really focused on ensuring region can meet its affordable housing needs now and in the future. So, um, this is really good progress for us. Um, but we are working with partners and interested parties and asking folks to come alongside us as we look to build upon the infrastructure that's been built on the housing bond. So any other things to say about housing bond?

Well, one of the things we learned when we started, as you know, the counties asked Metro to get involved in both the housing bond as well as in supportive services because there was a realization that this is a regional problem. People move around and everybody is affected by it. So there's been a lot of work to build up the resources on the part of Clackamas County. Clackamas County has done a really good job. uh... there's been a the same thing is true in washington county but it's been a very big learning curve and we the situation has not gotten better but through external factors but the project has been quite successful number of people house number people prevented from being home becoming homeless and now a lot of people get the services they need so we have about a ninety ninety five percent retention rate in the housing where we place them so which is a pretty good which is a pretty good success rate at this point in time.

Yeah. Yeah. Actually you pivoted great for me. I was just going to say supportive housing services. Some of those were, um, that's, that's exactly what your name in the 2020 voter approved, um, supportive housing services. Um, it was really, it's took that historical step to invest, to make sure that we are tackling this problem in a new way. Um, directly funds Clackamas, Multnomah, Washington counties to invest in local strategies, to meet the needs in their communities. And as the counselor named, there's a lot of, there's programs around helping pay rent, advocacy and case management services in the areas of mental health and physical health and more. There have been more than, as the slide will tell us, more than 10,000 households placed in housing, more than 20,000 prevented. from homelessness, so there's, through various programs, really important work that's happening, and we wanna, again, continue to think about how do we build on this infrastructure that, in many ways, is very new for our region.

And one of the key points is that, of course, supportive services measure which is a tax on people about with certain incomes that is due to expire in twenty thirties twenty thirty one so the question is uh... how do we move forward how do we continue to move forward and provide these services and extend the services uh... to continue to solve the problem and hopefully eventually will in the not distant future, we'll get to basically zero long-term chronic houselessness. But it's a process.

Yep, yep. And then Metro Council adopted a series of reforms to the SHS program to make the system more efficient, accountable, and transparent. There's a new committee, an oversight committee, that serves as the governance committee for the supportive housing services funds. It's charged with regional oversight. and accountability responsibilities for the fund. Monthly meetings kicked off in May, I believe. And so we're gonna continue to build on that in the coming months. But two meetings in. So probably the most recent thing.

Two meetings in. It's a complex committee, as I'm sure many of you know. It has both elected officials on it as well as experts in the field. And it's a fairly large committee, something around 20, 22. And so they're meant to have a lot of say and provide a lot of input to Metro and also to the counties on how the process can be adaptive moving forward and efficient. And one of the best management efficiency is one of the key elements that they're going to be assessing, trying to make sure that it uses money wisely and as effectively as possible.

Yep, I'll pass it back to you, Councilor, for economic development.

I just want to say a little bit about economic development. As you know, I mean, Wilsonville is one of the sort of the stars in the area. You have some good lands and some good economic development going on here. And you have a university or a research facility as well. But Metro, at the result and the request of a lot of different entities, particularly the Westside Economic Alliance and others, decided, or I wouldn't say decided, responded that we will develop a lands inventory that is a much better inventory of what lands are available, what lands are available immediately, and what needs certain kinds of work, what are subject to certain limitations. So Metro is going to develop a comprehensive, well, has developed the start of a comprehensive economic development strategy and this lands inventory which will try and improve the ability to target investments and make lands more shovel ready as soon as possible. They're gonna be doing that. Metro may also have roles in helping to convene as well as to provide database analysis because we have a fairly robust data service that provides a lot of support or cancer but a lot of support the small cities throughout the region uh... and we can consolidate that so economic development as you know that the governor is developing the economic development council so everybody realizes we're in a bit of a stagnant economy at the moment we want to move forward and get uh... better economic development in in this in a smart way and uh... there is a this area in Southern Washington and in Clackamas County has opportunities for economic development, but may take some preliminary investment. So, and then I'll say a comment on this, Jeff.

Uh, I don't have anything to add. Uh, lastly, we've got visitor venues.

Uh, yes, but we had a slide that they will just pass over cause it really is not as important visitor venues. Two, three things to know. First of all, we're gonna be turning, or we have told the city that we'll be turning the P5, which is the Keller, the Schnitzer, and the Winningstad, and so forth, back to the city by next, not this July, but by next July. We manage the properties, but the city of Portland owns them, and there has been a problem with providing funding for long-term maintenance, and so they're getting a little worn, and they need a lot of work, and so it's really a city, now, We don't know exactly how the city's gonna manage this. As you know, there's been a big debate about the Keller. The Keller is a very important facility in terms of bringing economy into the region. The Expo Future is being developed in two ways. One is to provide a memorial for both the Vanport as well as the Japanese internment, but also to develop it as a regional sports venue, particularly for, you might say, competitive sports at the high school and upper, you know, and community college level to bring people into the area to do court sports of various sorts. And so that's one of the things that's going there. That is a process that is being developed with Travel Portland and with the Portland Development, to Portland development areas. And then the Center for the Arts, as I said, we're in the process of transitioning that. The Convention Center is just continuing to operate as it is. They're working very hard to bring more people in. The Convention Center is one of the big draws that brings people and economy in from outside of the region, so it's a very important facility. Next slide. So... We covered three of the major elements that Metro is concerned with that were priorities, economic development, housing and homeless services, and then parks and nature. But I understand that some of the cities have concerns over solid waste management and other aspects of things that Metro is involved with, and we're happy to answer any questions.

Any questions? Councillor Sheva?

Just a comment. Thank you. You're obviously very, very busy. So thank you for all the good work that you do, and in particular, thank you for the work you do that supports Wilsonville's efforts and our vision.

Any other comments or questions? Councilor Cunningham?

Yeah, I'd like to thank you for the work that was done over at, and continues to be done at, Graham Oaks Nature Park. with the concerns that our community had around the fire danger over there. I received the mailers that have outlined the information about the work that's going on over there. And so I appreciate that that was heard and is being addressed and hope to see it continue to be addressed and maintained so that, you know, that risk of fire danger with a lot of homes that back right up to that park are well taken care of.

Thank you. Councillor Skoll.

Also want to thank you for the presentation and to echo Councillor Cunningham for the work and efforts at Graham Oaks Park. There's a lot of work going on there and appreciate what you guys are doing to mediate a lot of those issues. Other question I have would be relative to your housing units and basically working with the homeless. I can see there that you're getting a lot of work done there and everything, and you're kind of staying on top of it, but what are you anticipating in the future in terms of trying to get out in front of it? What are the plans, what are the efforts, and what can we do to kind of pay attention to that and help out?

Well, that's a big question. The first thing is, of course, a potential extension of the tax levy. Eventually, in order to continue to pay for supportive services, we're going to need to extend the levy, and that's a question at what level and what rate and when to do it forward. It's certainly not going to be in 2026, but... It could be as early as 2027. It has to be done before 2031, probably before 2029. So that's a big issue. And then making sure that people understand the levels of success and trying to generate support for that and make sure that it's efficiently done and it serves the public good. uh... the other one is the bond issue and that's a bigger that's another big question is to what extent should we does the does the region want to extend or expand the bond issue to build more affordable housing uh... it's been successful we've built some uh... We're expanding it to include paths to home ownership, but like I said, it's been a learning experience, but that's a question that's still open as to when that is. We have spent all the money that we had in the original bond that's basically all committed, and so we... WITH THE STATE'S LIMITED RESOURCES, THERE'S SOME MONEY FROM THE STATE, BUT THERE'S VERY LITTLE THAT'S GOING ON TO BUILDING NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING. ONE OF THE THINGS WE LEARNED, OF COURSE, IS THAT THERE'S A GREAT NEED FOR FAMILY UNITS, NOT SO MUCH SINGLE-PERSON UNITS, BUT MORE FAMILY UNITS. THAT'S PARTICULARLY TRUE IN THE AREAS, LIKE WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, TWALTON OR BEAVERTON OR WILSONVILLE AND SO FORTH, BECAUSE THE FAMILIES ARE, YOU KNOW, STRUGGLING IN SOME REGARDS. More to be discussed on this, and final decisions have not been made.

