The record · Transcript

Council session — 2026-02-19

Transcript from the session's official auto-captions (30,690 words), shown in readable case and split into speaker turns. Speakers are AI-suggested and editor-reviewed (low confidence — auto-captions garble names); each color marks a speaker.

watch the recording

Keelan. This is Loretta. I'm here online.

Hi, councilor Smith. Thanks for letting us know.

You're welcome.

Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to the Thursday, February 19th afternoon recess session of the Portland city council. Can we please call the roll?

Good afternoon. Avalos.

Present.

Smith.

Kanal. Present.

Pirtle-guiney here.

Ryan. Koyama Lane here. Morillo. Novick. Clark.

Here.

Green.

Zimmerman. Here. Novick.

Thank you. Councilor. Novick. Was that also councilor Green?

Mitch Green: Loretta is here.

Yes.

Thank you. I had Green, too.

Thank you. I've got councilors Smith, Green and Novick.

And I'm here to.

Thank you, councilor Zimmerman. Dunphy.

And I'm also here. Hello, everybody.

And councilor Ryan.

Dan Ryan: We all made it. Thank you. Can we please read the rules of decorum?

Yes. Good afternoon. Welcome to the Portland city council. To testify before council in person or virtually. You must sign up in advance on the council agenda at wwe Portland. Agenda. Information on engaging with council can be found on the council clerk's webpage. Individuals may testify for three minutes unless the presiding officer states otherwise. Your microphone will be muted when your time is over. The presiding officer preserves order. Disruptive conduct such as shouting. Refusing to conclude your testimony when your time is up, or interrupting others testimony or council deliberations will not be allowed. If you cause a disruption, a warning will be given. Further disruption will result in ejection from the meeting. Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass. Additionally, council may take a short recess and reconvene virtually. Your testimony should address the matter being considered when testifying. State your name for the record. Your address is not necessary. If you are a lobbyist, identify the organization that you represent. Virtual testifiers should unmute themselves when the council clerk calls your name. Thank you.

Thank you very much. And can we move to item eight, please?

Item eight declare bridge between southeast 17th avenue and southeast 26th avenue to be named brooklyn bridge, and direct the city administrator to authorize update of signage as appropriate.

Thank you. And we have claire adams with council lops here for a committee staff summary. Welcome, claire.

Council president and councilors. For the record, claire adams, city council policy analyst and transportation. The resolution before you document number 2026 048 was heard in the transportation and infrastructure committee on February 9th, where it was referred to full council with the recommendation to be adopted. The resolution names the bridge, located along holgate boulevard between southeast 17th avenue and southeast 26th avenue, as the brooklyn bridge. It directs the city administrator to authorize appropriate signage or maps, and update city records to reflect the bridge's name. The resolution further requests that the city administrator, through the Portland bureau of transportation, work with the brooklyn action corps and stakeholders to celebrate the designation. The full impact statement on this item includes information on financial and budgetary impacts and community impacts and community involvement. No one provided verbal testimony other than invited testimony at the committee meeting on February 9th, and one person submitted written testimony on this item prior to committee action on the merits of formally recognizing the pacific northwest owned brooklyn bridge. And that concludes the committee. Staff summary. Thank you.

Thank you, claire, and vice president Clark. I believe you were overseeing this item.

Thank you, council president. I think claire did a great job providing the overview. This bridge does connect district three and district four. And councilor Morillo brought forward this on behalf of the community. It's a fun thing to do, and I think I'll just hand it over to council councilor Morillo to discuss it. See? Is she there?

Is she online?

Is she online? Oh. Oh. Is there no councilor Morillo. Oh well, anyway, it's pretty straightforward. It's actually kind of a fun thing. A brooklyn bridge in Portland. And if councilor Morillo were here, she would tell you that she's going to use her very own office budget to pay for the signage and anything else that needs to be done. And we're ready to go.

Incredible, fantastic. Well, if councilor Morillo does join us, I'll make space for her to jump in. But, colleagues, are there any technical or clarifying questions before we move to public testimony? Councilor pirtle-guiney.

Elana Pirtle-Guiney: Thank you very briefly, the committee staff summary councilor Clerk said that there was no testimony other than the invited testimony. Can you share with us who I don't need names, but like were these community members, neighborhood association leaders, folks who work at the rail yard, who were the community advocates, who testified.

There was a person from the neighborhood association who lives in the neighborhood that testified, really on behalf of all the people who would have been here but were at work during the day and couldn't be there. This, I think, came from the neighborhood association. And having worked, you know, just down the street from this bridge for ten years at TriMet, I don't think there would be any opposition to naming it the brooklyn bridge. If anything, it would be the brooklyn yards bridge because we're going over the rail yard. But I think making it brooklyn bridge is a fun thing.

Thank you for that clarification.

And I see that councilor Morillo has joined us online. Councilor. Before I councilor Novick I see your hand as well. I'll come to you in just a moment. But councilor Morillo if you are able to come off mute, you're welcome to come off mute. And there she is.

Hi everyone. Thanks so much for introducing this to council today. Yeah, this was something that the neighborhood association had brought up to us, the brooklyn action corps. It's something they've been fighting for for a long time. And it's a quick and easy, meaningful change that we can do for that neighborhood. I worked on that with councilor Clerk, and people are very happy about it. There's not going to be any expenses. It's just going to come from my office. So we're really proud and happy to introduce this and push it forward.

Thank you. Councilor Morillo councilor Novick.

Angelita Morillo: Yeah, I just wanted to note that, of course, the famous con man, george c parker in the early 20th century pretended that he could sell people pieces of brooklyn bridge and got people to actually pay good money for it. I'm just wondering if you consider the possibility that we might renaming our bridge the brooklyn bridge might open us up to scam artists here.

We could use the money.

Really?

Excellent point, councilor Novick. We will have to be very judicious in how we address this. The only other thing I would know is that the neighborhood association, you know, PBOT said that it would likely they would have signage by June or July, but I'm hopeful that maybe they could get the signage sooner sometime in may, because that's when the other brooklyn bridge's birthday is. And I think it would be fun if their birthdays were at the same time.

Well, councilor, since you're using your office budget to pay for the signage, I will use mine to add a sign saying this bridge is not for sale.

Thank you. Councilor Novick rebecca, can you please call any public testimony?

One person is signed up. Ryan. Lyle.

Welcome. Ryan. Please introduce yourself for the record, your pronouns and three minutes.

Ryan. Lyle. He, him. And I'm here to represent the neighborhood again. Thank you so much, council, for your support. Hopefully it just goes really smooth and it sets the tone for the rest of your meeting today. But yeah, it's just an exciting thing that we've been looking forward to for a few years and helping to, like, solidify brooklyn on the map, get some more neighborhood excitement about living in the neighborhood. And yeah, so just very happy to support it. And thank you all for for your support too.

Thank you so much for being here.

That concludes testimony.

Excellent, colleagues. We're now moving into discussion. Councilor Novick, are you in queue for discussion or is that a legacy.

Legacy, legacy? My apologies.

No problem.

Councilor Kanal thank you, council president. As someone who lived in brooklyn for five years, not near the bridge, but I'm excited to have a a brooklyn bridge in Portland. I just wanted to make sure everybody read alex amen's. Amen. I don't know how to pronounce it. Sorry. Written testimony. It's fantastic. You should all read it. It refers to new york city's version screaming for attention with its granite towers and historic suspension cables, but that ours will possess the quiet pacific northwest confidence of a structure that knows it's essentially just a generous overpass. It's one of the funniest pieces of written testimony. We do read those, so I just wanted to take the opportunity to encourage people to to write in your testimony if you can't make it ever in the future. But I will be voting. Yes. I just wanted to make sure I shouted that out.

Thank you councilor Kanal colleagues. Any further discussion of this item? Great! Can we please call the roll?

Avalos I.

Smith.

Kanal I.

Pirtle-guiney I.

Ryan I.

Koyama Lane I Morillo. I Novick.

31 years ago I did live quite near the other brooklyn bridge, so I'll be happy. It'll make me feel young again to live near one again.

I Clark. I Green.

Zimmerman. I Dunphy. I and the vote is 12 ayes.

Congratulations. Everybody involved. Can we please call item number nine?

Item nine. Amend council committee code to allow for the creation of a council committee of the whole.

Thank you. Colleagues, this is an item coming directly to us. Rather than going through a committee as it's pertaining to directly to our our code as to our body. Specifically, this code is making some specific changes to allow for a committee of the whole councilor Kanal. I'll turn it over to you for any introductory remarks and also a technical amendment.

Yeah. So I'm going to describe the ordinance as it is proposed technical amendment. But just to clarify on what that is, there was a interpretation of between that was not inclusive. Meaning between 4 and 6 would mean five as opposed to four or 5 or 6 as it currently reads. So we're just editing it back. This ordinance changes council code 3.02.050. City code 3.02.050. About council committees part c one and two. It adds the word committees to clarify which quorum we're talking about. And then in the main body it says that there is an exception carved out for committee of the whole, allowing it to have more than six members. This is the exact text, the way that it's written, other than a committee of the whole, that was suggested by our city attorney, robert taylor, when we had the question and answer session earlier. And that's it. That's the whole ordinance.

Thank you. Councilor Kanal colleagues, before we move to well, I would move to technical or clarifying questions on this at this point, but I'd also like to move and vote on the technical amendment to clarify the language. So before we move to proper debate at so councilor Kanal moves the amendment, is there a second second councilor Clark seconds the amendment. Is there any debate on the amendment? Can we please call the roll on the Kanal one?

Avalos I.

Smith no. Kanal I. Pirtle-guiney I.

Ryan I.

Koyama Lane I.

Morillo I.

Novick I.

Clark I.

Green. I Zimmerman. I Dunphy. I the amendment is approved with 11 I and one no vote.

Perfect colleagues is there any technical or clarifying questions with regard to this ordinance, this now amended ordinance? And again, this is the first reading of a nonemergency ordinance. We won't be voting on the underlying ordinance today, but any technical or clarifying questions at this time?

Yeah.

Councilor Ryan.

