City Council - Special Meeting

Music playing

Call to order the work session of the Willisville City Council of July 30th, 2026 at 1 p.m. Are there any councilor concerns? Seeing none, we'll turn now to the work session. Resolution number 3279 referring proposed ordinance number 905 to Willisville voters.

I'm going to go ahead and start this while Matt comes up, uh, just to kind of set the stage. So, uh, this afternoon, uh, what the council is going to be doing is making a decision. If you want to refer the resolution to your meeting on August 3rd, if you want to move that forward, that's question number one, question number two is if yes, what kind of modifications or changes would you like to see? So Matt's gonna go through a presentation, then there'll be an opportunity if you have items that you wanna see changed or a conversation for the council to have at that point.

Okay, thank you, Gina. Good afternoon, Mayor O'Neill, Council President Berry, and City Councilors. We're here to walk through the proposed voter referral package for the Town Center Development District. To answer your questions and receive any feedback or direction before you formally consider Resolution 3279, or if you choose to formally consider 3279. My name is Matt Lorenzen. I'm the City's Economic Development Manager, and I'm joined here by Elaine Howard, Elaine was our consultant on this project. She's an expert in urban renewal statutory compliance. While we had Tiberius Solutions, who's joined us in previous meetings, they assisted us primarily with the financial component of this exercise. We're not asking for any action or decision today, but if you do wish to proceed, we are looking at the calendar for August 3rd as the date of potentially considering Resolution 3279. So as Gina mentioned, and as the council packet indicates, and as I just mentioned, we're looking for feedback and any guidance that you'd like to provide with regard to the documents that are included in your packet. There are a number of them. It's a lot to process and consume. We look forward to the discussion surrounding those documents. I'm going to approach this sort of in three parts. We'll review the draft urban renewal plan and report, which you have not seen until recently. This sort of key data points and disclosures that are required under the recent charter amendment and where to find those. Um, and then we'll go into summarizing each document that's part of the legislative package you're presented with. And then finally conclude with a discussion of how we're endeavoring to comply with the requirements of the charter amendment. So for anyone following along, uh, this is what the cover page of the urban renewal plan or the town center development district plan looks like. And we'll start at a very high level and just, um, show. what the boundary looks like. It encompasses 169 acres, roughly 145 of which are tax lots, with the balance being right of way, roads, sidewalks, et cetera. The plan itself establishes the boundary, identifies eligible projects and programs, outlines financing, and provides the framework that would guide implementation over an approximate 28 year duration. or rather a 28-year duration if it's ultimately approved. This boundary, as I noted, has about 145 acres of developable property or existing developments. And you'll notice that this boundary is different from what was included in previous iterations, which showed a crossing and a landing for the I-5 bike ped bridge. This boundary now excludes that portion across and on the west side of I-5. This map is found in the urban renewal plan. It's included in chapter five in the project section. This shows nine location specific infrastructure projects that we've discussed in previous meetings. I'll just note that the exact timing of any project would depend on future urban renewal agency decisions, available funding, redevelopment activity and partnership opportunities. So I have shown the projects here. We're not gonna go through each one, but there are thorough project descriptions again in chapter five of the town center development district plan and the accompanying report. These location specific projects are critical for the proper function of the town center area as development occurs. They improve circulation for cars and other modes of transportation and introduce a walkable streetscape that includes landscaped planters, benches, lighting, and other amenities. The projects move people and vehicles efficiently and safely within Town Center and on Wilsonville Road. One of the most noteworthy projects is the extension of Parkway Avenue to the south, shown as project number three. This north-south street becomes the functional main street and center of energy in a vibrant mixed-use district as it's been envisioned in the Town Center plan. Other projects include modifications to Town Center Loop West, the Park Place Promenade redesign, Gateway Plaza to Main Street Promenade near the movie theater. Together, these projects support the long-term vision established in the town center plan. These projects are district-wide rather than site-specific. They include local road construction, underground utility relocation, cycle tracks, parking facilities, food cart pod incentives, AND REAL ESTATE OR SITE PREPARATION ACTIVITIES. THE PLAN AUTHORIZES THESE PROJECTS AND CATEGORIES, BUT IT DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT EVERY PROJECT BE COMPLETED. AND THEN JUST A QUICK NOTE BEFORE ADVANCING FURTHER, WE'RE ABOUT TO LOOK AT SOME IMPORTANT DATA POINTS, AND I'VE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK THOSE ITEMS THAT ARE sort of assumptions or estimates rather than fixed or binding components of the plan. So this slide summarizes several foundational assumptions. As noted, the district includes about 169 acres. The redevelopment analysis assumes that about 56 acres ultimately will redevelop over the life of the district. Development could include a mix of housing, commercial, retail, office, hospitality, and other uses permitted under the development code, the town center zone. Building heights shown here simply reflect what zoning allows and what we used in our modeling. We don't know how tall each building may be, but we do know this council is taking action to limit maximum height at five stories. Again, the figures marked with an asterisk are estimates used for planning purposes. Maximum indebtedness and district duration are binding, however, under which the district would be operated if it's approved. So here's where we'll spend a good chunk of our time and we will come back to the plan itself as a part of this conversation, but I wanted to just briefly cover those key components and disclosures. Rather than discussing the contents of each document in detail, I want to explain what each document does and more importantly, how they all fit and work together. Think of these documents as one coordinated package where each document serves a different legal or informational purpose. One way to think of the documents is that they each address a different question. The resolution asks, should this go to voters? The ordinance asks, what are voters being asked to approve? The ballot title and explanatory statement ask, how is this measure going to be explained to voters? And the plan and report ask, what would govern this district and what analysis supports it? So we'll begin with resolution number 3279 as it's drafted today. This is the action council would consider next week if you choose to move forward. The resolution does not itself establish the development district. Instead, it initiates the voter referral process. It packages together the election materials, approves the ballot title and explanatory statement, and refers proposed ordinance 905 to Wilsonville voters. Moving to proposed ordinance 905, this is the legislative document voters would be considering. If voters approve the measure, this is the ordinance council would later consider adopting after the completion of remaining statutory steps that are required under ORS Chapter 457. If it's ultimately adopted by the council after the November vote, the ordinance would establish the town center development district and approve the town center development district plan. In other words, the resolution refers the question, the ordinance is what voters are being asked to approve, and if approved, the ordinance is what council would later adopt. The ballot title. Attached to the resolution as an exhibit is the proposed ballot title. This is the language that would actually appear on the ballot. You saw it at your last work session and we have revised it since then to reflect your feedback. It now explicitly states that the Town Center Development District Plan is an urban renewal plan. By law, it consists of three parts, caption, question, summary. Its purpose is to provide voters with a concise and impartial description of the measure. The explanatory statement accompanies the ballot title and it appears alongside the ballot title in the county voters pamphlet. Because the ballot title is necessarily brief, the explanatory statement provides additional factual background and context for voters. Now moving to the Town Center Development District Plan, and I'll stop here and deviate from my scripted words a little bit. We've invited Elaine to be here today as she has vast experience with the implementation and administration of urban renewal plans across the state of Oregon. I specifically want to invite her to comment on how our plan is set up, how the report is set up, why they are set up this way. So a bit of an awkward segue, but Elaine, if you wouldn't mind kind of speaking to those points.