Right, and my concerns there are, you know, salaries are flat, inflation's going up, and, you know, there's more of the elderly in the community without, you know, and elderly care is actually, the inflation of elderly care is actually exceeding the normal inflation rate. So for them to be able to take care of themselves and basically afford to live is going to be more difficult as we move forward. And so there's a whole bunch of many dynamics there that's in play, and I'm just concerned that we're not going to be able to stay out in front of that.

I share your concern. I mean, one of the ways, of course, is rental voucher programs for people that, for elderly that are already in housing to make sure that they're, And we have done some of that already, and there's probably more that needs to be done so that if their unit goes market rate, because a lot of these things were built, LG houses had 20 or 30 years stasis, but then they go market rate, and so providing vouchers so people can stay there and not become homeless, because then it becomes a much bigger problem and a lot more costly. So that has expanded. But again, we'll see in a year or two to see what the situation is. and we'll see what the economy is and whether there's been economic development that can address some of this. It's concerned.

Thank you. Thank you, Councilor, for your presentation. Thank you, everybody.

Thank you all. Thank you all, thank you very much. Thank you. Feel free to reach out and I can put you in touch with staff if you're not already and we can answer other questions on this and transportation. And I do wanna say one thing about transportation. We're gonna be doing the regional transportation And I'm a strong supporter of Wilsonville's desire to get something done about the moon bridge So that's something we're gonna have to work with and I know them the mayor and others are very concerned about that Thank you.

Thank you We will now move to community input announcements portion of the City Council meeting agenda and This opportunity for visitors to address the city council on any matter concerning city business or any matter over which the council has authority. It is also the time to address items not on the agenda or items on the agenda that are not scheduled for a public hearing. Staff will make every effort to respond to questions raised during community input as quickly as possible following the meeting. Please limit your comments to three minutes. When making your remarks, please address the council as a whole. and not any one member individually. You may use the podium or sit at the tables in front of council, whatever makes you most comfortable. Please speak into the microphone at either location. To comment before council in person or virtually, you must sign up by completing a speaker card at the side of the room or by using the raise hand feature in Zoom. Please provide your name, address, and topic, information on engaging with city council, can be found on the council webpage, willsvilleoregon.gov forward slash city council. As a reminder, when you begin your comments, please state your name for the record and your address or indicate that your address is provided on your speaker card. Please know that the community input is a time for the council to listen, receive feedback, and hear directly from the community. To keep that process fair and respectful to everyone, council members generally will not respond to individual comments during citizen input. If we respond to one speaker and not another, it can create the impression that some viewpoints carry more weight than others, and I do not believe that serves the public well. If follow-up is needed, staff or council members can connect with you after the meeting. Councilors are also free to share thoughts during councilor comments later in the meeting if they choose. You're always welcome to submit information in writing, by email, or to schedule a meeting with me or any of the members of council. Jeremy Bowen? Sorry.

Thank you. I believe I attached a note to the comment card. Would you mind reading that?

I'm not in a position to do that. Oh, okay. Do you want to? Yeah, I forgot the acronyms. Do you want me to hand it to you so you can read it? I'm trying to make it difficult. There you go.

First, I would like to mention that we have certain things we want in Wilsonville. It doesn't seem like visitors is necessarily one of them. I would wonder if we even want franchises. We certainly don't want homeless people, and to that I have to say that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. As long as we allow citizen intervention team, or what used to be called Project Respond, to authorize police to take people to mental institutions, we will have a homeless problem. Have you ever seen the discharge bags they get out of? They have a string tie. Thank you. And to address the building issues, there are necrotic properties So necrotic properties first. First immediate restoration street. That's the best I could come up with. I asked the guy who was talking about the urban renewal. He said a lot of this stuff that's empty is mixed use. I'm thinking the Rite Aid could be partitioned in several partitions in front and many partitions in back, sold as lofts to artists. And the artists could sell their wares out the front, the high dollar ones. But it could be a mixed income That's just an off-the-cuff solution. A man can dream. I think the movie theater would make a great town hall meeting place. So what he was saying is basically sprawl. Spend property taxes on renewal, additional wins and losses, spend taxes to make taxes, right? Sprawl.

Thank you. Kyle Bunch.

Good evening, Mayor and Councillors. Kyle Bunch, my information is on the card. I'm here tonight as a citizen who cares deeply about Wilsonville and wants to see our town center succeed. Let's start with the reality check. The passage of 632 was not a vote against urban renewal. It was not a vote against growth. It was not a vote against a vibrant town center. It was a vote by citizens who felt they were not being heard. For months, residents raised concerns about the town center development plan. Many felt those concerns were dismissed rather than seriously considered. They were told they didn't understand the vision, were standing in the way of progress, or were risking the future of Wilsonville. Well, the voters have now spoken. Whether you like the result or not, the message cannot be ignored. Now the important question, what happens next? Because if the answer is to continue down the same path, make a few cosmetic changes, and ask voters to approve urban renewal in November anyway, I believe you're headed for another defeat. People are not asking for better marketing or an excuse of why it can't be changed. They're asking for a better plan. The community does not need another presentation explaining why the current plan is wonderful. the community needs a seat at the table helping shape a plan they can actually support. And I hope this council understands something else. The consultants do not vote in Wilsonville. The advocacy groups do not vote in Wilsonville. The organizations that spent tens of thousands of dollars for the opposition campaign do not vote in Wilsonville. The citizens of Wilsonville do. Those citizens have the opportunity to elect every single person on the dais. The same citizens passed 3632, even with strong opposition from most of you. That should tell you something. Trust has been damaged. The good news is trust can be rebuilt. But rebuilding trust requires listening, humility, and a willingness to acknowledge that maybe the people raising concerns weren't the problem. Because here's the reality. There are two council seats on the ballot this November as well. The same voters who felt ignored during this process are going to be evaluating who they believe will listen to them moving forward. People support leaders they trust. I want Town Center to succeed. I want Urban Renewal to succeed. But I also think this community is asking the city to think outside the box. For too long, Wilsonville has allowed the perfect to become the enemy of good. And throughout this discussion, we've heard repeatedly that Town Center has struggled because there haven't been enough co-investment dollars available to attract redevelopment. But I think it's worth remembering that some of the biggest missed opportunities in Town Center didn't fail because there wasn't public money available. They failed despite private investment being willing to come to the table. Take the Fry's site. Was Home Depot the ideal vision? No. But it was investment, jobs, infrastructure improvements, and development. It required no urban renewal district. It required no co-investment dollars from taxpayers. It was a private company willing to invest in Wilsonville. Instead, years later, the city is being sued and the property continues to sit in blight. Look at the movie theater property. There was a proposal that included a potential for a large anchor, boutique retail, an entertainment arts center, and a food hall that could have become a destination for Wilsonville. Developer invested about $75,000 pursuing what the city asked them to do, only to be turned away because it didn't fit and idealize the vision. That project required no urban renewal dollars, no taxpayer subsidy, no co-investment funding. Today, instead of a thriving destination, we have a movie theater that continues to deteriorate. Those examples should give us pause because they suggest that the challenge isn't always a lack of public money. Sometimes the challenge is a lack of flexibility. Sometimes the challenge is being unwilling to work with projects that don't perfectly match a preconceived vision. The lesson isn't that Wilsonville should approve every project. It's that opportunities are not unlimited. Investment is not unlimited. Businesses have choices and increasingly they're choosing other cities. If we want Town Center to thrive, we need a plan that reflects community values, but we also need a city willing to work creatively with people ready to invest in Wilsonville because blight doesn't disappear because we have a beautiful vision. Blight disappears when projects actually get built. Okay, thank you.

Brad Williams.