Dan Ryan: Thank you. Council president, on the council as a whole. Could you explain it further? Is it a three meeting groups finance, governance and the third for everything else?

No. So we will get I'll have a little bit more to say about this in the next item as well. But I.

Thought it was technical.

That's why this part of it specifically is to amend our code to clarify that committees could comprise more than just five individuals. And specifically.

We're still on that.

Yeah. Yeah, but but it's a perfectly valid question to ask. What is a committee of the whole and what will it look like in the next item we'll be talking about? Committee of the whole is a less formal, iterative body for the 12 of us to be able to receive information and debate the merits of it at the time, outside of the relatively tight confines of a city council hearing, we can have and we will receive public testimony. But really, it's my experience that some of the points of the most conflict that we have had in this building have been those moments where councilors feel like there was not sufficient enough information by the time for them, something coming out of committee. And so we've had to have a longer full council hearings. I want to be able to make sure that all councilors are having access to the same information and the ability to weigh in on big, broad, important items early. It will be a weekly scheduled meeting. It will primarily involve items that include finance, governance, hr committee appointments, but and a lot of those bigger ticket items that we know folks will all want to weigh in on, that is the the ultimate goal of what I think the committee.

The distinction between this and, say, a work session, because it did sound like a work session. Much of what you said is that the distinction is you can actually vote on policy.

And receive public testimony.

Okay. All right. And I think the two that you did call out, finance and governance, my experience in our first year is that no matter what happened at those two committees, they seem to often get rehashed out like the committee never worked on it. So it's probably going to be more efficient.

And the hope also is that that items, if we are in broad consensus of something coming out of committee, that it can go on to the consent agenda, and we won't have to necessarily rehash that.

Okay, that helped to hear a little bit more about your vision on that. Absolutely.

Thank you. Colleagues. Seeing no one else in the queue for technical or clarifying questions, is there anyone signed up for testimony?

One person signed up, terry harris.

Welcome, terry. Please introduce yourself and your pronouns. And you have three minutes.

Hi, it's terry harris, he him, and I'm glad to be here. And I'm glad to testify on this. I think the that last little part of your discussion was really helpful. This I think the committee of the whole will help you both streamline and gotcha. Streamline procedures and make your time together more flexible than a mirror work session or a full council meeting. This is an intermediate step that I think is going to be helpful. You already have a committee of the whole. By the way, your budget committee is a committee of the whole. And now you have the committee of the whole that will act like and operate like any other committee. So if you consider it as just another committee, but you can all get together and do committee work, I think that'll be really helpful. And I'm glad you're doing it. It's it's vindicating some of the g-tech work and I'm happy to to support it.

Thank you very much.

That concludes testimony, colleagues.

We're now moving into council discussion. Is there any further discussion about the. Nonemergency ordinance, councilor Clark?

Olivia Clark: Thank you, council president. I'll just make a couple of comments. Colleagues, I was rather agnostic about having a committee of the whole. The council president was very persuasive. I think it is an experiment. Just as much of what we're doing in this first year. Now, the second year is rather experimental. And as the council president indicated, both, I think the committee of the whole as well as our committee structure, he's going to reevaluate that in July and take everyone's comments as to what's working and what's not. So from my perspective, it's going to be a good place to workshop ideas, workshop complex issues. And I believe that one of the first issues that the committee of the whole will take up is transportation, alternative finance, which is a big issue and a little plug. I hope you all go to the district meetings, but I just wanted to say that I wasn't convinced at first. I really appreciate the work that gtac has done and the research that you've done on this kind of format across the country. Oh, great. Okay. I have I have a few seconds left, but in any event, I just wanted to share my thoughts on that, and I would love to hear from other colleagues about this as well.

Thank you, councilor Clark. Vice president Clark, I just read it off. The thing. I keep forgetting your title. I will not councilor Pirtle-guiney.

Elana Pirtle-Guiney: Thank you, council president. A couple of comments and then one question about the portion of this not related to committee of the whole. I think it's important to make this change to our code. I think that as we look at making sure that future council presidents have the options that they need to do work in the way that works best for council at that time, making sure that we're not prohibited from having a committee of the whole is important. I know this is something, council president that you are very interested in testing out, but I also want to make sure that we're noting for the record today that nothing in what we are passing would require a committee of the whole, because it could be that we have leaders in the future who don't believe that that's the right path to go for that council at that time. And I think that flexibility is important. So I just want to make sure that we're noting that today, it's not a format that I personally love. We'll talk more about this, I'm sure, on the next item. But I do think it's important to make sure that we have it as an option. So I will be supportive. I do have a question though, about the non committee of the whole portion of the measure. Previously, our code language said that a committee generally consists of 4 to 6 councilors, allowing for us to have a three councilor Councilor committee if we needed. And I am wondering why that option is being taken away in this language under the currently proposed language. It would. It says committees must be composed of 4 to 6 councilors. We haven't used that. We haven't considered using it. But under this new language, the only odd numbered committee size allowed would be five. And that seems limiting to me.

I had not thought about that. That is a good question to ask. Well, I don't have a good answer for that directly, but if councilor Kanal looks like he may, but also. But I will also, I will just say specifically from my perspective at this point, I made a I said this earlier and I make this again publicly in July. I'm going to be building in a checkpoint on this to understand whether or not this is the right direction. This is absolutely an experiment. But not only this committee, the whole, but all of the committees. And if there is a need or an interest in pivoting at that time or later in the year as well, I am committed to making those changes and that this will be included on that list for sure. If there is a good reason why we would need, I don't imagine a scenario where we would probably have seven, but I could imagine maybe a subcommittee of three or something like that. It's an interesting flag that I hadn't considered. Councilor Kanal.

Sameer Kanal: Yeah, first, in terms of the broader actually, I'll start with the question. The the six side of it, the why it's between 4 and 6 is that above six would already be against the rest of the sentence, actually the same sentence it's in to be less than a quorum of council. And on the lower end, I'll just note that I haven't seen a proposal for three come up yet. I will note, because council president, you just mentioned it, the idea of a subcommittee, my understanding is that that this it falls outside of the scope because a subcommittee is different from a committee. But I we could verify that publicly with the attorneys if that's helpful. But that's the reasoning with relation to the underlying ordinance. Actually, councilor Pirtle-guiney said everything I was going to say, so I don't need to repeat it. Thanks.

Councilor Ryan.

Dan Ryan: Oh, thank you, council president, council president, first of all, thank you for putting this together. It's a challenging puzzle. I can only imagine how many different puzzles you put together on this one. And I think anyone that's had to do that job, I'm sitting between the two that have it's it's quite strenuous and difficult and you know, you're not pleasing everyone.

So we're still just doing the committee of.

The whole we're doing community whole still. Oh, okay. Sorry.

I've come to the new resolution.

Just I'm so excited for the next item. I want to get. Excited for it too. Okay?

Okay, colleagues. No we're not. We're actually because this is a non-emergency ordinance. And so we will if there is no further discussion from council, we will move this item to. Our second reading. And can we please call item ten.

Item ten, establish new city council committees.

And now we are on that. Yes. So colleagues, as I have shared with you all, but as your new council president, I my first action to try and tackle was to try and discuss with all of you the role of our committees and how things are working. I have worked hard on the proposed reconfiguration of our standing committee structure, and I'm excited to unveil this proposal. I've. In the weeks since I was elected as council president, I've met with each of you, including all council members, council ops, the council clerk, the city administrators, the mayor. I've talked to as many people as I possibly could to understand what is working and what is not. And the proposal before you tries to incorporate as many of those preferences as possible. This proposal is a compromise that I believe will set us up for success with a structure that is fair and balanced and moves our city forward in a meaningful way. But as I said already, if this new system leads to dysfunction, delay or burden, we will change it. We simply must have a city council that works. And I believe that this new five council, five committee structure gives us the flexibility to discuss policy items and any items before this body that may need to be accomplished. I appreciate the cooperation and candor that each of you have had in this conversation. This proposal, before you, accomplishes a number of things that I set out specifically to try and accomplish that. These were important to me. I thought that a total of five total committees was important for policy committees and the committee of the whole, so that the committee chairs can meet weekly with me as a leadership team focused on scheduling and committee referrals without breaking quorum laws, I wanted to ensure that all four districts are represented on all committees. I wanted to see that all four districts are represented in the committee chairs. I wanted all councilors to have a chair or vice chair role. I was seeking balanced committee composition. I wanted to make sure that councilors workloads are not overburdened, and that individual councilors are not on more than two policy committees, plus the committee of the whole. I wanted to make sure that each of you councilors had at least one of your preferred committees, but hopefully nothing that you hate. And I wanted to ensure that there was a role for in leadership for the two city councilors who cumulatively had the most votes for council president under the last election. This proposal reduces the total number of committees from eight down to five. Those five committees are currently housing and permitting public works, city life, community and public safety, and the committee of the whole. The alignment, while not directly aligned with our city service areas, aligns the work nicely in a flow that I think will lead to good conversation and ability to do good work and still meet the challenges of our days. It builds in intentional flexibility for sub or ad hoc committees to be able to focus on those specific issues where perhaps we need a little bit more work, but not as a whole group. For example, councilor Koyama Lane work on the on the committee handbook, maybe more work with regard to climate or with regard to the federal response. Those will be decisions that we will all have an opportunity to weigh in on. I wanted to make sure that these new committees had enough time to do the work. I have heard repeatedly that one of the frustrations from folks is the council committees running out of time, and I wanted to also provide a regular occurrence for these committees so that individuals who are in our community know that on tuesdays at 9:00, you can go to this committee and this will be there. And if you show up at 2:00, 930 or whatever it might be 2:00, the next committee will be there. And additionally, I heard from each of you that trying to keep mondays and fridays clear of committees would be ideal. I also following through with my promise to councilor Novick. We'll schedule a regular public airing of grievances. This is not going to be an opportunity for people to exhibit bad behavior. This is not an opportunity for people to attack colleagues or be belligerent in any regard, but rather is an opportunity for us to air problems before they are problems. My commitment to you all at this moment is that if this is not working, if this best bet or best case scenario that I have outlined before you is not going is not working, we will change it. I have attempted to try to compromise and to provide as much in this, so that each of you can see yourselves and see feel good, that this work is going to move forward. And I am eager to hear from all of you about whether this works. And I will continue, both publicly and privately, to meet with each of you to understand how this system is serving you and whether you feel like it is able to get your legislation through. There are. Before we move into public testimony or further, there are three technical amendments that I am asking to move as a package. They are titled dunphys one, two and three. Dunphy one is a slightly more than a scribner's error, but a mistake in on my part in trying to translate from the memo that I sent to you all to the ordinance or to the resolution before us. Specifically, I made a mistake in saying that under the office, under the community and public safety committee, that issues involving the cebpa, the office of community police accountability and independent police review would be under that committee. I intended those to be under the committee of the whole. That is an issue that obviously all 12 councilors has have expressed some ongoing interest in. And so, Dunphy, one moves the cebpa and ipr under the committee of the whole Dunphy amendment two clarifies specifically that trash and recycling garbage and compost from the bureau of planning and sustainability will be heard under the public works committee. And the third is a technical clarifying amendment specifically to change the effective date of this in order to be legal with the committee of the whole timeline in the ordinance that we are voting on, hopefully next week that we just amended. So those are my three, my package of three, what I believe are technical amendments, and I'd like to move those three as an item for a vote and would ask for a second.