Thank you. I'm Elaine Howard. I've been doing urban renewal consulting for the past 20-some years and have worked with the city of Wilsonville for the past 20-some years on many different urban renewal issues. The urban renewal plans and reports are specific documents that follow what is required in the statute. So the statute says explicitly what has to be in an urban renewal plan, and our urban renewal plan has chapters or segments set up specifically that follows that statutory requirement. It is the same with the report. So when somebody's reading the report, they may look at it and think, well, why is this here or like this? It's because we are following what the statute says has to be in a report and putting in that specific information so that it complies with the statutory requirement. I have been doing this for 20 years, have done over 100 of these different urban renewal plans and amendments and have always followed this same layout of the documents for all of that work because it specifically meets what the statute requires.

So we're not gonna quite open up for full discussion yet, but it's just if there are questions about how those documents set up, how they function, their relationship to one another. Anything on that before we continue forward? Okay, go ahead. Thank you. So as I noted, if Ordinance 905 were approved by voters, it would become the governing document for the development district itself. establishing the boundary, the authorized projects and programs, the amount of authorized indebtedness, the financing methods, the amendment procedures, just the overall framework for how the plan is implemented over time. It authorizes projects, but it does not require that every project occur or establish a fixed construction schedule. We've talked a little bit about this in previous work sessions, but I'll pause for a moment here as well. We've seen some commentary about why there can't be greater specificity on this point. And what we discussed in the past is just simply that an economy is a very dynamic creature. And we interact with it on an opportunity basis and based on revenue streams, based on development activity that may or may not occur. And so the plan authorizes... a certain slate of projects, but it does not specify a specific date certain that it would be completed by, or even that all of the projects will be completed, again, due to the dynamic nature of how all of this unfolds over a 28-year period. Priorities may shift, opportunities may present themselves, and so forth. And that's not unique to Wilsonville. That's, again, how all urban renewal plans are set up. That said, the report document does have tables in it that specify our best attempt at how this might unfold over time. And if it were to unfold that way, is it feasible to finance it within the constraints of maximum indebtedness, et cetera? There is in the report a finance plan that does show a sequencing of projects, but that's non-binding and it is attempting to model feasibility rather than to create a specific sequencing or timeline for construction. So the plan tells us what the district may do. The report explains why and how the plan is supported. It contains the redevelopment assumptions, which are found in Appendix A. Yes, they are far back in the document, but again, the document is structured the way it is for a reason, not for a reason, which is statutory compliance. Unlike the plan, the report is not itself a governing document. It provides the evidentiary basis supporting the plan and the legislative findings required by ORS 457. So taken together, The resolution starts the election process. The ordinance is the legislative action voters would consider. The ballot title and explanatory statement communicate the measure to voters. The plan establishes the governing framework if it's ultimately adopted. The accompanying report provides the technical and financial analysis supporting the plan. Together these six documents comprise the complete referral package before the council today. So a few words about charter amendment compliance. This slide summarizes the disclosures that will be required under the Wilsonville Charter. If council refers the measure to voters, these items would be provided to every voter using precise language, which is in the charter amendment itself. It stipulates exactly what wording must be used and where these figures would be inserted into that language. They include, as shown here, the anticipated duration, maximum indebtedness, estimated interest payable, and the planning assumptions for housing and commercial development used in preparing the financial analysis. Industrial square footage is also required to be disclosed, but in this case, that number is zero. So with that, that concludes the presentation. And again, staff is seeking your feedback on the documents presented today. IF COUNCIL WOULD LIKE REVISIONS, STAFF WILL INCORPORATE THOSE AND DO SO BEFORE RETURNING BACK FOR FORMAL CONSIDERATION OF THE RESOLUTION NUMBER 3279. WE'RE HERE AND HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. COUNCILOR CHAVALIN.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MATT, AND WELCOME, MS. HOWARD. I'VE SEEN SOME OF YOUR PRESENTATIONS ON YOUTUBE, AND I FIND YOUR WORK. very easy to understand and comprehend. So I really appreciate that work. My teenage granddaughter wishes to be a YouTube influencer and here you've already achieved that accomplishment. I just want to make a statement that my focus for our discussion today and ongoing should we choose to move forward is that we look for every opportunity to be transparent with our community and There always are, as Ms. Howard knows, in regards to urban renewal, a lot of questions, oftentimes misunderstandings. And so I want to make sure that we are looking for maximum transparency, but of course, in our wording, in our intent, which can be two different things, but they should meld. and of course all of that within the law that's required. So I want to set the stage for that and that will be my focus, thank you.