Hi, Brad Williams. My contact information is on file. I want to address a statement that has been repeated several times during discussions about the town center plan that state law will not allow the number of housing units in the town center plan to be reduced. That's not exactly true. Oregon law requires cities to provide sufficient housing capacity to meet projected housing needs. What state law does not require is that every housing unit currently contemplated within the town center plan must remain there, regardless of community input or changing circumstances. The requirement is that Wilsonville as a whole demonstrates adequate housing capacity. How that capacity is distributed throughout the city is a planning decision that can be revisited through the public process. The town center plan is not a static document. It has been amended before and it can be amended again. The City Council has the authority to review and revise development standards, housing assumptions, density targets, building heights, land uses, and other components of the plan. If future analysis shows that housing needs can be met through a different mix of housing types, locations, or development patterns, those options can and should be considered. Obligations, while still engaging residents in thoughtful conversations about how, where, and at what scale that growth occurs. The path forward is not to tell residents that change is impossible. The path forward is to invite them to help create a town center plan that balances housing needs, economic vitality, and the community character that makes Wilsonville a place people are proud to call home. Metro just got through talking to us about how people in Wilsonville, like their main thing is nature. Well, six plus story buildings smack dab in the middle of our town, it's unnatural. And so this is why so many people are upset about this, is you're gonna take all of the character, the things that people love about this, the small town feel, and basically destroy that. Suburbs were created as sanctuaries from high density housing, overcrowding, traffic, crime, and instead of getting that, you're bringing all that right back to Wilsonville. It just doesn't make any sense. Wilsonville should not be a social engineering experiment for Metro and the state. Thank you.

Janelle Reed.

Good evening, Council and Mayor. My address is on file. My name is Janelle Reed, and I'm here with Jesse Lee. And on behalf of Jules Moody, we're from Soul Sisters. We just wanted to let you guys know how our event went this weekend and also thank some people. So first off, we want to thank the city and Metro for giving us such a beautiful place to host our race. We had over 500 women sign up for the race. They ranged in age from seven to 77. They came from 86 different cities and 13 different states. We heard from a lot of people who were here for the first time how beautiful our city is, how safe it felt. and how they just loved the energy and the support that they felt throughout the event and all along the route. We had over 50 volunteers and hundreds of spectators. We want to thank Parks and Rec for working with us and helping us pivot as setbacks emerged. We want to thank the Parks and Rec Board for the community grant that allowed us to get porta-potties, more signs, and professional flagging to help with safety and traffic flow. We also had a lot of local sponsors. Our diamond sponsor, J Hill Property Group, was out there with us every Saturday and throughout the season to host events and support us in every way. We also want to thank Nichols Family, Therapeutic Associates, Dr. Martindale at MoveRx, who was our race medic. Guild Mortgage, Josh and his team, Divine Complexions, We Elevate, Azend Hot Yoga, which is one of our new businesses, Hubbard Hope Farms, Wilsonville Orthodontics, Wilsonville Smiles, Soapbox, Vivid Nails, Bar 3, another new business, Club Pilates, and some of our volunteer groups like Wilsonville Cheer and Scout Troop 194. This event wouldn't have been possible without everybody's support, and we're already looking forward to next year, which is going to be our 20th anniversary. So Soul Sisters celebrates an incredible journey, 14 weeks of hard work, the power of community, and inspiring ways that women and the community continue to uplift and encourage one another. So thank you. Thank you.

Andrew angle.

Good evening, mayor and counselors. Thank you. My name is Andrew angle. My address is on file. I want to ask a question that's on my mind. Will we be able to vote on a town center urban renewal plan in November? I listened to that part of the planning work session that revolved around this, and I was encouraged. It sounded like you are making the conversations happen that need to lead to that process. But are you able to get all of the necessary planning commission hearings, whatever hearings, plan reports, list of projects, updates to the feasibility? And I did hear a lot of that during the work session. I was very happy to hear that progressing forward. Are you able to get that all done in time? Before we lose the opportunity to act until 2028, please get us moving. I don't want to wait that long. Show us the process and the timeline, please. I would really love to see that as a publicly visible process roadmap to that destination. I don't want big box retail, I don't want acres of parking lots, I want neighbors, I want places that create gathering and community, and I want an economically strong town center. Wilsonville can't depend on someone else doing the work to make that possible. We've got zoning, and we've got projects to support that, but it's up to us to put our skin in the game to make sure that we get an outcome that we want. SDCs, bonds, or special tax districts will either cost us NOW OR SCARE OFF POTENTIAL BUSINESSES. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS FUTURE LOOKING TAX INCREMENT FINANCE PLAN WORK FOR US IN A GOOD WAY. I WANT TO TOUCH ON THE HOUSING AND APARTMENT DEBATE, TOO, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S IN THE ZONING SIDE OF THINGS AND COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO INFRASTRUCTURE AND DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC AMENITIES IN TOWN CENTER. FROM THE 2025 HOUSING NEEDS ANALYSIS, IN 2000, WE HAD 40% APARTMENTS AND 43% SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED. In 2023, we had 42% apartments and 43% single family detached. Between 2013 and 2023, Wilsonville permitted 2,217 new dwelling units. 73% of those were for single family, 17% for townhouses and 10% for apartments. I'm not sure what's a driving anti-apartment sentiment in town, but it concerns me. I don't see rage against single family development in Frog Pond. I don't see rage against industrial development in Coffee Creek. I feel like apartments are a fair target, though, and I'm not cool with that. I'd love to see Town Center feature condos. I want more owner-occupied housing. If we can, I wouldn't mind pushing or incentivizing developers to build condos. But if we can get more apartments because that's what is available, I'll take it. Austin, Texas, has seen a ton of apartment construction. to the point that average rents fell by 7% last year. Supply and demand are important. We need all the housing options on the table so that we can beat upward housing pressure costs and remain an economically accessible city. We need town center urban renewal so we can execute and turn our blight into a boom. Thank you.

Now turning to councilor comments, liaison reports, and meeting announcements.

One moment. Can I speak?

Okay. Is there anybody else? Last call. Okay. Try to get in earlier next time.

Yeah, I apologize.

Tristan Rowland.

I took some notes during the previous presentations we heard, and I was debating whether I would, uh, uh, respond to them and I apologize for how late I go ahead. Um, so in response to Kyle bunches comments, uh, to say that this isn't that the measure of three dash six, three, two was not a vote against urban renewal. Okay, it's not a vote against urban renewal, but it's a vote to make it as difficult as possible to implement urban renewal. So it's not a vote against it, but let's make it as hard as possible. And then to talk about consultants and advocacy organizations is rather rich for me to hear. when they have Eric Winters as one of the chief petitioners. Do you know what national organization he is a part of? He's a part of a national group of libertarian lawyers trying to promote libertarian ideas. And he mentioned the same point of... the same voters will vote in the following election for councilors. Well, I'm not feeling too bad about that because it's 7,986 votes cast total that's not separating yes versus no votes. So the population of Wilsonville is 26,974. I'm not quite sure about the percentage of voter registration, but I'm not too worried about the next election. To talk about Mr. Williams' comments, he discusses it being unnatural to have multifamily and six-story housing in Wilsonville, and it would destroy the small-town feel. Well, we need to... Portland Metro is growing. We need to accommodate for that. So if we want to keep the small town feel, then maybe we can vote to push Wilsonville back to the Stone Age. That'll be a small town. That'll be a real nice small town feel. No one will be housed. No one will have public resources. No one will be able to live here. So this libertarian crap that I keep hearing about You know, we keep government off our backs, keep government off our backs. Well, I'm sorry, it's your choice. You can either go with the times or fight against the inevitable future and inevitable needs of the future population of Wilsonville. Thank you very much.

Now, turning to councilor comments, liaison reports, and meeting announcements, Council President Berry.

Thank you, and thank you for everybody for taking your time to come to the meeting tonight. So I'll keep my comments brief in the interest of time, but I do like to highlight that there were two activities that occurred last week that I really enjoyed and I learned a lot from. One was on Friday, the city council took the opportunity to tour a couple of businesses, including Coca-Cola and Collins Aerospace. And then we also toured the City's Water Treatment Plant. And then also attended the Voila ground opening with the new community shared food bank location and the Smart Transit Center. So that's the end of my comments.

Thank you.

Councilor Cunningham.

For brevity, I have no comments tonight. Thank you.

Okay.

Councilor Shetland.