Thank you, councilor Clark. Colleagues, is there any debate or discussion on the technical amendments package? Councilor pirtle-guiney.

Elana Pirtle-Guiney: Thank you, council president. One of the things that I was going to raise in broader discussion was the fact that appointments are put under committee of the whole. And I have some questions about that. And Dunphy, one raised some similar questions. These are items that I have heard many of our colleagues over the past year say they wanted to make sure could be addressed within the context of related programs in the the committees that address specific policy areas. So I guess I'm wondering why with Dunphy. One, you're making that change. I hear you that that's something that all counselors have shown an interest in. I think in part, that's been because we were going through some negotiations and seeding this first board. And I've assumed that moving forward after that point, some of that oversight work would be done in the context of the broader work that's done around oversight within the committee on is it still called community and public safety? I think it's still called community and public safety. And I'm, I guess, a little bit uncomfortable with us starting to pull. There are a few things where it looks like we're starting to pull programs away from the policies that they work in tandem with, into committee of the whole, as opposed to committee of the whole being these more specific large buckets that we need to tackle altogether.

Yeah, that's a great question. You know, specifically, I went through. And an incredible number of our old meetings and the outcomes of those specifically. And I tried to identify issues in which counselors have said I wasn't on that committee. And this is really important to me, and I want to be able to hear it. And that has subsequently led to us having full secondary presentations at the full council. I think that that does a disservice to the committee work and the inherent idea of iterative and debating how committee's work or the committees should be operating. And I also think it has wasted an enormous amount of our time under robert's rules. Anybody can pull anything from consent. Anybody can request to have more information about these things. I think that specifically for committee, community appointed boards and commissions and for a number of things like the cebpa, it is clear to me that more than the limited five limited members of the individual policy committees will have an opinion. And this is my effort to try and include as many counselors up front as possible before we are reacting at the full council. So it is it is slightly less principled in terms of the broad buckets that we have put under committee, the whole. But it is, in my opinion, I think, a time saving and information sharing tool.

I understand that I, I absolutely hear that position. I may be voting no on these amendments because that is included here. I think that that's a topic area that we need to address in the broader context of, of how our policing system and our public safety system works.

Absolutely. And again in July, I will be coming back very intentionally and iteratively throughout the remainder of the year in order to see if things are working for us or not. So thank you, counselor. Counselor Avalos.

Thank you for that explanation. Council president, I agree with your reasoning and think that the more that we can use the committee of the whole as a space to have those discussions that, as you said, are getting, you know, gummed up in the committee, it'll just increase transparency and lessen frustration, including on my part. I mean, I don't sit on the committee, and that's obviously an area I care a lot about. And so I'm glad that that and all of the other types of appointments will be funneled in a more consistent way. I do think that's the purpose of the committee of the whole. So I support that and I plan to vote for it. Thanks.

Thank you.

Councilor Avalos colleagues. Any more technical or clarifying questions? Counselor Zimmerman.

I tend to agree with councilor Pirtle-guiney. I think it's the wrong move to move the cebpa and ipr stuff to the council or the committee of the whole. I just think it really neuters the purpose of the committees and you got to have it, excuse me, got to have it one way or the other. And on this topic, I just I don't think you would have done that if it was a different chair in public safety. And so that I will not support the amendment if these are all grouped together like that.

Counselor Zimmerman. Any further clarifying or technical questions, counselor?

Oh yeah. I'm just curious to follow up on counselor Zimmerman and counselor pirtle-guiney. I was having that same thought. What was your reasoning in deciding to put that under the committee of the whole again, could you explain it again? And were there other examples where you considered moving it to committee as a whole, even though the practice area, say, draft board? That's probably in city life, not moved into committee as a whole. It's very important committee as well. Yeah, that could be seen as governance. So tell me again the rationale, the reason why you decided that was special.

Yeah, I really I felt that again, this was me going back to looking at the previous conversations that we have had as a body and where I felt specifically, we got bogged down by process. We also included things like the small donor elections or small or city elections. Issue programs would go to the committee. The whole, even though it could be argued, it could go to a different committee, go to city life. I think that city wide major strategic investments like. The comprehensive plan or things where where there is clear interest beyond that. I just thought that the this seems like a tool to be able to funnel those issues in. If there are more issues that should be put into there, I'm certainly open to that. If there are fewer, I'm also open to that conversation. But it felt like specifically this was a tool to be able to just make sure, especially because also we had well, specific to cebpa and police review, you know, we had appointments that were city or by district. We had a lot of heightened scrutiny over this in the press, and that felt like it was an appropriate place for it to go. I would personally like to be able to weigh in on these things, and I will not be sitting on any policy committees. But again, this is a judgment call for the body.

Thank you, counselor Ryan.

Thank you, counselor Novick.

Yeah, I just wanted to say that I agree with the council president. I think this is, in fact, an instance where we wind up having exactly the same conversations in full council as the committee. So I think it simply saves time to deal with the cebpa and ipr stuff in, full in the, in the committee of a whole.

Thank you.

Councilor Novick, counselor Green.

Yeah, I just wanted to just note that the committee of the whole is still committee. It's it's designed to take up matters that, you know, we can take some kind of an action on, but we can have discussions in public that allow and enable very swift just sort of check the block actions at the full council meeting and move very quickly through the business. So just because it's all 12 of us doesn't mean it's not a committee. I support the move of of moving these appointments and the ocpa consideration there as well.

Thank you. Councilor, councilor Zimmermann.

I guess I mean, the other point of this side would be that the committee chair has full authority to bring whatever they want. They can say that it has connective tissue to a topic. But but ultimately, committee chairs are the ones who are deciding how to run their committees. So it's a bit of a it's a strangeness that you would make this outline, because there's nothing that would have prevented the committee of the whole was talking about cebpa. But now you've made this a very deliberate move, and that seems strange. You know, I've said time and time again, I don't know that this council is ready for committee still. So perhaps we just get rid of them all and get straight into committee of the whole, because I don't think that there's any one group of topics that we've only rehashed here at council. We've wasted our time on pretty much every topic, because this committee structure does not work. So but it just I just say, like, to those of you who are chairing, I'd encourage you to still, you know, have ownership of your docket. And if committees mean anything, then. I guess that's going to what are the what is the parameter here that would keep us from not rehashing everything when it comes back? I just I think this is kind of a confused document. And this in particular saying that this topic won't be in this group, but it will be in that group, makes it seem like you expect an adherence to what the the committee chairs will bring or won't bring into the different, different venues. And I think we've seen from a year of experience that different venues connect to different items in a variety of ways. There's there's almost no legislation that doesn't touch finance or doesn't also touch land use or doesn't also touch. You know, how we plan our communities is related to public safety, is related to how we finance it. So it just continues and continues and continues. So perhaps the committee of the whole should be the only committee this body has if we really want to get to it.

Thank you. Councilor. Colleagues, are there any further technical or clarifying questions before we move to public testimony? Four five okay. Can we please call public testimony?

Terry harris?

Terry harris, he, him and a couple things on this. I just testified at how great the committee of the whole was going to be. Let me walk that back a little bit now and and say that. Having all of finance and all of governance and all of these other things go automatically to the committee of the whole will mean that committee is going to be too busy and not only too busy, it's all 12 of you. So the number of councilor Hours spent in a committee is going to be overwhelmingly in the committee of the whole. So I think it's really important to limit that. I think finance and governance things have little small things that probably don't need all 12 of your attention. And I hope you can use the subcommittees and create a process that can knock those out quickly. The other thing I'd point out is, is I think you might need all your committees to meet more frequently than every other week. You may want to consider holding time in those alternate weeks for simple one hour meetings, to knock out quick things so that things don't get jammed up in committees. So that's just throwing that out there. And then I'd say, relevant to that last discussion that you just had, the code allows sponsors to designate a committee. While I don't really quite agree with that, I think at some point the, the, the council president needs to say where things go and have that discretion. I would favor that, but I would also favor that the committee, you know, at your regular council meeting, there's that committee referral list that that be debatable or that that can take an item off of that and send it to a different committee by a vote of the majority. So I'm throwing those sorts of things out there to give you more flexibility and not get wrapped around the axle. But otherwise I think this committee structure nails it. I think it's the right size. I think you went through all the g-tech guidelines on things to consider. And again, gtac being vindicated is making me happy. And I'm glad you're you're moving this and learning some lessons.

Thank you very much.

Mark jackson.

Welcome. Please introduce introduce yourself for the record and pronouns.