Councillor Scull.

Just a couple questions, and this is more of a legal thing than to start. The caption question and summary, is that guided under a different statute or law than the ORS 457?

Yes, it's found in ORS Chapter 250. 215?

250.

250, thank you. Okay.

In the text, we reference food carts, and I've seen comments online, and actually I've received a couple questions regarding the comments, or regarding the food carts. Is that a front-loaded item, or is that a back-loaded item, or is it anytime it pops up throughout the 28 years?

Could you clarify your meaning with front-loaded versus back-loaded?

If this is voted in and we go through the process and everything is approved by city council on the back end and everything, can the food court start ASAP as soon as someone comes in with a proposal?

Yeah, so recognizing the community's interest in this and the council's unanimous support of that project, we showed it in our finance plan as project number one. But yes, it could be implemented at any point during the 28-year duration of the plan, but we have modeled it financially as the first project to be completed.

Okay. Last question for right now is, At the tail end of the proposed ballot, it says what happens next. Is there a link that could be added to that that kind of explains that what happens next in more detail so the public knows if this is approved, what are those detailed steps just so that we maintain transparency on the front end but also on the back end too?

For clarification, Councillor Scholl, do you mean like the additional statutory steps that would be required after the fact? Correct. If it's approved? Okay. Yes.

And you're looking for, you said a link?

Yeah, in the proposed text here, you have various links to the exhibits and everything. And I'm curious as to in the what happens next, if it's approved, can there be similar links there that will take the public to that process to show that we still have to go through several steps on the back end to get this implemented after the vote?

Like a schedule.

Yeah, I mean, absolutely that's doable. I think as far as this link goes, and I'm going to look to Amanda and Gina on this, but wilsonvilleoregon.gov slash ord-905, that page, as I've understood and as we've envisioned, it would really only include the materials that voters are considering. But could we provide the information, more detailed information about what happens next somewhere else? Or I'm going to defer to this question, but I think this specific web page that we've given a link to would have just the materials that voters are considering. Is that accurate?

Yeah, originally our plan was that landing page would go directly to the ordinance so voters could easily find and read what they're voting on. I do know that for the election notice for measure 3-632, We included on the webpage for that both the notice and then also included the full text of the measure. So what we could do is maybe similarly for the election, assuming this gets referred, the election notice for this measure, we could have that as a supporting document link there.

Yeah, my concern is from a transparency perspective is that once this is voted on, if it passes, then there are a series of steps that need to take place, going through planning commission and coming back to council, probably on several occasions, public hearing, so forth and so on, that guides a lot of the data that's being debated in public right now and everything. So that's something that we'll basically be taking care of after the fact. And I think it would be critical to, or important to, you know, have that stated and kind of, so those who want to look or those who want to know can see that that's what's going to, that's what the process is going to happen. Thank you.

Councilor Cunningham.

Real quick, it was the height waivers were mentioned earlier and I was hoping maybe for actually for us and for the community. Do we know when that issue is going to come before council and our citizens will have a final understanding of whether or not those height waivers will still be in place?

Yeah, I'd be happy to take that question. We are scheduled for planning commission public hearing on August 12th and it will come to city council assuming that they move forward with a recommendation to approve. It will come to council at your for first year reading and public hearing on September 10th and the second reading on September 21st. Okay.