Thank you and thank you for everyone who attended tonight and everyone else who is watching online. Likewise, I'll keep it very brief. Had an opportunity to attend a couple of events this last two weeks. I was honored with the mayor to present the city wreath on Memorial Day at the Korean War Memorial. That was a very touching presentation and I was proud of our city and proud of an honor to be able to participate. And then secondly, as Council President Berry commented, we took a city tour, Swire Coca-Cola bottling and distribution. I didn't realize that Coca-Cola franchises all their bottling and distribution activities throughout probably the world, but certainly in the United States. And so that was great. The Willamette River Water Treatment Plant, as was mentioned, and Collins Aerospace. My point about each one of these businesses or entities that we visited is that they are all very appreciative of the city and the support they receive from Wilsonville, and they're very pleased to be located in Wilsonville. So that was a very nice highlight of the day. Thank you.

Thank you. Councillor Schell. Keep them short, and my notes will be on file. Just to highlight, as everybody, as others have said, attended the Voila Grand Opening. It was a great event. Got to tour the facility. It's a great facility, very clean, very nice, very modern, and they're doing a good job there. We also visited the food bank there. and got to tour through that. And then secondly, Council Industry Day, and I basically, Councilor Shevlin and Councilor Berry said, basically put it in a good way. So it was very interesting, great tours, and I hope to keep that tour, the Industry Day, going here in the future. Otherwise, comments are on file.

Thank you. Next item is our Consent Agenda. Will the City Attorney please read the items on consent?

Minutes of the May 18, 2026 City Council meeting.

City Council President Berry can have a motion to adopt the consent agenda.

I move to adopt the consent agenda.

Is there a second? Second. Motion to adopt the consent agenda has been made by Council President Berry and seconded by Councilor Shevin. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Motion passes 5-0. Next under new business is resolution number 3262, resolution to allocate community enhancement funds for fiscal year 2026 and 2027. I would ask staff to provide their report. Ms. Momberg.

Good evening, Marin council. Um, as the mayor stated, um, I am so mumbert, I'm the assistant to the city manager. And as part of my work, I oversee the Wilsonville Metro community enhancement program and support the community enhancement committee before you. This evening is resolution number three, two, six, two. And this is for the allocation of the fiscal year, 2627 Wilsonville Metro community enhancement grants. Before we get into the projects this evening, I do want to provide you with a quick overview of the program, especially for those that may not be familiar. This is a program that we administer through an intergovernmental agreement with Metro, and the most recent agreement has been extended through 2030. The program is intended to provide investments to the community, to any community with a transfer station. The wet waste processed at Republic services on Ritter road directly impacts the funds that we received for this program. There are two separate funding sources, the community enhancement fee, which is our standard program. Um, and that is funded for every one ton of wet waste process at, um, Republic services. We receive $1 and the community investment fee. Um, this is a newer program and it is optional for public services to participate. And we generally receive about half, um, of the tonnage in, um, the dollar amount. So what we had anticipated for this upcoming year, would be 75,000 tons, so $75,000 in community enhancement, and 37,500 in community investment. I will note that we have been hearing from Metro that the amount of tonnage that they're being allocated at Republic Services is continuing to decrease, but there's different programs they can participate with, so we are actually seeing the revenues coming in higher than the 75,000 tons. To be eligible for this program, the project does need to benefit people or places within Wilsonville. The city limits are our boundary for this program. Schools, local government, or nonprofit are eligible. The programs or projects cannot discriminate against anyone. And then the projects need to meet at least one of the nine program goals. I'm not going to go through all of the goals, but we'll highlight just a few. So improving the appearance of environmental quality, resulting in rehabilitation and upgrade of real or personal property owned and operated by a nonprofit. A result in improvement to or an increase in recreational areas and programs. And result in improvement in safety. And this year we actually added, the committee added and community emergency preparedness. We didn't receive any grants on that, but the committee felt it was important to make that addition. Letter I, foster and enhance community enrichment through educational programming arts and cultural projects was added the year right before that. On your screen are the six applications that we received. French Prairie Road medium would replace unsightly landscaping with rock and drought resistant plant material. The 2026 Dia de los Muertos Festival would be at the high school and increase it to additional programming at the school and enhance their community event that they generally host. Enhancing Wilsonville's bike infrastructure with two bike repair stations. The Wilsonville Historical Society had requested 100 reprinted books of their Growing Up in Wilsonville book. This book was developed based on a previous community enhancement grant. That's how they developed the product. And then study pods at the library. There's one ADA and one standard, and you will note in the next slide that the amount that they had requested did increase, and that was due to unforeseen needing to have a fire suppression system and required building permits that weren't anticipated at the beginning of the project when they submitted this. And the final one, our utility box public art. So there would be seven utility boxes that would be painted with the theme celebrating the arts. These are the projects again with the requested amounts that they the requested amounts as well as the recommendation. So the only two that were modified based on their requests were the Wilsonville Foundation study pods as well as the reprint of the book. In their presentation, the Historical Society mentioned that they were interested in sharing the book with a number of organizations. So the committee asked that we increase the amount so that they could better serve the community. So instead of 100 books, it'll likely be around 200 books. That is the request for this year. Staff doesn't have any concerns about the amount that's being requested from the community enhancement funds. This was just what we received this year.

So there will be funds that roll over into the next year.

And with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. Any questions, council?

Councilor Cunningham.

Yeah, one quick question. What happens to the funds if they're not utilized?

They just come back. So we have had projects in the past where we've allocated funds and then either it wasn't scoped well or something happens and then we just keep track of that amount and it gets reallocated.

Great, thank you.

Any questions? Councilor Skoll. The library pods, when are they due to be, well, they're here, right? And they're just due to be installed here over the next couple months?

Yes, I guess they were. Yes, as I understand it, they're gonna be installed probably within the next few weeks. The next few weeks?

Okay, because I understand from attending the library meeting that the existing rooms, study rooms, they have quite the lengthy waiting list, so it would be pretty good to have those installed quickly. Thank you. Anything further? Okay.

City Council President Berry can I have a motion to approve resolution 3262 allocating community enhancement funds for fiscal year 2026 and 2027.

I move to approve resolution number 3262.

Is there a second? Second. The motion's been made and seconded. Is there any discussion? Councilor Cunningham.

Yes, I do want to bring up that one of the entities on this list of six, I have a little bit of an issue with the ask here because this entity did give a sizable $1,400 political donation to a recent local political movement in opposition to the measure that just passed. None of the other applicants on this list engaged in any sort of political advocacy. And I think it sends a bad message to our community that we would give money to an applicant who has... engaged in our local political activities and then to turn around and give public money to that applicant, I think sends a bad message. So I would move to amend this to replace the $37,500 for the Charbonneau Community Foundation to be $36,100 to reflect the $1,400 that they obviously had and could have spent on this project but chose to engage in the political arena here in town.

I'm going to have to turn to the city attorney because this is new. You have to ask for a second.

You have to ask for a second because there's a motion to amend the resolution which trumps, which overrides the- I understand the process.

Okay. No offense. I want to ask a question about not the amendment but information because this is news to me about the $1,400 contribution. So do we have something that you can point me to? That's all I'm asking.

I believe we need a second to have a discussion on the amendment.

All right. I have a second on the amendment. Well, I'm going to second him because I need to have further information. So I second the motion to, uh, amend the resolution for the purposes of having a conversation about the information. So you want to provide that if you help me with that, is this news?

Yeah, I'm not, I'm not sure what the, what was the exact 14, you mentioned $1,400.

and I'm just trying to have a better understanding what we're referring to. I have not seen that amount.

The Charbonneau Community Foundation made a $1,000 and a $400 donation to the Wilson v. United PAC, which that PAC stated purpose was opposition to Measure 3632. Understood. They also made a $500 donation to a political candidate but later took it back because 501 s are not allowed to donate to uh, political candidates.

Okay. So my legal question, um, we can proceed on an amendment, uh, if we so choose. So on that, okay. Well, if that's in fact the case, and this is again, I'm relying on councilor Cunningham. I trust that I, I agree with, for my purposes, if that's the case, I think we should reduce that particular amount by $1,400. So that's my view. Council president Barry.

I don't think that's one of the criteria, so can you clarify that, or the city attorney, can you clarify if political donations impact the decision to approve a offending?