Good afternoon, pastor mark jackson. For the record, I'm just here to provide some initial thoughts in terms of one having limited knowledge of the committee structure, but my observation shows that there's been a removal of the actual labor and workforce development committee. And I know that was a committee that really championed investments around some of the works, of which many nonprofit organizations really benefited from, to support our most vulnerable students in the city. So that's that's quite concerning to me. I'm not sure where that will land in this new structure, but it's important to call that out, because what I experienced on last night was quite unsettling in terms of the continuation of a delay of resources to our most vulnerable populations, and then to be having to endure the external noise of the moment last night and have folks who took time to come down here and to be on zoom for an extended period of time and be silenced by not being able to give public testimony is very alarming, because the public elected you all, and you do not silence those who put you in office. Let's be clear. Let's reconcile that as we move forward. We appreciate you all's resilience, your collaboration. But again, as I said a few weeks ago, we have to lead by being collaborative with humility and also being intentional in recognizing public trust is quite fragile. We don't build trust by silencing the community. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

That concludes testimony.

Thank you. Colleagues, we have a I got ahead of myself before moving to test my the package of technical amendments are before us and have been seconded. And there is not any further debate or technical clarifying questions on that. Can we please call the roll on the package of technical amendments dunphys one, two and three? All together?

Avalos I.

Smith no.

Kanal I.

Pirtle-guiney no.

Ryan.

No.

Koyama Lane I.

Morillo absent Novick. I Clark. I Green. I Zimmerman.

No.

Dunphy I.

Amendments are approved with 7i4 no and one absent.

Thank you very much colleagues. We now move into council discussion or further discussion or debate about the underlying resolution on our new proposed committee structure. Councilor Avalos.

Candace Avalos: I just wanted to take a moment to thank you so very much. Council president, I really do think that you struck the right balance. And what excites me in particular is the leadership team, the having some structured times, because as we all know, it's been very frustrating trying to get work sessions scheduled. And we've been asking for just some dedicated time slots so that we can have some predictability in our schedule. I like that we have reduced the amount of committees and the way that you have set up the cadence just makes, I know for me and my schedule, it makes it a lot easier for me to be in the community so I can be in district one on mondays and fridays, and I have a steady set of council commitments. I think the composition of the committees is really great. I am eager to see how all of the new leaders take on their roles. I think, you know, there's obviously been some concerns that have been voiced, as we heard in testimony, around how certain committees got put together. And I think those are valid concerns that we should continue to look at and how we operationalize each of those committees. So I would hope that committees that are kind of absorbing other ones can really be intentional about making sure that the topics that have been discussed in those committees individually don't get lost just because they've been blended together. I definitely don't intend to do that. So yeah, I'm very grateful. These are definitely changes that I have been yearning for and I thank your leadership.

Thank you councilor. Colleagues, councilor. Novick.

I just wanted to say I might be the only person who didn't mind the old committee structure, and I was very skeptical that anybody could come up with an alternative that we could agree on. I was delightedly surprised to see the council president's proposal, and see that it was something that made sense and something that I could support. So kudos to the council president, and I hope that everybody else feels the same way.

Thank you, councilor Novick councilor Ryan. Yes.

Thank you, council president. I'm on the right topic. I just want to say that again. I really do appreciate you putting this puzzle together. And I did feel listen to was kind of like speed dating. We had 15 minutes, but I understand most people didn't get much more than that. So and I did request economic development and I'm kind of in that committee. I'll get to that in a minute. I also like that there's fewer committees, yet I remain concerned that we're in too many three hour meetings and in city hall and fewer hours with constituents where they live. I got what you did with Monday and Friday, but I still think this new form of government should give us more time to be out on the streets talking to portlanders. There are two main reasons at this time that I can't support the final proposal. I think the city life committee reads like a catchall. Kind of reminds me, similar to how civic life felt like a miscellaneous catchall in the recent past as a bureau, and I find that discouraging at this time, because economic development is being treated like that. The city is in a red alert zone at this time. And when it comes to our economy, our economic development, and I think that this needs focused attention, I'm also although I was supportive of the committee of the whole, I was assumed that that meant that the people we voted for in council leadership, that would be you and vice president Clark would be those who would be chairing those committees. The committees of the whole is designed to be the most impactful and influential committees, and that's why I expected that. I have nothing against the selection of councilor Kanal. It's not personal that way. For me. I'm crystal clear. I'd be opposing this based on that principle, not on who the person that was selected for that role. I will also end with a happy note that I will suit up and do what's told to me on the committees that I'm in. We will figure out how to work together. We don't see eye to eye, but we know how to work together and we'll figure that out. And I have some good lived experience in finances that you don't, so hopefully you'll be appreciating that. I look forward to participating and doing the best I can with this, but the way this was designed in those, for those particular reasons, I just can't get behind a yes on this. Thanks.

Thank you, councilor Ryan councilor Pirtle-guiney.

Elana Pirtle-Guiney: Thank you, council president, I want to start by saying that I am supportive of the structure that you have put in front of us today. I know firsthand how hard it is to balance all of the different things that you named as your priorities in trying to build committees. And whenever you sit down with a list of priorities that you want to make sure to hit in every committee, you start to open up a puzzle that is nearly impossible to finish. And I understand and appreciate the work that went into this. And while there are things that might not be the ideal for any of us up here, I think you did a good job of laying out clearly what your priorities were going to be, and meeting those as you put this together, I appreciate that. I also am genuinely excited for what we can do in the city life committee and the opportunity to talk about economic developments, art, sports and culture in our community workforce and the experience of people who are working those jobs that we often talk about without talking about the people who are trying to earn a living doing them, and sustainability and resilience and climate and and what the daily lived experience because of those things of those individuals in our city are, I think, provides us a lot of really important opportunities. I also am looking forward to the review at the six month mark. I hope that what we do during that review is look at this and say this is working well and continue on, because I know it is a lot of work to put something new together. I want to raise a few concerns about the committee of the whole, and they're not concerns that will prevent me from supporting this today. But there are things that I need to put on the record so that when we get to that six month review, they've been noted and we can make sure that we're looking at them. The subject matter assigned to committee of the whole is incredibly broad. It is much broader than I thought you were initially going to bring forward for us. And I worry that committee of the whole will become a drag on our time, instead of a way to use our time more efficiently. I understand that rehashing things at council is frustrating. I have been the first to voice those frustrations throughout the last year, but I also understand the value of having five people instead of 12, debating us from here, getting us from here to here so that we're at least debating within a narrower realm. When we get to twice as many voices in the room. And I worry that this will become a drag on our ability to move efficiently. I also noted previously that I'm concerned about including appointments on committee of the whole. Well, I think it is helpful for us to have a look at all of the appointments together. I heard from many of our colleagues over the last year that they wanted to be able to think about appointments within the policy committees that they were working on, and we are losing the opportunity to to think about appointments more strategically within the the work of those policy committees. I am concerned that the leadership of committee of the whole is not the council leadership that we intentionally elected. And I say this with no ill will toward my district two colleague, I think you will do a fine job running that committee. But I think if we are going to have a committee of the whole. That that leadership of the whole body should fall to the leadership of the whole body who we elected to lead us. I also want to note my disappointment that internal workplace and labor policies are being taken up by the committee of the whole and not in the city life committee, alongside other job training programs, apprenticeship, broader workforce policy that we will be looking at in that committee. I think the way that our city treats our employees should be a reflection of the values and policies that we are asking for all employers in our city to abide by, and separating those two things was a little bit disappointing when I saw this proposal. I hope that we look carefully about how that works over the next few months, and that be on the list of things that we perhaps reconsider, depending on how the time is balancing between different committees. And I think it is important to note, and this is a little uncomfortable, to note, that the leadership of these committees is is left leaning. We talk sometimes uncomfortably about different caucuses. And while you split the committee leadership between those inside and outside of those caucuses, I do think it is still a left leaning leadership. Personally, I'm comfortable with that. But I think it's important to say, because I suspect in the future there could be criticisms for doing things like that, and I suspect it could come from people who appoint more left leaning or more moderate leaning leadership teams. And I think if we're going to support this today, we need to be clear that leadership matters and elections matter. And the council president election matters. And we need to accept that today as we would in the future as well. I am grateful to be on the team. I am grateful for your work in putting this together, even with those reservations that I think are important to note. For the record, I think that you did an incredible job finding as much balance as is possible on this work. I'm excited to work with my colleagues, both on the city life committee and the housing and permitting committees, as we stand those up. And I just want to note, colleagues, that if you have items that are currently in process, in committees whose work might transfer to the city life committee that those committees can't get to before our committee structure changes, please let me know if you are chairing committees whose work might be collapsed there, and there are things that you want to make sure we continue to move forward, please let me know. I want this transition at least where I have any say over it, to be as smooth as possible, and I look forward to our work continuing not starting anew with this new structure. Thank you, council president.

Thank you, councilor Pirtle-guiney councilor Green.

Elana Pirtle-Guiney: Yeah. Thank you, council president. Everyone said this before and I'll say it again, it's really, really difficult to to assemble something like this. There's a lot of it's a big puzzle to assemble. So I appreciate your work on that. I know, I know a lot went into it, and I know you agonized over every choice. I think it's a welcome reduction in the number of committees. I think the only thing I want to speak to substantively is in reducing the number of committees. We've we've lost a climate committee, an explicit climate committee. And I can tell you that that that that work must continue. And any committee that I'm part of, I'm going to make sure that we are we're working for our climate to the extent that it works through these, these committees. So, you know, as far as I see it, climate is largely a land use consideration. And and that's in the permitting committee. So so I will be paying attention to all those issues related to the ci hub, the eoa and any of our zoning stuff from a climate lens for folks who might be watching along. I'm excited to get to work on this. I'm excited to see how this committee as a whole can help us do our work better, and I look forward to serving with new committee members. Thanks.

Thank you, councilor Green. Councilor Smith.

Loretta Smith: Thank you, mr. President. I will go on the record. I don't like this new committee system. And I'll just say from the beginning that I'm going to need some accommodations, some health accommodations. We're going to be sitting in committees for not two hours, but three hours. And we're going to be doing it twice a day, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, at least in the other committees. We had two hours, and then we had a few hours that we could do other things and have other meetings. It just seems like we were trying to figure out ways in which to reduce the clerk's work. But this does not do that. This does not reduce the clerk's work. It increases the clerk's work. And if we do, as the folks suggested, to have these meetings every week, it's going to really go into the hours and the overtime hours that we have already identified for committee meetings. As I told you before, I'm going to do whatever. Wherever you put me, I am going to work and I can work anywhere. I don't like being on the community and public safety committee. I thought that you if you wanted to put someone from district one, you should have put my colleague here on there. I think that you put a lot of work into this, and it's it's tough and it's hard. And I appreciate the work that you put in. I like I said, I am really concerned about some issues and I'm concerned that the issues around youth jobs. I saw city life has sports, I don't where is sports right now? I didn't know we had a.