Thank you. Um, so to kind of, preface my questions and comments. Council's received 20 different comments from citizens via email. We had two in favor of this proposal. We've had 18 that are maybe not necessarily addressing the proposal but are, I would, I would file under the questioning or opposed category. These are the 18 citizen comments. I don't think we've seen that many comments since we addressed sewer and storm water being tripled over a few years. And I just wanted to go through and just kind of highlight some of these comments. So as you convene, please exercise complete transparency and honesty adhering to the amended city charter, measure 3632. Town center plan is currently envisioned forces a housing density at least four times greater than Villabois. As you convene, please exercise complete transparency. I'm asking the city to clearly disclose the plan for 2,300 plus residential units near the beginning of the upcoming ballot measure description. True community support comes from giving residents clear, accessible information, not placing one of the proposals, most consequential details, several pages into the explanation. I respectfully request that when designing the ballot you remain true to the transparency ideals for which we voted in May, Measure 3632, including the wording that was used at that time. This person says no more apartments. It is hard to gain trust of your constituents when we feel like you're being deceptive at times. Density and number of units should be on the first page. I urge you to be transparent. List the actual density up front in the ballot text and what it actually means to residents. It's deceptive to not include 2,381 housing units that are planned for this project on the first page of this document along with other key details of the plan. I'm shocked and dismayed at the amount of proposed units. This is untenable traffic, parking, gridlock. Wilsonville just can't handle this additional density. Wilsonville residents deserve transparency, accountability, and certainly not a 28 year commitment based on decisions that will largely be made later. I asked that the city council clearly state the city's plans regarding this district that will impact our community for decades to come. There are lots of vague statements about supposed improvements, but no mention of the proposed 2,381 apartments, no mention of limited parking, no mention of urban renewal and no mention of how many existing businesses will be displaced. there's a complete absence of 2,381 units on page one under the plan details. So those are the 18 in opposition to what we're, or asking for at least enhanced transparency and that we're focused on that today. So I hope that council has had a chance to read those. They were coming in kind of hot and heavy today, so I was trying to keep up with them as best as I could. But I think that's an important, background that we listened to our citizens who took the time to communicate with us on that. A few minutes ago when you were, you mentioned some of the changes based on feedback from the last meeting, Matt, and said that we added the words urban renewal. Can you clarify where those words were added and changed?

In the summary.

Okay.

The first paragraph of the summary.

And the summary is going to be in the voter pamphlet, right? It will not be on the ballot. Is that correct?

So it's part of the ballot title. The summary is part of the ballot title.

But what will appear on the ballot itself that voters are putting above it?

The ballot title and the explanatory statement.

And the summary will be included on the actual ballot?

Yes, the summary is one of three components of the ballot title. So the ballot title consists of the caption, question, and summary. So it will be included there. And then the explanatory statement is also included in the voter's pamphlet. And to clarify, those aren't three pages when they are published and in the voter's pamphlet. They are three pages because that's how it's submitted. But it shows up all on a page in the voter's pamphlet.

in the voter's pamphlet.

Correct.

And on the ballot itself.

I guess I'm confused by what you mean by the ballot itself.

So there's a voter's pamphlet statement that you open up, you flip through, you see endorsements and all that stuff. Oh, you're talking about what you're actually voting on. We're talking about when you pull your envelope out, if maybe somebody got their voter information, the packet, two, three weeks before the election, They've misplaced it. Now all they have in front of them is the ballot itself. Will the words urban renewal appear on the ballot itself?

No. As far as I, I mean, I can verify that. But I believe what it is is the caption is what is shown.

Right. And I guess that's my concern is that voters will have to go and reference something else to under, you know, if they're not up to, you know, we just developed this phrasing, Wilsonville Town Center Development District in the last month or so. That's not something voters are familiar with. It hasn't been part of the conversations in this community. And I think putting that on there, is questionable at best. On the, one of the slides before this, it mentioned, can you go back? So the charter amendment compliance, it has to be posted on the city website and mailed to the electors. Are there any other options, or actually first, what is the cost of mailing that to the electors? What would the estimated cost of that, something like that be? I mean, we've done citywide mailers before.

I don't know what that is off the top of my head, but we can follow up with that information for the council.

Okay, my concern is that that's taxpayer money. And does measure 3632, did that give us any other options besides spending taxpayer money to mail that to our voters?

It can also be put in the explanatory statement.

So if it could be put in the explanatory statement, and it's about 150 words, maybe a little less out of the 500 that we're allowed, and it also goes to explain in a very straightforward, factual way what our voters are looking at, I have a concern that we're spending taxpayer money to mail this out to voters rather than just putting it in what would be included in our explanatory statement that doesn't cost our taxpayers any money. So I would like council to consider having staff put that into our explanatory statement rather than using more taxpayer money. On the taxpayer money front, has the city hired anyone to conduct any of the business in research and ballot language development?

I don't know what you mean by that, Councillor Cunningham, can you clarify? The ballot language for the ordinance?

Correct.

I wrote the ordinance.

Okay, but has the city employed a public affairs office to create communication and assist the city in communication on this?

Yes, we have had a company that we hired for polling that did community polling that provided some information. That information was provided after Amanda created it. Some of that information was provided in there after we received that polling data.