That is not something that is within the guidelines that I'm aware of. I can go back and check the metro rules, but it's not something that I'm familiar with.

This is a smell test, okay? I don't support that. I think that's not something I would, you know, warrant if someone's asking money. And there was $1,400 that was donated to a political campaign. I concur with Councillor Cunningham. I think that, and that's why I'm asking for verification. I take Councillor Cunningham's word to me. And it's only $1,400. So I... For my purposes, I concur. I think it should be considered, the amendment should be considered. We still have to vote on it, but I'm joining Councilor Cunningham on that. Any further discussion on that? Councilor Shetland.

Both Council President Berry and I sit on the committee, the Wilsonville Metro Community Handsman Committee that makes the decisions about making recommendations to grant the funds. And part of the, I understand, I understand the point that Councillor Cunningham is making and that the mayor is in support of. We don't discuss any political activities during our deliberations about these grant requests. So we haven't been aware of any political activities that any of our nonprofits may have asked for. And I don't know if we've done any other homework on any other nonprofit requests in the past or for this current group, whether they've made any political donations. So I get the smell test piece, and yes, it's only $1,400. it was never a consideration as part of the criteria to grant the money. So now we're saying that it should have been a criteria. Maybe that's something we look at in the future, but it wasn't something we were asked to consider this time.

Yeah, a couple things from my perspective. I'm not criticizing any decisions you had because it sounds like you didn't even have the information in front of you. Is that correct? Okay. So the application, when was that originally submitted?

On January 5th, 2026. Okay.

And it was approved.

The committee met on April 30th to make the recommendation to city council.

To me, it's not whether or not we should revisit a criteria. It's the fact of the timing of this particular application and the timing of, I mean, that would probably have been something that the applicant should have disclosed, in my view. That's my personal view. If I'm setting a precedent on my view, fine, but I just, I have a problem with that.

To be fair, Mayor, The application was submitted before the donations did occur. The donations occurred sometime within the last few months.

Okay. All right.

Any other? This is not a time for public comments.

It is not a public comment.

It is a protest. Have a seat. Have a seat.

Have a seat, please.

As long as he's not talking, it's fine for him to stand.

Okay, I thought you were wanting the floor. Okay. Any further discussions? All right. So we currently have a motion to amend the pending resolution which has been seconded. So we're voting on whether or not to amend the current resolution. Do I have that right?

Correct.

Okay, we'll take a vote on that. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed.

Aye. Opposed. Opposed. Opposed.

So the motion to amend fails 3-2. Okay, we will now turn to back to the original motion. which has been made and seconded. Correct. So I don't have to relive that one.

Correct. You're back in discussion. Okay.

So let's have a conversation. The original resolution, any discussions? Councilor Scull.

So my opinion is that basically there were goals for the community enhancement projects that were set up and published. Basically this worked through the Metro Community Committee, correct? That's correct. Were they aware of any of this new role or a new issue about the political contributions?

Yeah, but that's been decided already. I'm just letting you know we're currently The motion to amend, Councillor Scull, that Councillor Cunningham presented, and I second it, has failed. So now we're just, the motion before us is approving the resolution as it is. So if you have comments.

So since there was no, yeah, since there was no discussion during that process, then I'll withhold my comments.

Any other? Councillor Cunningham.

Yeah, I'll just say that we're stewards of our public funds, and if somebody's got enough money as a nonprofit to make a political donation, they have enough money to take care of their own garden beds.

Any other discussion? Okay, well, from my comments on this resolution, since the amendment has been voted down, I think all the worthy allocations, projects are worth proceeding on, and I still take issue, which I've already articulated. I think that it's delicate to have someone who's asking for funds who is also contributing at the same time to something that directly involves our charter. And so people know, I'm not criticizing anybody on council because council wasn't aware at the time when those were approved. I just think it sends the wrong message and I concur with Councilor Cunningham on that. With that, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed?

No.

Okay, the motion passes 4-1. Next we'll turn to ordinance number 903 on first reading. Tonight we'll have a public hearing to consider on first reading ordinance number 903. This comes to us as a recommendation from the planning commission. I would ask the city attorney to read the proposed ordinance title.

This is the first reading of ordinance number 903, an ordinance of the city of Wilsonville adopting amendments to chapter two and chapter four of the Wilsonville city code related to the housing statutory compliance project part one and declaring an emergency.

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 will 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 Zoom meeting who has not testified but would like to testify to do so. After each person testifies, counselors may pose questions to me to be addressed by the person who testified or to the 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, but you want to ensure you have legal standing in the public record, 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's one minute remaining. Since this is a legal process for considering a land use decision, we need to state your name and address for the public record. The public hearing is now open at 8.36 p.m. I'll ask Kimberly Rival, Senior Planner, please provide the staff's presentation.

Thank you, Mayor O'Neill, and good evening to the rest of City Council. My name is Kimberly Reibold, Senior Planner with the City of Wilsonville, and with me tonight is Heather Austin of 3J Consulting, and we will present to you Ordinance Number 903, which is part one of the Housing Statutory Compliance Project. This project is focused on the city's residential development review process and integrating some requirements that have come about through various legislative efforts by the state over the past couple of years. So in your packet tonight attached to ordinance 903 are a few different items. The first exhibit are proposed development code amendments related to this project. Within that exhibit, there is a table of contents that, based on feedback we got from you all at our last work session, we've attempted to integrate some of the different requirements and or reasonings behind the various development code amendments. So that provides essentially index to each section and the various reasons for the proposed Development Code amendments. Exhibit B is amendments to Chapter 2 of the City Code. This is not the Development Code but the other parts of the City Code that get into the City's boards and board composition. And then also in exhibit C are compliance findings related to the development code amendments for the project and exhibit D is the complete public record for the project. So with that, I'm gonna turn it over to Heather to provide some background on why we've embarked on this work, what the requirements are and other information about the legislation.

Thank you, Kim. Good evening, Mayor, members of Council. It's a pleasure to be with you this evening. As we've already spoken with you in work session, I know this is review, but I wanted to make sure that for the record we talk about why we embarked on this project. So in order to comply with the statutory requirements that go into effect on July 1st, which is coming right up, We do need to be consistent with Senate Bill 974 and House Bill 4037. But the good news in Wilsonville is that you were a little ahead of the game in implementing your housing production strategy. So your action C was to look at your administrative review options for housing and see how you could streamline and remove barriers to housing production. So a lot of the work that was done in the packet was related to both the statutory requirements and housing production strategy action C. We wanted to balance these statutory requirements with the customer service friendly processes that people have come to appreciate here in Wilsonville, as well as to maintain as much public access to and transparency of land use review process as possible. And your Planner Reibold will talk more about the local ways that we're going to be making a few additional changes that are outside of these state requirements. So I'm gonna just focus on those two pieces of legislation and your housing production strategy with my part of the presentation. Next slide, please. So the first one that was passed in 2025 was Senate Bill 974, and that did look to make three specific types of housing reviews as type two or class two administrative reviews. That's zone map amendments that increase density, your planned development reviews, which in Wilsonville there's two stages of those, so each of those pieces, as well as your variances and waivers that apply to residential development standards. The other thing that changed with Senate Bill 974 is that public comment periods for class two reviews are required to be exactly 14 days. In Wilsonville, those were previously 10 days or are currently 10 days, so that will be actually an increase in the amount of time that the public notice period is open. Next slide, please. So then HB 4037 was passed this year in 2026 in a short session. And it was meant to go in concert with Senate Bill 974. The addition was that now all residential development applications that meet clear and objective standards are considered Class 2 administrative review. It changed the mailed public notice radius for most residential projects to 100 feet, as well as saying that the appeal rights for a decision made under clear and objective standards sit with the applicant only after this point. So that was a big sort of surprising change to the way that we do land use for residential projects. review again meeting clear and objective standards. So for Wilsonville to be able to implement that based on the way the code already operates and the standards that are in place, we did find that it was necessary to add a new code section to address waivers specifically. So there would be this review path that would address things that are not clear and objective in nature, as well as updating the appeals section that's already existing in code to reflect those changes that are required HB 4037. I think that's everything with the state mandated changes and then Kim Planner-Reibold will talk to you about some of the more local implementation measures that we're proposing.