Yeah largely fits under the recreation and with the arts and.

Yeah we didn't we didn't have that as a pullout.

Never pulled it out.

No. Right. Yeah. So three hours is too long to be in anybody's committee Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. It doesn't make my life any easier. It makes it much harder because I don't have time in the middle of the day to go and do other things and meet with other people. Again, transportation is an issue and a committee that I sat on before. I have the vice chair position. Thank you for that. But I also think that some of those things in transportation were gutted out, and I noticed that procurement was pulled out and put into the committee of the whole. That's very troubling for me. And I thought that that should be under a different committee. But new leadership elections have consequences. New leadership will bring new ideas. So I appreciate you putting the energy and having the courage to do what you do. But just for the record, I wanted to tell you I do not like this. I think we, you know, we go from from eight hours to like 15 hours of, of work and it just doesn't seem right.

Well, councilor to one specific point that you had said, my staff did some early looking at the as we had filed the the outline of it with the calendar that I had included in there. No councilors will have back to back committees. It looks like, as near as I can tell, and I may be wrong, and I will apologize if I am. If you have a committee on the first Tuesday morning, you will not have the Tuesday the first Tuesday afternoon, but you may have the second Tuesday afternoon or whatever that works out. There should not be a situation in which committees on those tuesdays specifically, you'll be sitting for for that long. And there's also a 90 minute chunk dividing so we can all go get lunch and reset the chamber and everything. But absolutely, I will be paying very close attention to that.

And thank you.

Thank you, councilor Smith. Councilor Novick.

Steve Novick: Yeah, on I sort of share councilor Greene's concern about there not being a climate committee, but I thought that my understanding maybe I didn't read right is that you do expect many climate issues, including sort of pdf related issues, to come up in the city, like city life committee, is that right?

Correct, yes.

And I okay, good. I also just wanted to take this opportunity to note that one thing I think that we should think about is the relationship of the council to any advisory bodies that make funding decisions, and that includes PCEF. And it also includes the the children's levy committees. So that might be something that we ask that committee as of the whole or some subcommittee of that to take a look at sort of across the board, or it might be something that the individual committees with responsible for those things look at. But I just wanted to say that I'm assuming and hoping that there will be some room to have those discussions about that important question of what exactly is the relationship between the council and committees that are making funding recommendations?

Thank you, councilor Novick and colleagues. I do want to make a note. This just on the official record that was flagged by robert taylor, our city attorney. While because it wasn't explicit, the creation of new committees does dissolve the old committees. So we won't have multiple systems. But with the effective date. These will come into effect by the first week of April, and the old committee structure will go away. Colleagues, are there any other debate on the item? Mr. Councilor Smith, are you back? Thank you. Okay. Sorry, I'm getting a note from. Okay. Councilor Smith.

Loretta Smith: Thank you.

Pxf is a huge deal that I think is widely. Cared about by all 12 of us. And I think that the staff should be in the committee of the whole. If you're going to do that and you have finance and all those other things in there, you need to have cf in the committee of the whole. If that's if that was your goal, because all of us are asked about PCEF, all of us care about it. We all have constituencies who try to secure piece at funding. And so I would like to to be able to put a motion on the floor, to be able to move cf from city life to the committee of the whole.

Second.

There has been a motion to amend to remove references to the Portland clean energy fund from the exhibit a to where they are currently under the area titled city life, and to instead move those issues to the committee of the whole issue has been moved and seconded. Is there debate on the on this amendment? Councilor Avalos.

Candace Avalos: Yeah, help me understand. Council president, I feel, though, that the discussion we were having a bit ago is that committee chairs. And, you know, especially being on the leadership team, right. They'll be able to negotiate those kinds of things. So even regardless of how it's all written as is, like there's it's not in stone. It's what I heard you explain earlier. So if it's not if we don't make this particular change, it doesn't mean that things couldn't come to the committee, the whole or that a committee chair could say, hey, I think this should actually elevate to this committee, to the committee of the whole for this reason, etc. Is my understanding that there is flexibility built in.

That is my intention, though right now I do think it is important to call out things very intentionally also about where we think that they should go. And there's also the ability for an individual filer to to direct where those go. So ultimately, either way, I it is my hope to, as a leadership team to be able to guide this towards where the body would like to see things happen. But I also don't have any any discomfort specifically calling it out wherever this body thinks is the best place for it.

Okay, thanks.

Yeah. Councilor Zimmerman.

Eric Zimmerman: Similarly. Excuse me. Similarly to councilor Avalos, it's about what does it mean if a topic is listed in your document council president. Right. So I think about what did finance tackle this year. We talked about transportation issues. We talked about urban forestry. We talked about housing dollars. We meaning there is a decision making responsibility on behalf of the chair. So I think your language here is confusing things. And then now if we're now in the moment where we're making amendments to this in order to signal that a committee of the whole will take on more, I think we're diving into the pool that councilor Pirtle-guiney kind of opened up, which is to what end? Multnomah county has a very straightforward system. They work in work sessions on tuesdays, and they have commission meetings on thursdays. I would encourage us before we shoehorn ourselves into another year of committees, because some organizations said committees are really good, that committees take a maturity of a body before we understand that where the body needs expertise to break away. Because in this 20 minutes, we've now talked about two topics that we are wondering whether or not they belong in the committee of the whole. And I'm using committee of the whole as an analogy to what a work session is at Multnomah county across the river, because in essence, it serves a very similar role. But I don't think this is the last one. I while I support the the idea behind councilor Smith's amendment, I'm probably not going to support that amendment just because I don't know where where we stop sliding down the glacier of what comes back to committee. The whole because I want to be on the committee that discusses a topic. And as that happens, as committee of the whole starts to take on more topics, I will deeply agree. And it's my biggest misgivings about this document that you or the council vice president should be leading council committee of the whole. The more we add to it, the more we say that other things can't be discussed in committees. The more I think that this is fragile and falling off the knife's edge. So I appreciate the amendment because it allows me to make a point in the larger sense to where I think councilor Pirtle-guiney was going earlier, and I think that this will be a flawed system if we set it up, and that July check in won't come fast enough.

Thank you. Councilor, before I call you councilor Pirtle-guiney councilor Smith reviewing the document, the. It doesn't currently make a reference to the clean energy fund in the document at all at this point. So I had misspoken when I said I was moving something from one to another. Do you have are you able to propose the specific language that you would like to include? Would it just be to to add that?

Yes.

Just to add Portland clean energy fund there.

Okay. So the amendment will simply be to add the words Portland clean energy fund or to the the first, I guess. Five a.

Yes.

Okay. Thank you. Councilor pirtle-guiney.

Elana Pirtle-Guiney: Thank you, council president. I was going to note that this isn't currently in our document as well, much like I had concerns with separating a board overseeing police accountability from the committee where we might discuss policies around policing, I am concerned that separating the funding streams associated with PCEF and the priorities around reaching sustainability goals that those funding streams help us achieve from our broader conversations around sustainability programs. The work of the sustainability officer and our other sustainability policies in the city seems like a very good way to make sure that we don't have effective, efficient, streamlined policies. I can't support this.

Thank you. Councilor pirtle-guiney, councilor Green.

Mitch Green: Yeah, I'm actually wasn't expecting this, but councilor Smith, your your amendment is intriguing to me. I'm inclined to support it. And the reason why I'm inclined to support it is I've been thinking about the Portland clean energy fund a lot lately. I have been thinking about it as both a very large fund with with five years of programed expenses that reach deep into our communities, but also deep into every part of the city. And right now it's really just sort of in in the bureau of planning, sustainability. And I've been struggling with like how to how to interact with that from a council committee perspective. And I think that there I mean, councilor Pirtle-guiney you're I think you're right when you say, you know, it is hazardous to maybe separate a funding decision from a policy thing. I think the conversation is bigger than just an individual policy item. I think right now we're grappling with conversations around what is the appropriate role for the city of Portland vis a vis the community. What is what does it mean to amend a pcf, cip right now? And and some of that, I think really does need to happen at this holistic level. And so the reason why the committee of the whole as a committee is important to me is because it allows us to have public comment and testimony and engage like a work session before a final action, but in in public. So we don't violate quorum, but we can have a conversation with those communities, because when we talk about pcf, we're also talking about communities priorities, but we're not talking with community. And that's what that's something I would like this body to do right now. We do it in a piecemeal way. So I actually support this. I think it's I think it's a good move. Councilor Smith and I'm going to vote yes on this.

Thank you, councilor Green. Colleagues, I've been informed that I have to introduce also a technical another technical amendment. There was a functionally if we pass this today, the existing committees dissolve immediately. So I will be moving another technical amendment. And I'd like to note that we are at 317. And we have a very I have a large group of people signed up to testify on the next items. So councilor Clerk.

Thank you. Council president I'll be brief. I really want to address councilor Zimmerman's comment because I believe there's been tremendous fluidity between all of our committees. Finance has taken up transportation issues that maybe I wanted, but it was more made more sense for them to be there. Other issues, same sort of fluidity. So I don't feel the need right now to parse this out any further. In fact, I would have said the children's levy should be in the in the committee of the whole. I'm I'm inclined to vote against this at this point. And I thought council councilwoman Pirtle-guiney comment about peace and sustainability and its role in climate is is is more connected. So I think at this point, I don't want to parse this anymore. I think we will have fluidity and well, I could call the question and allow the people who are in the queue to speak and then call the question, is that possible?

I think I am able to limit debate to those who are currently in queue to the current amendment, without a separate vote, is that right?

I think you can subject to being overruled if people want to overrule you.