Is there any other work that they have been contracted to engage in?

Sorry, I can't get my button to push right. They have been contracted to do the polling data for us, and they have assisted with reviewing some ballot title language.

Was a contract extension made through November 15th with this company for other services?

I do not have that contract in front of me right now.

Well, it was. The city hired Wright Public Affairs to do polling and research. The total cost of this contract originally, I believe, was in the ballpark of $40-something thousand dollars. And the extension is about $33,000. So we're spending about $75,000 on this. And my concern is that the language that is being used in what we're putting to the voters came from that polling data. they tested different descriptions of this town center. And the one that tested the highest is the one that we're including here. And I'm troubled by the fact that we've spent $75,000 in taxpayer money in order to, to me, what feels like influence our voters and to advocate for this rather than inform and provide fact. The summary of what we're proposing here today, it reads more like a timeshare brochure than it does something that would just tell people exactly what we're up to. A set of proposed ballot titles drafted by AI not drafted by me. They were provided to me by Eric Winters, who was one of the chief petitioners of Measure 3632. These three ballot titles were plugged into AI and asked to create something that was neutral. It didn't have any kind of the human influence. It didn't have any kind of the desire to create, you know, use polling data. It took The vanilla information, the data, the stats, the information that is important, that has to be provided, and all three of these ballot titles that were spit out are, and the caption question and summary are pretty darn similar. But they all use the word urban renewal. And as I mentioned in the last meeting, I'm afraid that we've become afraid of using the word urban renewal. has some sort of negative connotation, but this is what our citizens understand, and I think that we really need to, in the light of 18 messages from our citizens who are questioning what we're doing here today, we really need to consider being as straightforward and open and honest with them. I'll take a break.

Let's be sure. As long as I can come back. Councillor Shetland.

Thank you, Councillor Cunningham. I certainly understand your intent to make sure that we maintain transparency. I believe most of us have spoken to that also this afternoon. I look at the consultants that we use for the polling as a group of professionals who interpreted the feedback from the polling to create a phrase or a statement, Town Center Development District, that's not trying to sell timeshares, but recognizing that there are phrases and words that connected with those that were polled. And to me, it looked like the polling was even. It was broad. It wasn't focusing on one group or another. And I see the feedback from the professionals that we hired as valuable information that can help us create a statement or a small group of statements that captures what we're trying to do based on the feedback that they received during the polling process. So one could look at it as being suspicious and trying to sell something under the table or another way. Or one could look at it as, here's a statement or small group of statements that our citizens connected with when we were talking about developing our downtown and using urban renewal. Thank you.

I have two. It's a tie if you went late. City Council President Berry.

I'll keep it brief, but I appreciate your report. I found it to be really clear and concise and easy to understand. I appreciate that you started out and emphasized that traffic is one of the, traffic circulation is going to be addressed with this district, which is, I think, one of the big concerns that we hear from a lot of our residents. And then on the the wording and the polling, I strongly, I really, really appreciate clear, concise communications. And Councillor Cunningham pointed out that we spent money on a consultant. To me, that money was well spent because I think it's informing us on how we can communicate with our residents. And in an easy way for them to understand when they go to the ballot, they know what they're voting on. So I don't have any concerns there. Those are my comments for now.

Thank you. Councillor Cunningham.

You know, under ORS 260432, we have to walk a fine line between informing and advocating. The ballot title has to be neutral. Our communication, once this is referred, has to be informative and fact-based. It can't advocate, it can't go and try to influence. And looking at the final $33,750 contract added with the right public affairs, it talks about how Part of that is to train city council and senior staff on how to talk about the measure, helping the city manage issues or problems should there arise with community or media. If the plan... The plan should be a little bit easier than that, I think, to understand and to be able to argue for or against. If it was widely accepted and easy to understand, or if it was widely accepted and didn't require... obfuscating 2,381 residential units in hyper density in our town center, I don't know why any of that would be required. And so I think that we have to be careful with, to me, a public affairs office hired on through November 15th, which is the election, which would also provide daily, weekly turnout reports in the voting period and post-election turnout result analysis. I mean, why we need to have electoral analysis? I mean, is that so we can change our messaging? That concerns me. It doesn't pass the smell test for me. Again, I think that we can save taxpayer money by not sending out mailers, by putting the requirement required information in the beginning of the summary, or I'm sorry, in the beginning of the explanatory statement that would save taxpayer money and it would just be there to inform people. Going back to the use of the word urban renewal. So the charter amendment now reserves the voters the authority to enact an urban renewal plan as defined and defines that term by reference by ORS 457. Our own plan is titled an urban renewal plan. The charter ORS 457, the city's own plan, all uses urban renewal. I don't see that we have a justification for changing up the verbiage here in the 11th hour right before we refer it to the voters and present it as something that they're not familiar with. To me, that doesn't meet the transparency that we've talked about. I think if we're looking to actually follow through on that transparency, we ensure that the verbiage is familiar and useful and meets what the charter amendment ORS 457 and our own plan, call it. And we've called it all along in our discussions here on the podium for the last year and a half. The other part that I would mention is that we also never We also never address in the explanatory statement, it says that we talk about the assessed value growing from $206 million to roughly 1.7 billion. But to keep this thing neutral, I think it would be fair to also add in clarification that the tax increment that overlapping districts would forego. that's not included in there and if we're going to talk about the big positive of creating a larger tax base out of the area I think we also need to mention to be fair and neutral that these taxing districts will forego TVF and are for example twenty eight twenty point eight million dollars over the life of this district So, and not TVFNR specifically in there, but that's just one example of where that happens. And so I think that to keep it fair and neutral, that should also be considered as being added in there.