Thank you. I did want to mention, because it was a topic of our conversation at the last work session, there were some questions raised about, well, what else can we do if we are limited to a mailed public notice radius of 100 feet? So we did want to highlight a couple of the things the city already does. and that includes site postings for public hearings and looking at how we can potentially expand that to include these new residential development applications even if they are being reviewed administratively. We do have a project around the city webpage as well where we track all current development projects that are more substantial and provide information about the plans and the staff reports available on the website. There's also currently an email subscription list that people can subscribe to and get email notices about whenever there are public notices that are issued. And so what we have currently right now is a short one question survey on Let's Talk Wilsonville, trying to get more information about how people would prefer to hear about what's going on in the community. So I want to plug that right now. We are going to try to continue to push that, make people aware of that survey because we really want to understand, you know, we are limited by the statute as to where we can mail these notifications, but there's plenty of other ways to get information and we want to understand how the community would like to receive that moving forward. So just want to plug that. That will be available throughout June and we can keep it open throughout the summer as well just to try to get input. I do want to touch on a couple of the other updates that are in the development code that weren't necessarily required by the state statute, but that we've chosen to implement based on planning commission and city council feedback in line with the housing production strategy action that we had to look at administrative review. The first of these is the annexation process and for residential development in areas where there is an adopted master plan. So the image here being Frog Pond as an example of where this might be the case. There will be a new expedited process whereby a residential annexation request would go straight to a hearing before City Council once we have a complete development application. This is consistent with the process that was adopted in the Coffee Creek Industrial Area back in 2018. And so essentially it allows for an annexation to have a hearing without a prior recommendation from the DRB. This seemed to make a lot of sense in this context because the rest of the development applications can't go to DRB anymore. So we're hoping this helps streamline the process a little bit. Based on these changes, we also looked at the threshold for other development types that are eligible for Class 2 review when there's a modification to existing development or existing approved site and architectural plans. The current threshold that is in the code is 1,250 square feet. Anything greater than that has to go to a public hearing at DRB. In light of the changes to the residential process and to consider equity for local businesses in our land use review process, we sought feedback from the Planning Commission and City Council as to whether or not this threshold should be increased. We got feedback that we should look at potentially increasing this on a somewhat limited level. And so that proposed threshold will now go up to 10,000 square feet, but there is still a limitation that caps that at 25%. And so what these graphics on this slide show, that essentially depending on the size of the existing building, That may limit what can qualify for a staff level review. These modifications will still be noticed because they're not residential development. There are still appeals rights and public comments that can be considered on the ability for the development review board to call these applications up. A couple of other updates throughout the code. We added some new definitions to help us provide some clarity around the process as we made the code updates. So a new definition for what residential development is. as well as a definition for review authority, just to try to avoid having overly wordy code that says DRB and or planning director. We're essentially simplifying that to review authority. The code amendments also touch the site design review section of the code. This is a section of the code that evaluates the design of buildings and landscaping and looks at things like materials and layout. That has a lot of subjective language which per state statute, we should not be applying to residential development. So what this code update does is essentially codify current practice, which is to refer back to the clear and objective standards that already exist in the code. for reviewing things like building design or landscaping. And then lastly, we've looked at other various updates throughout the code to make sure that what's in there is reflecting current practice. Knowing that we're now in an environment where code standards change more frequently, one of the proposals is to add an expiration to pre-application meetings. This will ensure that if an applicant team comes in to get information about which code standards apply, that the information they receive is current. Those pre-application meetings which are required for a development permit application will now expire within one year of the meeting. We've removed other conflicting language in the code where we have timelines that do not align with our 120 day land use review clock that we have according to the state. And so we've removed those conflicts. And we've also just refined other application review procedure language to reflect current practice. So accounting for things like the fact that we don't require paper copies of plans communicate information via facsimile, those kind of updates. The last major change that is proposed in light of some of these changes to what is eligible for DRB review is that beginning in 2027, the Development Review Board will consolidate to a single panel made up of seven members. We discussed this concept throughout the project with both the Planning Commission and City Council and also sought feedback from both development review board panels at meetings earlier this year to get their input. We did hear from city council that we appreciated having the two panels because of the flexibility it provides with scheduling. So one of the things that we talked about with DRB members is if they felt like they would be willing if the timing required called for it to have a second meeting in a month if needed. And that was something that members seemed open to. One of the things we heard a lot is that in light of having a lot of meeting cancellations more recently, it really affected feelings of preparedness and feelings of meaningfully serving the community. And that was what those members felt like they were called to do. by participating on these boards. So we are hopeful that moving to this model will provide a little more continuity for the DRB. The code edits that implement this are the code edits that are in chapter two of the city code. And so what we will do is later this year actually come back to you to have a discussion about how we go about implementing this change in terms of looking at how the terms and assignments will work. We expect to have this conversation with you later this summer. But in the meantime, the code amendments will set the stage for us to make this transition in 2027. We have not, throughout the project, received any public comment in written form to date to enter into the record. So based on this, at their meeting on May 13th, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of resolution LP26-0002, which recommended adoption of the proposed development code amendments that are in your packet as exhibit A. So the staff recommendation based on this planning commission recommendation is to adopt ordinance number 903 on first reading, which includes both the development code edits as well as the chapter two edits and to declare an emergency with an effective date of the ordinance on July 1st, 2026, which matches the statutory deadline. With that, we are happy to answer any questions you may have, thank you.

Councilor Cunningham.

Yeah, thank you for the presentation. Sure seems like a lot of things that are being mandated to us once more by Salem. Can you go back to, I think it was the second or third slide that was about SB 974. That one. I just wanted to make sure that everybody saw this. From SB 974, Zone map amendments and increased density are now an administrative review, so not something that comes into a meeting like this in front of our public that we deliberate publicly. It just happens behind closed doors in City Hall now. I think that's an atrocity to take that away from our city councils across the state, but Just wanted to point that out and make sure that our public saw that and it really does kind of reinforce the idea that we all need to be paying attention to what's going on and to be looking for these notices when they come out and taking care of each other in our in our community and making sure that we speak up if we see something. going on that might not meet our community's actual visions. So thank you for going back to that. I don't really have any questions about it. It looks like this is all pretty much stuff that we have to do and we just gotta do it, so.

Councillor Schell.

Actually, I agree with Councilor Cunningham on that. Being forced into that corner by the state makes it pretty difficult for us to manage the needs of the community and kind of takes the flexibility away from the Planning Commission and the Council. But I guess it is what it is. Question regarding the DRB going to a two meeting a week format. Will they work? I mean, there's a lot of documentation, a lot of stuff to go through to make those decisions, and they're important decisions. Will they have enough time in between sessions to absorb that and make a reasonable and good decision? Will that be kind of spread out over time?

I think we currently now work with scheduling hearings to make sure that we are balancing workload while meeting the obligations of the 120-day timeline. So I think we will continue to remain thoughtful in scheduling. you know, to not push through things that are on too aggressive of a timeline that doesn't allow the DRB to have adequate time to review. So I think we will continue to be mindful of that and balance that. We do have 120 days. I think historically, Wilsonville has prided itself on not necessarily taking that whole 120 days and trying to keep things moving through the process. But that said, we are entitled to that 120-day review timeline and staff will work to ensure that we are equitably distributing that workload as much as we possibly can.

You've worked on this for quite a while. Are there any gaps between a plan or package going down the administrative path versus the DRB path? Do you see any gaps there?

Could you clarify what you mean by gaps?

Well, are there packages or basically decisions that will be made at an administrative level that could actually be made, that will go down that path that could be made by DRB or just the opposite? I mean, do you think that we have it designed in a finite way that that just won't happen?

So I will say this. For the applications outside of the required residential ones that we must make a decision on, if it is, let's say, a non-residential development application, the code currently allows for the planning director, if the planning director senses that there might be more community interest, to direct that to a hearing. So that ability will be retained. But, you know, essentially if something qualifies for a class two review, it will go through that administrative review process. The difference being that some applications now will no longer be able to be called up by the DRB if there is only an appeal right to the applicant.