Okay, colleagues, I'd like to limit debate to those in the queue to the amendment and move to a vote. I will need to move a technical amendment that I hope will get quick support, and then to a vote of the underlying resolution. Councilor Kanal.

Sameer Kanal: Thank you. While I would be fine with either outcome in terms of what we do after this, I'm going to be voting no on the amendment. And my rationale for it is actually the same argument that councilor Green gave in many ways, but for the opposite position. And it's that I think that we've separated the PCEF conversation too much from the climate conversation in a lot of ways already, and I think that's damaging. So I would like to defer to the technical details. Being in the city life committee and go from there. I certainly think that it might be a good practice. And it's a suggestion, not a not a condition, that if there is something really big that committees invite the seven colleagues who aren't in it to come to the occasional when it's something that is sporadic and occasional, I think that's separate from a permanent assignment. But that's my reasoning. And so I'll be I'll be voting no on it, but if it passes, we'll make it work either way.

Thank you. Councilor councilor Novick.

Steve Novick: Similar comment. I think that we need to have some serious policy conversations about things like how piece f relates to our climate action plan, and I think that those with a greater likelihood of those conversations being had and being had, well, with enough time, if we have them first in committee rather than a committee of a whole. I say that as somebody who has a deep interest in cf and am disappointed to no longer, you know, be on a committee that has climate in the title. But I still think as a, you know, as a matter of policy, it should stay in a policy committee.

Thank you. Councilor Novick councilor Smith.

Steve Novick: Thank you.

One of the thoughts that I had as you all were talking, I was thinking, well, move the whole policy committee over to the committee of the whole and then put the human resources and the labor stuff over in the other committee in city life. The reason why I want to have a conversation about this is because whenever I've been given a presentation by PCEF, everything that I've seen is district one is dramatically behind in getting any of those investments. And I think that you need the full force of all three district one councilors who can listen to those things and to fight for them. I talked to sam, who's the director. He noted that as well. But it is really eerie to me, the biggest pot of money that we have at the at the city of Portland, that district one is minimized and marginalized, and we haven't had a full throated voice to have those resources in district one. The other issue is we don't use a lot of the system development charges. We don't have the the building going on in district one like other places. And if I look at who gets those resources, district two and district three gets the lion's share of all the PCEF money. And I don't like it. I want to have a conversation about it. If you want to keep the policy and piece that together, move the whole thing to the to the committee of the whole and put the labor stuff over there in city life, and we'll solve that problem.

Thank you, councilor Smith.

Loretta Smith: Thank you.

Colleagues, seeing no one else in the queue for debate of the amendment, can we please call the roll?

Just to clarify, we're calling the roll on Smith one.

Yes. On Smith one.

Or document 2026 072.

Yes.

Point of clarification. Smith one is just the language, correct?

Yes. We are just voting on whether to add language to the committee of the whole description.

And we had that moved by councilor Smith and seconded by councilor Ryan. Thank you. Avalos.

Struggling with the decision, hearing all the arguments. I'm going to vote no.

Smith.

Yes.

Kanal.

No.

Pirtle-guiney.

No.

Ryan.

Yes.

Koyama Lane.

No.

Aye, Morillo is absent. Novick.

No.

Clark.

No.

Green.

Yes.

Zimmerman.

No.

Dunphy.

No.

And the amendment fails with 3i8 no. And one absent vote.

Thank you. Colleagues, I would like to move an amendment please. That reads specifically. Now therefore be it resolved the the following standing Portland city council committees are terminated effective March 30th, 2026. This is specific to make sure that they don't dissolve today. And I would ask for a second.

Second, second.

Thank you. Colleagues. Any debate or discussion about this amendment? Councilor Smith, just verifying your legacy hand.

Oh yeah. Legacy.

Thanks.

Seeing no one in the queue, can we please call the roll on this Dunphy amendment? Dunphy for. I don't know what it is.

Dunphy for. And to clarify, was that second councilor Green or was there someone before Avalos. Avalos. Thank you. Apologies. My audio is not good. Seconded by councilor Avalos.

Candace Avalos: Avalos I.

Smith I.

Kanal I. Pirtle-guiney I. Ryan I. Koyama Lane I.

Morillo absent Novick. I Clark. I Green. I Zimmerman. I Dunphy. I and the amendment Dunphy for is approved with 11 I one absent and no no votes.

Thank you. And can we now move to a vote on the resolution.

That.

Avalos.

Thank you for your leadership.

I vote yea Smith.

No.

Kanal thank you for putting d2 on the public works committee.

I pirtle-guiney.

Good work.

I Ryan. No Koyama Lane. I Morillo Novick. I Clark. I Green.

Zimmerman no.

Dunphy I.

The resolution is adopted with 8i3 no and one absent.

Thank you. Colleagues can we please call items 11 and 12 together?

Item 11 amend civil rights code related to sexual orientation and family status definitions to amend nondiscrimination clauses. Item 12 declare the city of Portland will defend the rights of transgender people and all of the LGBTQ plus community colleagues.

This item came directly to council because it had so many amazing sponsors. I'm going to turn to each of the sponsors in turn, but first I will turn to councilor Koyama Lane.

Tiffany Koyama Lane: Thank you, council president colleagues, I'm proud to sponsor this with our out lgbtqia to plus colleagues, councilors Morillo, pirtle-guiney Ryan and Zimmerman. The lgbt qia two plus protections package. These items affirm our commitment to protect our entire LGBTQ plus community, and amends our city code to remove outdated bathroom rules and expand nondiscrimination protection for all families. I'd like to invite brief words from any of my co-sponsors and ask that we pretty please prioritize our time to hear from the many members of the community who have come to testify. We have quite a few today.

Councilors Zimmerman, pirtle-guiney Morillo. Ryan. Anybody want to jump into the queue first?

Thanks. Just a appreciation to the members of the public who've come out today. Appreciate that. And also to everybody inside city hall who made this come together. It's an interesting time to be a group that gets a focus from a federal government or from certain activist groups. And I think that's the time when you double down on who you are. And I also think that from time to time, it is good to take a look at the words that are listed in our laws to make sure that they reflect current era, and 2026 needed an update in some spaces in Portland in portland's code. But but more importantly than even the code changes is sometimes signaling to the members of your community exactly where you're at when it comes to who they are is really important, and we need more of that in government. We need more government to signal their support for their public at at the times that we have right now where I think it's we're in an era where certain governments are targeting people more and more, and that's just that's just not the right thing. This legislation is probably one of those pieces of legislation that it would not have happened. But for the staff members who work for those of us sitting up here. And so I just want to take a chance or take an opportunity to thank my own staff. Luke and christopher aubrey from district three, devin. And I'm sure that I missed some others, but those are the faces that I saw in the room when we were working on it. And I appreciate all of their dedication because it we should admit that sometimes legislation happens because staff gets us there. And so I just want to thank them for their hard work and to my colleagues for signing it.

Councilor thank you, council president. I will save most of my remarks so we can get straight to testimony. But I do want to reiterate the gratitude to the staff who helped make this happen, both within our offices and within the the administrative side. I know we have many people who went back and forth on the specifics here to make sure we get this right, and I am glad to be able to stand up for my community today, as so many cities, states, and even our federal government try to launch attacks and move backwards on protecting the rights of of all people.

So thank you.

I'll have more to say later. And thank you to everybody who's here to testify.

Councilor Ryan.

Dan Ryan: Thank you, council president, real quick, I just want to say at a time of so much exclusion, aggressive exclusion coming at so many of us and at a time of rage, it's so wonderful to be here in a place of love and really focusing on inclusion. So without further ado, I just want to add one more name to the thanks. And that's I see lex out there. And so thank you for your multiple years of working on this and digging through and acknowledging all this language that is that still in there. So thank you for that meticulous work. And you and aubrey were doing that for some time. So I wanted to lift that. I look so forward to hearing the community's testimony. Thank you.

Thank you. Before we move to testimony, I understand councilor Koyama Lane has a technical amendment.

Very quickly, colleagues, I'd like to introduce a small amendment to the resolution in the time between our offices filing this item and being heard on our agenda for today in 2026, there have been 420 anti lgbtqia to plus bills introduced in state legislatures across the country. My co-sponsors and I would like to update the resolution to recognize these ongoing attacks against our LGBTQ plus community and emphasize the importance of standing up for our community in this moment. Council president, I would like to make a motion to introduce this amendment. Koyama Lane one. Can I please have a second.

Second?

Councilor Koyama Lane has moved an amendment to update the dates and number of staggering number of anti lgbt qi2s plus bills and councilor Ryan seconds colleagues, is there any discussion of this amendment or should we move to move to a roll call vote on the amendment?

I point of information. Did we open both the resolution and the ordinance?

I believe we did, yes.

Yes.

Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry.

And yes, the roll call vote on the amendment to the resolution.

On Koyama Lane one.

Koyama Lane one. Avalos I.

Smith.

No.

Kanal I.

Pirtle-guiney I. Ryan I. Koyama Lane I.

Morillo Novick. I Clark. I Green. Hi Zimmerman. I Dunphy. I and the amendment is approved with ten I one no and one absent.

Great colleagues is there any technical or clarifying discussion before we move to public testimony? We have is there a staff present? Do we have a staff to come up and do quick presentation on what's actually in these two bills? Great. Welcome.

Thank you. Get pulled up here.

Make sure to please introduce yourself for the record pronouns and go get to it. And we are seeing. Your presentation. There we go.