Thank you. I'm going to defer to staff. The city attorney, did you have a comment?

I just wanted to clarify one thing because I was able to find the statute that talks about what goes on the ballot. So I just want to make sure that I'm being accurate. So under ORS 254.175, the county clerk does print the ballot title. But in lieu of printing the complete ballot title of any measure other than a state measure, the county clerk may print the caption and the question of the ballot title and the measure number on the ballot. And then it also says, in lieu of printing the complete ballot title and financial estimates of any state measures, which would not be applicable here, that the county clerk can do the caption of the ballot title and the statements of a yes or no vote. So basically, it's the caption in question at a minimum.

Thank you. Thank you for that input. Councillor Skoll.

Yes, thank you for that input. And also, in terms of addressing the voters' pamphlet, there's been quite a few comments out there about this thing, or the ballot itself being one, two, three, or four pages and everything. So I actually went out to the city attorney's point and basically pulled the ballot here from... last of the primary, this is 3633, 717 words, and I think you have 713 words, and everything on the ballot that's in this text would actually fit on one page. So from a transparency perspective, I don't think that there's anything being hidden or not being transparent. The information can be clearly stated there. And I personally think that the ballot as written follows a very good storyline. And basically it builds the project up as you move through the ballot. And then it basically lays out the technical information as required per the 362. And then basically takes it to the next step. And I don't think there's a problem with that. As for the title, I understand some of the arguments with the title there. But in certain terms, the Wilsonville Town Center Development District as far as I'm concerned, if this is approved, this takes this project to the next step and basically would be a term that would be used for the life of the project, and I think that's an appropriate thing. So, thank you. Thank you. Councilor Shevlin.

Matt, could you please go back to, I think it's your second or third slide where it says, oh, that might have been it. Back. There, Exhibit A. Could not Exhibit A be the wording that we use for the title?

If I might jump in, are you talking about the ordinance? Like the ordinance title? The ordinance title's too long.

It's too long, okay. And how many words do we have to take out of that, of that exhibit A? I'd have to, I could figure that out. You could wordsmith that. Yeah. Because I like that title, but I know we have to come into compliance, so. if there were a way to use, you know, the maximum amount of words and use those. I like that. I think that that accomplishes what we're all trying to say. We like the urban renewal or rather the town center development district plan. but it also makes reference to urban renewal plan, so I don't know how much wordsmithing we could do.

If I could offer a suggestion, if there's agreement amongst a majority of the council that urban renewal is somehow referenced on the actual ballot, BECAUSE THE CAPTION AND QUESTION ARE BOTH INCLUDED, THE QUESTION COULD BE CHANGED AS AN EXAMPLE TO SHOULD THE CITY ADOPT PROPOSED ORDINANCE NUMBER 905 ESTABLISHING THE WILSONVILLE TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT? AND THAT IS 19 WORDS SO THAT KEEPS IT UNDER THE 20-WORD REQUIREMENT.

At your slower speed. Sorry, okay, yes.

Thank you, Mayor, yes. Should the city adopt proposed ordinance number 905, establishing the Wilsonville Town Center Development District, comma, and Urban Renewal District, question mark. And so what it takes out is the to address blight. That's what I deleted to be able to fit that.

May I respond? Councillor Shetland.

I think getting the wording in the way you just said it is more important than using the term blight. We can bring blight in at an appropriate time further into the documents. Everyone agrees that blight is here and we don't care for it, but I believe we all agree that the development district and the urban renewal wording are of primary importance, in my opinion.

Thank you. Anybody else? I concur with that proposed change. I have some questions. I always go last or try to. Councilor Scholl mentioned food carts and that we're trying to make that a priority. What I don't want is something that's a sales pitch and never happens. So I guess I... Totally appreciate that we're referencing that as part of this issue. But I do know, no matter how this should go in November, if it passes, there's going to be an expectation that food carts are going to materialize, probably, because people have been asking about food carts for a long, long time. You know, it's a project there. I understand there's no guarantees. It could be done in the first year. It could be done in the next 29 years. I understand that. But you need to realize that the expectation of the community is that one, which is the, what I would say is something that was presented that's new, is something that's a top priority. So, and that's, I guess, not a question, a comment more so. Secondly, and I'll invite the city manager to provide further detail on this, or our expert here. When it comes to urban renewal district votes, I operate as a lawyer as to what other cities do and what Is there a pattern of expectation of how a city operates on a fiduciary obligation to taxpayer funds and everything else in making decisions whether or not it goes out to vote? And so my understanding when it comes to polling, when it comes to hiring these consultants, you know, we're a council which is an elected body, but on... Ms. Troha's side of the equation, there are certain things that she has to do, I believe, as well as the city attorney, of looking at what do other cities do, what steps are properly done before you turn it out, vote, and maybe polling is something we use. And so I guess I would invite the city manager to explain, given her experiences, that Are we operating on a process that is used by other cities? And just to clarify what you do.