Okay. I'm pretty sure I understand that. Thank you. Mm-hmm. Yeah, there. Mm-hmm.

I'll just say from my perspective, serving on DRB for six years, I'm concerned about the Salem dictates because I think the most compassionate and thoughtful input from citizens were on those areas that are being stripped away and are an administrative decision. And they were good discussions. and made the final decisions by the DRB better. And if there was an issue, it went up from DRB to the city council. But again, I think Salem has to stop dictating us with housing mandates and provide us money to develop infrastructure to get things going. So I think... Too many rules are costing our city and our budget and everything else and taking away meaningful conversations with our citizens, but that's my view. Anybody else? Okay, thank you. Do we have anybody sign up for public testimony on Zoom or anyone? Okay. Anybody in the audience wish to provide public testimony right now on this issue? Seeing none, does staff have anything further to add at this time?

No.

All right. So at this time, hearing no further questions, everyone having the opportunity to testify hereby declare the public hearing closed at 8.59 p.m. It's now time for the council to consider ordinance number 903 on first reading. Does council wish to have any sort of deliberation in advance of the motion being presented? Okay. Seeing none, do I have a motion on ordinance number 903?

I move to adopt ordinance number 903 on first reading.

Okay. Is there a second? Second. Okay. The motion's been made by Council President Berry and seconded by Councilor Shevin. Is there any further discussion on the motion? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? SEEING NONE, THE MOTION PASSES 5-0. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS PRESENTATION. NEXT, WE'LL CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS NUMBERS 3264, 3265, AND 3266. I'LL ASK THE CITY ATTORNEY TO READ THE RESOLUTION TITLES.

Resolution number 3264, a resolution declaring the city's eligibility to receive state shared revenues. Resolution number 3265, a resolution declaring the city's election to receive state shared revenues. And resolution number 3266, a resolution of the city of Wilsonville adopting the budget making appropriations declaring the ad valorem tax levy and classifying the levy as provided by ORS 310.060 sub two for fiscal year 2026-27. And I will just note for the record, I know council knows this, is that we're having the public hearings together, but you will vote individually on each resolution.

On motion. Thank you. I call to order the Wilson City Council public hearing on resolutions number 3264, 3265, and 3266 at 9 p.m. Ladies and gentlemen, the city council will be taking public testimony tonight at this public hearing. The hearing will be conducted in the falling matter. Staff will present their report. Testimony will be asked for, for by those who wish to testify. Council will consider a motion for each resolution separately. This meeting is being held in person and remotely by zoom. If you are listening to this meeting remotely, when the time for public testimony is called, please use the raise hand feature in Zoom or press star 9 on your telephone if you would like to testify. If you are having difficulties with these instructions, you may call the number shown on the screen and enter webinar ID number shown on the screen when prompted. When called up to testify, state your full name and address for the records. I request for those providing testimony not to repeat testimony that has already been given to the city council, simply indicating you agree with the prior testimony given by a speaker you identify as sufficient. Each person will have three minutes to provide testimony. Thank you, and now staff will present their report.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. I'm Catherine Smith, the City's Assistant Finance Director, and with me this evening is Keith Katko, the City's Finance Director. Before you this evening are three resolutions, number 3264, 3265, and 3266, surrounding the fiscal year 2026-27 budget. First up are state shared revenues. Resolution 3264 acknowledges the city's eligibility to receive state shared revenues if the city provides four or more of the following services. Police, fire, planning, street construction, maintenance and lighting, sewer, storm, and utility services. The city provides all but fire, meeting eligibility. These are revenues collected by the state and dispersed based on population to municipalities. State shared revenues anticipated and budgeted for fiscal year 2026-27 include most notably gas tax, budgeted at $2 million. This is our single largest state shared revenue source. The next three are general fund revenues, liquor tax of $425,000, state revenue sharing of $340,000, and cigarette tax of $15,000. Next, Resolution 3265 acknowledges the city's election to receive state-shared revenues. ORS 221.770 establishes the process for the city to elect distributions of these funds, including enacting resolution and by holding a public hearing aligned for public comment. Next, resolution 3266, for which I'll turn it over to Keith.

Yeah, thanks, Catherine. Good evening, council. This resolution adopts the city's fiscal year 2627 budget. And while we have just one summary slide for you here tonight, this represents the culmination of approximately six and a half hours of public hearings held over two nights this past May at the budget committee. And those meetings, of course, are available for review on the city's website, on the city's YouTube channel, and the entire budget book is also published on the city's website. Just for the greater good, the most complete overview of the budget, or the most quick, condensed version of understanding the budget would be to read the city manager's budget message at the beginning of the budget book, which kind of serves as an executive summary of the whole budget, and again, that's posted online. So for tonight, I just have three key highlights of the budget. First, the total city budget is $300.5 million across 24 funds, and this reflects the point at which resources equal requirements as required under budget law, Oregon budget law. The city budgets all available resources and all anticipated uses of those resources. Resources include beginning fund balances, ongoing revenues, while requirements include operating expenses, capital improvement projects, debt service, inter-fund transfers, and ending fund balances. So it's everything that's budgeted. As a slice of that, the city's operating budget for next year is 68 million, and the capital improvement budget, also called the CIP budget, is 45.5 million. Second point to make on the budget is regarding the city's budgetary level of control. Each fund is budgeted separately, so we speak collectively of the entire city budget of 300.5 million, but it's really a collection of those 24 separate SEPARATE FUNDS. AND WITHIN THOSE FUNDS, THE BUDGETARY CONTROL IS MAINTAINED AT A FUND LEVEL, AS I MENTIONED, ACROSS SEVERAL CATEGORIES WITHIN EACH ONE OF THOSE FUNDS, INCLUDING DEPARTMENTS. EACH DEPARTMENT HAS A BUDGET. THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT HAS A BUDGET. DEBT SERVICE TRANSFERS AND THE ENDING FUND BALANCE ARE WHAT IS KNOWN ALSO AS OUR CONTINGENCIES ALL ARE BUDGETED SEPARATELY. It's collectively known as the fund accounting. The fund-based accounting structure allows the city to track restricted revenue sources separately and helps ensure that those funds are used only for their intended purposes. Third point I just would like to make is at the Budget Committee, we talked a little bit about the function and the duties of the Budget Committee and discussed some additional touch points that we might have throughout next year. So we're going to put on the calendar a type of mid-year review to check back on the status of the budget in the actuals. Sometime after, probably in January or February, we'll look at that, with particular update on the city's general fund. While the general fund, as we talked about at the budget committee, is currently stable, is in balance, the existing model is unlikely to be sustainable over long term without some adjustments. As City Manager Troja noted in her budget message to the Budget Committee in May, a comprehensive review of the General Fund is already underway and will continue over the next six months to identify a more sustainable long-term path forward in the General Fund. So that is the presentation I have, but open to any additional questions you have. since those budget committee meetings as well as we have the city engineer in the audience too to talk about any specific capital improvement project budget questions you may have.

Any questions? Councilor Cunningham.

No questions, just a statement. I wanted to thank you both for all your hard work on the budget. I thought that our committee meetings went really well and there's some good discussion and questions that were asked and look forward to continuing that process with you. All the praise goes to you guys, great job. It was a very easy to read budget that even a dumb dumb like me can figure out, so.

Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Skoll.

Thank you again.

Thank you again for an excellent budget, a balanced budget in the process. I agree with Councilor Cunningham, the process went excellent. It's kind of interesting. I watched a little bit of the video from the county budget meeting and it was all over the place. So kudos to you both and your team for putting the budget together, balancing it out, and presenting it in a very constructive and orderly fashion. We do have some challenges here coming up in the future, and I look forward to working through that. But I think we're going to, based on the way things are going economically from the Fed down, we're going to have challenges at the state level, the county level, and, of course, that trickles down here to the local level. And so, you know, just look forward to working with you and staying out ahead of that. So thanks again. Thank you. Councillor Shetland.

Thank you, and I also want to publicly thank our budget committee members, particularly our non-council members, so citizens of our community that some of them were new this year and had to learn quickly on the run to be able to digest the budget. It was all very well done, and I appreciate both staff, council, and our community members that are on the budget committee. Thank you.

Anything further from anybody?