All right good afternoon everyone. My name is lexi koszewski. I use they them pronouns and I lead the LGBTQ plus program in the office of equity and human rights. This program provides technical guidance, education, and assistance to city bureaus and elected officials and programs. Focus is ensuring that Portland continues a strong legacy as a welcoming community for lgbtqia plus people. So the sponsors of item 11. Item 12 asked me to share a very brief staff presentation of both the resolution and the ordinance, as they were not heard in a subcommittee. So while I won't have time to give much more context than what's in the policies themselves today, I think it is important to note that this package is a meaningful measure and coming at a really pivotal moment this year, as was mentioned by councilor Koyama Lane, there's already been 420 anti LGBTQ bills introduced in state legislatures across the country, and we expect that number to only grow. This community is right to exist are under threat. And it's also being re adjudicated daily. We are community organizations are reporting that more and more LGBTQ people are moving to Portland for safety, for access to healthcare and for the ability to just live openly and authentically. The Portland metro area has the second highest percentage of LGBTQ folks in the nation. So what we do when it comes to the city's commitment to LGBTQ plus equity really has a significant impact on our community. So with that context in mind, let's shift to the policy and the development timeline here. The city's investment in LGBTQ plus policy started in 2021. The program hit the ground running in many different policy and programmatic areas. But in 2022, commissioner Mapps requested that our program conduct a review of city administrative rules and policy, and this work developed into a multiyear project identifying opportunities for both proactive policy development as well as opportunities to expand on previously established legislative intent. So, for example, the realization of the all user restroom ordinance that passed last week. In 2024, the program strategic plan was unanimously accepted by city council with the support of a host of community organizations, as well as the support of about 350 of our city employees who belong to the queer alliance employee resource group. That plan really highlighted the importance of moving forward with policies like the ones under consideration today and in spring of 2025, councilor Koyama Lane office requested that our program draft policy considerations, and in response to her work leading the city's response to federal threats. All that work brings us to the package under consideration today, and let's begin with item 11. The proposed amendment addresses title 14 of city code, specifically 14 a50100, which governs misuse of a public restroom, as referenced in exhibit a, the proposed updates remove outdated and contradictory sections of city code, and also aligns better with existing policy in our human resources administrative rules, as well as Portland police bureau directive 640, both policies that our program has partnered with those bureaus on the presented language focuses on what really matters when it comes to restroom utilization in the city. So that's one barring disorderly and disruptive conduct. And two, people can use the restroom that aligns with their gender. We did receive a question about Portland police department's involvement in these updates. And so I just want to share that. Early last year, our program met with chief day and briefed him on these proposed changes. He was fully supportive, and the Portland police department overall has been a great partner in this work. And so I just want to personally thank chief day for that. And you'll find a letter of his support in the uploaded exhibits for the item. The second piece of item 11 is focused on title 23 of our city code, which governs civil rights. The proposed updates to title 23 update the definition of sexual orientation, and add definitions for family or relationship structure. This proposed code update also expands our nondiscrimination protections to bar discrimination on the basis of an individual's family or relationship structure. So the intent here is to ensure that portlanders are not subject to discrimination due to being in, for example, a polyamorous non-monogamous relationship or any other kind of nontraditional family structure. These protections would extend to employment, selling, renting or leasing property, and also just general discrimination in places of public accommodation through the policy development process. There was a question raised about potential financial impact to employers. So, for example, if this update would require multiple partners to be eligible for health care coverage and just to confirm these changes would not necessitate any changes to employer health care coverage, which is rearticulated in Portland city code 2301050 and section c, we also received a few questions about the enforcement of these protections. And to be clear, none of these changes that you're considering today are going to alter any sort, any of the enforcement mechanisms that currently exist for title 23. Shifting now to item 12, the package resolution, a statement of intended policy for the city. This resolution declares the city of Portland will defend the rights of transgender people and all of the LGBTQ plus community. I would encourage council to review some of the whereas statements of the resolution, as they certainly allude to the context that I opened with. But in terms of the crux of the resolution, there are three primary elements. The first is the most common provision that we've seen cities across the country adopt as part of their protection resolutions, and that is the prohibition of city resources to be used in the criminalization of queer and trans people's access to care. The second piece is calling on the state to continue passing legislation that protects the rights of LGBTQ plus people, and to continue to provide resources to community organizations that directly support this community. The last piece is a reaffirmation of the city's overall commitment to lgbtqia to plus equity. That concludes the quasi staff measure summary that I prepared for you all today. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Lex. Colleagues, is there any technical or clarifying comments or questions before we move to public testimony?

Councilor Kanal thank you, council president. I noticed in the slides that there was a note that the initial draft removed sections e and f, but there was apparently an amendment that removed sections a through d in committee. I just wanted to get a little clarity on what happened there.

Yes. Happy to provide some clarity. Essentially, initial drafts of the changes to title 14 were a little bit more scant in terms of what we took out. And through conversations as the proposal moved through council offices, as I as I understood, the decision was made to just simplify the whole conversation, to really just focus again on the two major pieces around barring disorderly and disruptive conduct and just being very clear about a person. All people can access the public restroom of the gender that aligns with them. So it's really it was a matter of clarity.

Thank you.

Yeah. Of course. Any other questions.

Don't see any more in the queue right now. So thank you. Colleagues. There are currently 40 people signed up to testify between the two items. We are going to take testimony all at the same time to the public. I apologize, but because there are 40 of you, we are going to have to reduce it to two minutes apiece. And can we please call up testimony at testifiers as a panel?

First up, we have. Sorry. Let me refresh my document. Mark kelly, amy nash. Kelly, layla vega and david carlson.

Folks are welcome to come on up. If you hear your name called and please identify yourself for the record, feel free to share your pronouns and you have two minutes.

Yeah.

Starting now.

Yeah.

Go ahead. Okay. Thank you. Councilors. My name is mark kelly. He him? I'm from district three. Please amend the civil rights code to protect family or relationship structure. This includes multi-partner multi parent families and relationships. Stepfamilies, multi-generational households, consensual non-monogamy, and asexual or romantic relationships. A no vote leaves gaps in the current code saying it's okay for society's distaste or ignorance to outweigh the survival needs of unfamiliar or disfavored people. This is very personal for me. My partner's amy and david and myself and our four children moved to Portland from colorado in 2011 because life there was untenable for our nontraditional family. I felt relief, but also fear what to disclose on lease and mortgage paperwork, how to test for acceptance during job interviews, and hedging against threats to our family's basic economic needs. After five years of underemployment, I secured a full time hr job at Multnomah county. When colleagues talked about their family plans. I kept quiet. I never knew who might react badly and with what consequences. Ironically, I ensured the civil rights of others while I remained exposed. Nearly five years in county hr taught me that a policy without specifics is unenforceable at best and selectively enforced with harm at worst. The current proposed ordinance language is necessary but insufficient. Merely referencing family and relationship structure will not protect us. Detailed specific language is needed, otherwise complaints will be a painful, likely expensive process with an uncertain outcome.

30 more seconds. That 30 more seconds.

Okay, a chilling effect will undermine the good intentions of these code changes. Please vote yes on proper amended language. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Amy. Sorry. Amy is online. Amy. Nash. Kelly.

Thank you.

Rebecca.

Go ahead. Amy.

My name is amy nash. Kelly. Pronouns. She and I live in district three. I strongly support changing the civil rights code to include protection for people in diverse family or relationship structures. I've been in a committed triad with my partners david and mark for 17 years. We own our home together, are saving for retirement, are all employed and raised four kids who have graduated from college and are thriving. Not everyone would choose a family like ours, but it has been the greatest blessing of my life to share a partnership with two gentle, loving men who supported me while I earned a phd and pursued my career with responsibility. Shared among us three. During our time together, we've seen progress for civil rights. Our family was among the first in Oregon to obtain a third parent adoption, making all three of us legal parents. We've been grateful to see cities across the country adopt ordinances like the one Portland is considering. We traveled to massachusetts and were among the first multi-partner families to obtain three party domestic partnership in somerville. We expected it to be symbolic, but it helped us complete estate planning. It's important that the ordinance amendment explicitly mention multi-partner or non-monogamous families like ours and other family diversity, rather than relying on interpretation of family structure. We have learned that vague language leaves room for bias and hate instead of inclusion and care. Despite our stable relationship, we have not always been treated as a valid family structure. I'm testifying today before civil rights are extended to me, relying on the kindness of my employer for job security rather than the protection of this ordinance. If I can be that brave to risk my job, I believe the council can be brave enough to use plain language, recognizing families like mine and protecting the civil rights of unusual family. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon, president Dunphy and council members. My name is david carlson, and I'm the legislative campaign coordinator for open. That's the organization for polyamory and ethical non-monogamy. We are a grassroots nonprofit working to advance the rights and acceptance for non-monogamous families and individuals. I'm also a proud resident of Portland. I live in district three. I thank you for your leadership in bringing this forward. As we know, sorry, these protections matter because our research has shown 60% of non-monogamous people report experiencing stigma and discrimination on the basis of their non-monogamous identity, and all forms of family deserve legal protection. And I'm here today to ask that this policy go all the way. Legal protections are only as strong as the words that define them right now. The ordinance protects family or relationship structure and defines that term, but it needs to go one step further and make crystal clear who these protections are meant to cover. That matters for two reasons. First, the public needs to know. Families need to have the protection and know that they are covered. Second, courts need clarity in this area. We cannot rely on judicial discretion or interpretation of legislative intent. We need to make crystal clear in the text itself who we are talking about. Without that, a judge can look at a polyamorous family, denied housing and say that ordinance doesn't clearly cover you. That's not hypothetical. That's how vague civil rights laws get gutted in practice. In fact, you have cited this. Just last week, you passed an ordinance requiring new signage to specify the existence of all gender restrooms. You ultimately determined that it was important to be clear that people outside of the gender binary or otherwise do not, who otherwise do not fit neatly into labels of men and women, are included. That same logic applies here. It would be consistent to be clear and include. Definition the definition enumerating specific protected relationships. In nondiscrimination ordinance. Four cities have already passed this right. Cambridge, somerville and massachusetts. Berkeley and oakland, california. They passed this exact language. The full enumerated examples the and phase zero legal challenges zero controversy zero. Problems because it works. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Point of order information I don't know, I just seems like the timer is early.

I saw.

That it's just been adjusted.

Okay.

Thanks.

There will be a time when there are 30s left and a chime when it's over at zero.

Thank you. Thanks.