Yeah, happy to do that. Thank you, Mayor. Conducting polling is a very common practice in communities and by city councils as it relates to doing urban renewal, local option levies, bonds, all of those sorts of things. So conducting a poll of your community to gauge where the community is at to be able to provide that information to the city council for your consideration when you decide if you want to put something on the ballot, whether that's urban renewal or a bond or a local option levy. That is information that is useful for city councils, boards, school districts when they're making a decision like that. So this is a best practice that is used in a lot of different communities and school districts.

Okay, thank you. And then when it comes to, and I really love how our community is engaged. I mean, I appreciate Councilor Cunningham's thought of the presentation of some concerned citizens that have submitted things. I appreciate his summary of those submissions. I've been busy all day, so I didn't get to read all of them, but I did read at least a few. And I anticipate, no matter when we do the formal vote, if it be Monday, as far as sending this out to vote, um, we'll have further community input. And, um, I have come to, in my years here in the community, realize that we have certain pockets of very engaged people that sometimes come early to let their feelings known. Some come later, uh, You know, we have, what, 81 plus 82% of people work outside the community and don't have the opportunity to come to these things. So I anticipate we'll have further input later. But I tend to, I think polling also sends a message of capturing the community more broadly than, say, people that come communicate their three minutes, some people that might submit an email to us. And it's not that I invalidate anybody that has communicated to me. I value all that information. I thought these things were, these are very important things to discuss. It just doesn't necessarily represent the whole community. And I'm all about inclusive input. So with that, that's all I have. But I join with the council in that if they agree to the recommendation of our city attorney and that change, I think that's fine. As far as presenting it on Monday, I think that was the question. I would like to go forward with Monday is that we do this formal vote. Any other concerns at all or comments? Councillor Scull.

I would also concur with that, changing the question and adding the urban redo into that. So I just wanted to make sure to get that in. Thank you.

Anybody else?

Oh, okay. Councillor Cunningham. We haven't. addressed the explanatory statement. I brought up concerns around the explanatory statement not including the required language for measure 3632 and that if we don't include that in the explanatory statement that will be an additional cost to our taxpayers on top of the $75,000 for the public affairs firm that we have hired. And I'm hoping that we take good care of our taxpayer money and responsibly ensure that we're not blowing it on a mailer when we can just put it in the explanatory statement for free.

City Council President Berry.

So I appreciate your concerns on how we spend our taxpayers' money. I think that's very, very valid. But I think that communications is really key and that people hear things in different manners and that a mailing, to me, would be money well spent. So thank you.

Councillor Shevin.

I'm not sure if our guest today is ready to make a statement or a comment, but I would value your feedback on our deliberations here and if our discussions and conclusions and where we're moving are fairly common, in your opinion. I hope you'll be able to provide some feedback perhaps later. Are we on the right track? Are we doing this the right way? That's what I want to do, and I'd like to know. So Ms. Howard, I'm not sure if you're ready to make any kind of a summary statement at all, but I would appreciate some feedback.

I mean, you've been saying you've been doing it for 20 plus years, so we could. Do you want that now, or do you want to wait? I'm ready now, if you don't mind.

There are only a small number of communities that require a vote. You now are one of those. And I've sat through a number of city council sessions like this trying to make sure that you do it right. And I think that's what all of you are trying to do is to figure out how to do it right and how to make sure you're complying with the requirement to do the vote and how to make sure you're transmitting the appropriate language. And I think the way you transmit that language is different in every community because every community residents have a different way of taking in information. And I think part of that is why you hire pollsters is to figure out what's the best way to give information so that everybody knows what's the best way to transmit that information. So yes, I think you're on the right track. You're going through the steps of trying to make sure that you meet what was passed in the May election. and to do it transparently. And I think you all have that same goal and are working to figure out how to balance it.

Thank you. Any other comments, questions? Councillor Cunningham.

Yeah, thank you for that. I guess one question. You mentioned the things that are required that we have to do in forming this ballot information. What are the ramifications if we were to go off the rails and we were to go into a place where advocacy began to occur on these? Would there be any repercussions or possibilities?

That's not really my arena. I'm not a lawyer, and that's more the arena of your city attorney.

Okay. Then I'll direct the question over there.

So city council can advocate all you want. It's really about city staff and the resources of the city being used for advocacy. And we take steps every election cycle to talk with city staff ahead of the elections about the Secretary of State puts out a really good manual on what you can and cannot do as an employee of government. And so we provide that every time there's an election to make sure that city staff know where the line is. And also under Oregon law, potential violations are individual. So it's... it's on city staff to take care for not engaging in that activity, but there's really good examples in the Oregon secretary of state's manual. And there's DOJ guidance in that as well. That gives examples of kind of where lines are. So we always, I make sure to inform staff of that every time we're heading into an election season.