I'm sorry, I thought I got the light.

I'm sorry, Council President Berry.

Yeah, again, thank you. I can see why year after year, the city gets awards for their budgets. I think that you put together a really good report. I see it as a value statement for the city, and I really, the first time that I was on the budget committee, I was a little nervous and thought, oh, this is really scary, but there's so much good information about all the operations and the services that the city offers that I learned a lot each year that I'm on the committee. And I agree with what everybody has said. I appreciate the volunteers that have sat on the committee, the city staff, the city council. I look forward to the city manager's report. And did you mention that you're going to do a report a few months down the road, letting us know how the budget is going?

Yeah, we'll probably do it sometime after the calendar year end, January or February. Kind of a mid-year check-in.

I think the committee had asked if that was something we could do, and I love that you're coming back and saying that is something we'll do. So I look forward to it. And again, thank you for all the hard work. And thank you for balancing the budget. That's key.

Ditto with everything that all councillors have said. That was my fifth year serving on the budget committee. Three as a community member, then two as a council member. And I thought that you guys did a superb job. I thought that QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, BOTH THE CITIZENS AND COUNCIL, WERE VERY THOUGHTFUL AND INFORMATIVE. I THINK I WANT TO GIVE DEFINITELY CREDIT TO YOU GUYS, DID A LOT OF HARD WORK, AN EXCELLENT PRESENTATION, BUT I ALSO WANT TO GIVE CREDIT AGAIN TO OUR CITY MANAGER, GINA TROHA, WHO DID AN EXCELLENT JOB RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING TO INTRODUCE THIS CLOSE ASSESSMENT OR ANALYSIS OF THE GENERAL FUND AND SETTING UP THAT THOUGHTFULNESS TO LET US KNOW THAT THAT WORK ISN'T GOING TO BE HAPPENING AND THAT WE'LL HAVE SOME THOUGHTFUL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE BEST COURSE IN THE FUTURE. I THINK THAT SET THE TONE FOR US AND HELPED US THROUGH THAT MEETING. SO I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. OKAY. Any more questions? Okay. Do we have any public testimony at all online or in the audience? Anybody want to give public testimony at this time? Okay. Seeing none, hearing no further questions, everyone having an opportunity to testify, I hereby declare this public hearing closed at 9.12 p.m. It's now time for the council to consider each resolution. First, we'll consider resolution number 3264. I'm assuming we'll all, council, can we just agree we'll skip to deliberation but would have a discussion after the motion? Okay. Is that all right with you? Okay. Do I have a motion to approve resolution number 3264?

I move that we approve resolution number 3264.

Do I have a second? Second. Okay. The motion to approve resolution number 3264 has been made by City Council President Berry and seconded by Councillor Skoll. Is there any further discussion on resolution number 3264 at this time? Okay, seeing none. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Hearing none, the motion passes 5-0. Next, we'll consider resolution number 3265. Do I have a motion to approve resolution numbers 3265?

I move to adopt resolution number 3265.

Okay, do I have a second?

Second.

Okay, the motion's been made by City Council President Berry to approve resolution number 3265 and seconded by Councilor Shevlin. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

The motion passes 5-0. Next, we'll consider resolution number 3266. Do I have a motion to approve resolution number 3266?

I move to adopt resolution 3266. Okay.

The motion has been made by City Council President Berry. Is there a second?

Second.

Okay, the motion has been made and seconded. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

AYE. THE MOTION PASSES 5-0. DID WE GET THROUGH THEM ALL? OKAY. SO IS THERE ANY CITY MANAGER BUSINESS?

YOU'LL NOTICE THAT CITY MANAGER BUSINESS IS LISTENED TWICE ON THE AGENDA. I DO NOTICE. I DON'T HAVE TWO CITY MANAGERS BUSINESS. I ONLY HAVE ONE.

I THOUGHT YOU PREEMPTED THE CITY ATTORNEY.

THAT'S FINE.

So there's no business? You're named twice?

Oh, no business from legal to nightmare. Okay.

So if you all recall, in February, you had approved a town center communications plan. That plan was consistent with your goal, and your goal was for the community to understand the town center plan, urban renewal, and other funding. So over the next couple weeks, you will start to see information roll out. Staff has been working on that plan that you all approved. working on those implementation strategies. Some of what you'll see will be a website that covers Town Center and provides some factual information about Town Center. You will also see some social media posts and reels, and this will occur over the next several months. In addition, you will see on Wilsonville Road probably some banners that will go up that essentially just simply say Town Center is kind of uh, more of a placemaking, uh, piece. So you'll see some information go out. I just wanted to make sure that you all knew that this isn't the implementation of the plan that you only already had approved in February that staff's been working on.

Thank you. And with that, our city council meetings adjourned at 9 16 PM and we'll be going into an urban renewal district agency agenda meeting. Do we have, do we need time? we can go right into it, okay? I call to order the meeting of the Urban Renewal Agency for June 1st, 2026 at 9.16 p.m. Will the city recorder please call the roll?

Member Shevlin?

Here.

Vice Chair Berry? Here. Member Cunningham?

Here.

Member Skoll?

Here.

Chair O'Neill?

Here. Member Berry, 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. OK, the motion's been seconded. And all those in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion passes 5-0. Now we turn to citizens' input. This is an opportunity. Is there anybody that signed up to give any input? So I don't want to have to read this. Anybody want to give input tonight? Everybody wants to go home. Okay, so I'm going to skip that. The next item is our consent agenda. Will the city attorney please read the items on consent?

Minutes of the April 20, 2026 Urban Renewal Agency meeting.

Sounds good. Member Berry can have a motion to adopt the consent agenda.

I move to adopt the consent agenda.

Is there a second? Second. Motion to adopt the consent agenda has been made and second all those in favor say aye aye Motion passes 5-0 Okay, we're now going to a public hearing I call to order the Wilsonville urban renewal a public hearing on you are a resolution number 359 I would ask the city attorney to read the title of the resolution I

URA resolution number 359, a resolution of the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Wilsonville adopting the budget, making appropriations, and declaring the intent to collect tax increment for fiscal year 2026-27.

Thank you. Folks, the Urban Renewal Agency will be taking public testimony tonight at this public hearing. The hearing will be conducted in the following manner. Staff will present their report. Testimony will be asked for by those who wish to testify. The agency will consider a motion for the resolution. The meeting is being held in person remotely by Zoom. If you're listening to this meeting remotely, when the time for public testimony is called, please use the raise hand feature in Zoom or press star nine on your telephone if you would like to testify. If you're having difficulties with these instructions, you may call the number shown on the screen and enter webinar ID number shown on the screen when prompted. When called up to testify, state your full name and address for the record. I request from those providing testimony not to repeat testimony that has already been given to the agency. Simply indicating you agree with the prior testimony given by the speaker will you identify with as sufficient. Each person will have three minutes to provide testimony. Now I'll ask staff to present their report.

Thank you, Mayor. This is the resolution to adopt the Urban Renewal Agency budget for fiscal year 26-27. Distilled down to one simple chart here, the three open urban renewal Plan areas are detailed here in columnar format. Only the WIN program and Coffee Creek are collecting tax increment, roughly two million, and you'll see that total on the far right of the screen. Total resources foot to 7.3 million, and they will equal total requirements of 7.3 million. The total requirements are, the bulk of that is for the rebate of the WIN program. in the wind program. And on the west side is for CIP 4216, which is Brown Road. And for the Coffee Creek, it is CIP 2115, which is the day road sewer extension in Coffee Creek. So those requirements of 7.3 equal the resources of 7.3 million. And that is all I have, save for any additional questions.

Council, any questions? Seeing none. Is there anybody wishing to testify online? No one signed up. Anybody in the audience? Seeing none. OK. With that, I'll close the public hearing at 9.21 PM. And it's time for us as members to consider resolution number 359. If we can, just go straight to the motion without deliberation. Do I have a motion to approve resolution number 359?

I move to approve resolution number 359.

Do I have a second? Second. Motion's been made by Member Berry and seconded by Member Skoll. Any further discussion? Okay, seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Anybody opposed? Five zeroes to pass. We're adjourned at 9.22 p.m.