Right, and so I guess included in that, what staff, what the city's allowed to do, that includes the ballot title and things like that under the ORS. And if we were to stray away from a neutral ballot title, what could be the possible outcomes of that?

So for the ballot title specifically, there is an avenue for people to challenge that. It doesn't stop a ballot measure from moving forward. It just goes to, in this case, it would go to the Clackamas County Circuit Court to make a final determination of what the ballot title says. And that has to occur by a specific date to ensure that the ballot titles are still then provided to the county clerk's office in time for the election. So there's a separate process for that if anybody chooses to challenge the ballot title, but ultimately it's decided by the circuit court they're the final stop on what will would be the ballot title language if If there's a challenge Gotcha Yeah, I guess one of the things that was brought up in the communication from citizens and

I think it's been a big part of the conversation around town center. It continues to be a big part of the conversations around town center. I believe it's the reason why measure 3605 back in May of 2024 failed is because of the high density, hyper density proposal of the nature of town center. And on that front of being upfront, of being honest, of ensuring that we are presenting this plan fairly. If you look at what the assumed square footage of development is going to be for residential and commercial, because industrial is zero, residential development is assumed to be 2.6 million square feet, estimated at 2,381 residential units in our financial feasibility study. Commercial is estimated at around a million so 68% of the assumed development in town center is residential it's the majority of development that we are expecting to see occur and the mention of it doesn't even make the first page of that explanatory statement. I think that's misplaced. I think that if we're going to see that level of development, if we're expecting to see that level of development, that page two-ing it, not putting it out in the forefront, I think is not being as transparent as we can be. But that's my take on it.

Any further comments? As far as mailing it versus...

Putting it in an explanatory statement.

Councilor Cunningham, can you talk into that mic, sorry.

Sorry, apologies. I was saying that we don't have, I didn't hear a consensus on whether or not we're going to spend taxpayer money to mail out the required communication or if we're gonna put it in the explanatory statement for zero dollar cost to our taxpayers. Okay, thank you. Councilor Shetland.

If you're waiting for me, I would like us to use maximum opportunities educate and communicate to our community. This town center and urban renewal are one of the biggest projects we've undertaken and it's so important that I don't believe we should I mean of course we want to be wise with our expenses but I believe we need to communicate in a maximum effective way and if that takes taxpayer money then we need to see what that would be but I believe we need to communicate as broadly as we can.

Councillor Schell.

I agree with Councillor Shevlin and Councillor Berry. The money would be well spent. It's about communication. It's about education. I think that's the most important thing that we need to do right now. I read a lot. I appreciate the input from the community. I'd like to see more. I do hear a lot, although I'm not one to sit up here and say, I've talked to such and such, or I talked to a group here and there. But I do hear a lot, and I don't really want to get into that. But I do think it's important that we spend the money, we do what we need to do to educate and make sure that the voters know both on the charter ordinance or the ordinance side and the charter side. And those can be... mixed if we include that in here. The focus of this ballot is basically the town center district and the ordinance, of course, does direct how we construct this, but I think that's a separate issue or a separate content or a separate amount of information that should be provided via mail. Thank you.

Councilor Cunningham. I'm not trying to cut you off. I just want to note for the record, we're at 2.07 p.m. and we have other things in the executive session, but go ahead, Councilor Cunningham.

I just have one last comment on this, and that's that Measure 3605 passed by a 16-point margin. Our citizens expected that transparency and that communication, that being in the documents that they're using to vote, not some mailer that's going to get thrown away because it's part of their junk mail. I think that our citizens spoke loud and clearly in May when they voted a 16-point yes for Measure 3632. And I think that spending their money on that is folly. It's not fair to them. Their tax money is their life and labor. And we're going to spend it so that we can push out more communication to sell this dream that ends with 2,400 residential units in town center. I don't know how we can sit here and pretend like the citizens haven't spoken loudly and clearly about this for a long, long time. They spoke about it in May of 2024 in Measure 3605 when they turned down funding urban renewal. for the first time in the history, second time, the first time that it failed, it went back and passed a couple years later. Failed in 2024, the voters spoke loud and clear in May of 2026, and now we're going to use their money to ensure that we can provide information in a mailer that's gonna get thrown out in the junk mail. I think that's atrocious.

I will just say that I'm all about communication, and I think we would be well served to make sure that all possible communication is extended to our community. Maybe mailers are going by way of the dinosaur, but it's still a process that is commonly used, and not only here, but also in other communities. other communities, so I think that I appreciate Councilor Cunningham's comments, but I also understand that we could have equal criticism that we're not doing enough engagement with the community with the information they need to make a good decision. But we can agree to disagree, but I think we have a decision on the mailer. Okay, with that, We will be adjourned. The city council will now meet an executive session pursuant to Oregon Revised Statute section 192, 660, Subsection 2, paragraph H, legal counsel slash litigation 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 be adjourned for five minutes.