Hello, my name is lila vega. My pronouns are she and her and I'm a resident of district three. I echo the comments of those who have commented before me. So instead of of these notes, I'm going to just tell you a little bit about my family. So I am proud to be a Portland resident. I am queer and I am in a polyamorous configuration, ethically non-monogamous in a way that's hard to define. Frankly. We call it gaming table poly because we get around the gaming table and everybody. It's so peaceful and so wonderful. We moved to Portland because my spouse of many years is transgender, and we wanted to raise our kids in a community where our polyamorous lifestyle, our gender identities, our identities, queer people was not the primary focus of our children's lives, where we, their kids, who can go to schools and, you know, just be kids and we can live our lives. And that's what we have in our community. I urge you to protect us, because frankly, I am afraid that speaking publicly here and being on the record as non-monogamous could impact my job. It is at the grace of my employer. I have a fairly public job, and if folks google me, they're going to see this, and that's going to impact how people treat me in the workplace. I have no protections for that. And I am the primary breadwinner for my family. Other people need protections more than I do. I have a lot of privilege. But racial inequities, homophobia, income disparities all increase. Factors that that, you know, make those people at risk of greater impact when they are discriminated against. If I am discriminated against, I live in Portland. I can likely get another job. I'm a well-educated professional. But if you start compounding those factors, it really becomes a serious issue. And I also want to speak to including multigenerational families, including stepfamilies. These are also issues that impact people who have compounding biases, working against them in a much more, you know, magnified way. So thank you for all the work you're doing. Really. Thank you so much.

Thank you very much for being here.

Next we have Jamie carty, elizabeth sheff, harper havercamp, alex maresca.

Welcome, folks. Please introduce yourself. For the record, welcome to use your preferred pronouns. And you got two minutes.

Good afternoon.

I'm Jamie cully.

I live in district two and I am the executive director of a local community called sex positive Portland. We support folks in sex education and consent training, boundaries training, and also gatherings. We have accessible, consent focused, inclusive events and includes mixers, cuddle parties and touch events as well. I'd like to see a non-monogamy included in these protections, because it's important to the people who are part of my community. We have socials, discussion groups, affinity groups throughout the year, including those for non-monogamous and polyamorous folks. For the last two years, we have also hosted events for the non-monogamy week of visibility that happens in July as part of open. You heard from earlier and the last two years. We also brought back after it was canceled in 2020, a big event called polytopia. This had 80 people when we were there in 2024 at the jupiter hotel. We were last year at the royal sonesta and we doubled in size to 160 folks, the number one thing that comes up when we have these events, we bring in speakers to come and speak for us. We have mixers, we have a big show Saturday night. It's that people need to talk about whether or not they can actually be out of the closet in their workplace and their social lives. So these protections really matter to the folks who show up for this. I also want to mention that this had a budget of $35,000 last year. So this is bringing in money for Portland as well, and really stimulates local economy and represents a lot of folks. Sbp currently sits at about 450 members, but we see thousands of people come through throughout the years because we've been around for about 11 years at this point. So please include non-monogamy in these protections.

Thank you.

My name is doctor elizabeth schiff. I've been studying polyamorous families with children since 1996. In the longitudinal polyamorous family study. I'm also an expert witness in family courts on behalf of polyamorous families who are potentially losing their children, losing custody of their children. So, long story short, I've seen the impacts of discrimination, both in my data. Speaking to children who are growing up in polyamorous families, I've seen how discrimination and bias affects them directly and how difficult it can make their lives. And I've seen bias in courts across the country, bias against polyamorous families. That assumes with no foundation, no foundation in empirical fact, at least, that these families are pathological when in fact they can be very supportive, healthy, functional, fabulous places to raise children that provide an extensive social safety network that provide appropriate, caring, supportive parenting. It is the village everyone wants, but somehow not in that way. So my concern is that if the language in the proposal is not more specific, that these families will be overlooked, that they will not be included in the protections, when unfortunately, they are selectively included in biases and disadvantages. They should also be extensively included specifically for protection, because these families exist in a way that does not damage any other family, protecting them does not take anything away from anyone else. There is no disadvantage to protecting these families.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is harper haverkamp. I'm a resident in district three and the kerns neighborhood. I'm a longtime union member. I have a phd, and I'm. I'm an aunt to three nephews and a wonderful niece. I'm also a woman who's medical trans status does not define me, but significantly contours my life. I'm here to personally support passing these policies. I moved to Oregon 12 years ago. My home state, kansas, is currently passing policies to criminalize individuals holding driver's licenses with gender markers different than their birth certificate and a bathroom bounty hunter law. I moved here for a reason. I've slept long, called long, cold Oregon months in a van in an uninsulated garage, used food pantries, lost a career, family and friends. Life is so different for us. 99% of society does not change their sex. So let me break down some ways that discrimination operates. For over 60 years, women in the trans community have had consistent calls for housing, health care, dignity, and the decriminalization of sex work and getting the police off our backs with housing and jobs. You have a background or credit check, references in your gender history and prior names show up. Perception and implicit bias is real. Girls like us quietly struggle to get jobs or qualified for or housing we can't afford. Discrimination in Portland isn't in your face or easily provable. It's quiet denials visible or disclosed. Whether your status is trans girls sleeping in vans and tents. Bus stops are being further kept down by sweeps in a broken shelter system that's great at getting grants, but fails. Us unhoused girls in Portland struggle to find safe housing. This is a material need. Because of this, we support each other like family, spend our days with our sisters, and survive through drag, ballroom, arts, and more. Some engage in alternative work, the oldest profession of which is harshly criminalized and policed. Sex work is work in Portland. City laws do not make us safer. Women are not safer when we're arrested, abused, harmed, thrown at jails, or assaulted. When work is criminalized at both ends, accountability is impossible. So I am deeply disappointed that this work took over five years and doesn't include sex work at all. It's entwined in our history and lives and loved ones. It took 60 years to get here and it might take another 60 years, but I have hope in passing. This helps me have hope. Please vote yes.

Thank you.

For the record, my name is alex maresca. She they pronouns. I'm here from friendly house elder pride services. We're a nonprofit based in district four that advocates for LGBTQ plus older adults. I'm here to express. Excuse me. I'm also a member of the lgbtqia plus housing collaborative. I'm here to express my strong support for the entire policy package, but especially for the code provisions in exhibit a and exhibit b. You know, the best part of my job is that I get to talk to LGBTQ elders. These are folks who have really seen it all. They have the best stories. Not a lot surprises them. But when I talk to older adults in the community lately, a lot of them are really concerned. They're concerned because they're looking around and they're seeing parallels to fights that they thought they had already fought, things they thought they'd already won. And they're really disheartened to see that we're still having the same conversations again and again today. Trans folks in particular are facing attacks on their identities, their integrity and their safety. That shouldn't have to happen in Portland. With this policy package, the city can reassure portlanders of all ages that they will actually be respected here. I also want to highlight how these changes will especially benefit LGBTQ plus elders as we age. It's a reality that a lot of us are more likely to need assistance using the restroom. We might need a caregiver to come in with us. And while the previous version of the code did include a caregiver exception, it's not always obvious who a caregiver is. At first glance, many older adults, especially LGBTQ+ older adults, receive support from a partner or a friend rather than a child or a paid caregiver. This new code will ensure that portlanders can use the restroom without fear of discrimination or embarrassment. In a time when the community is under real threat. As we outlined earlier, Portland has an opportunity to do something concrete in support of lgbtqia to plus rights. I sincerely appreciate the entire policy package and the city's commitment to lgbtqia to equity. At the same time, I hope this is just the first step of many. Achieving equity requires time, energy, and resources. If the city is serious about protecting our community, it must also be serious about investing in the organizations that keep community alive. Thank you.

Thank you, thank you all for being here.

Next we have benjamin gilbert, jordan lewis, robin bogojevic, and skylar cruz.

Come on up, folks. Are those joining us online? Please introduce yourself. For the record, feel free to share your pronouns. And two minutes two.

Good online. First, maybe.

Jordan and skylar are online. You can go ahead while we get them situated at the testimony table if you're ready.

Yeah. Ben, why don't you?

Okay.

Go ahead. Hello. My name is. Hello. My name is ben gilbert, and I use he they pronouns. I'm a volunteer lobbyist for the Portland democratic socialists of America, and I'm a tenant in district four. I support amending civil rights code related to sexual orientation and family status definitions, and the amendments of the nondiscrimination clauses as LGBTQ. Plus people are under attack from the federal administration, it's crucial that our city government fight backs and protects portlanders. Adding family or relationship structure to nondiscrimination clauses is a needed addition, and furthermore, updating the misuse of a public restroom code is long overdue. Also, strongly support the declaration that the city of Portland will defend the rights of transgender people and all of the LGBTQ plus community, and want to emphasize thanks for the council for bringing this. But also, you know, always keep in mind that these communities and these portlanders, first and foremost, like, are also experiencing because of these amenities, economic hardship. And we cannot separate these forms of discrimination from the economic hardships that workers in Portland are facing, whether that's access to housing, you know, the rights of the rights that they have as workers on the job site all intersect with this. Thank you. Yield my time.

Thank you very much.

Jordan.

Jordan. Lewis. Jordan's online. You can go ahead.

Hello. City council. For the record, my name is jordan lewis. He him I'm a volunteer lobbyist for Portland democratic socialists of America and I'm a resident. I'm here today commenting on a resolution I support, but that lacks specific language I think is key to meeting the intent of it. I want to see language protecting non-nuclear families, multi-generational households, blended families, and polyamorous relationships. Polyamory needs to be stated explicitly because in our current culture, it often serves as the new front for control over gay and gender non-conforming neighbors, especially as they become more present in daily life. Every gay person and every trans person has, at some point in their lives, brushed up against the bounds of social acceptability and gotten the subtle but firm signal to slow down or to even stop. I got it when I came out to my conservative parents as bi in west virginia. My girlfriend skye got it when she heard about an awkward hr presentation she wasn't present for when she came out as trans at work. I think the ability to persist and overcome this friction is one of our greatest strengths, and it does not stop being useful. After we've come out of the closet later in our lives, we face new kinds of friction and scrutiny just over life choices which are perceived as deviant and cringe. Life choices like my ability to love and live with two people. That doesn't hurt anyone. It's actually necessary for us to thrive. We face resistance over solid social norms and outdated policy, which you have the ability to change right now. So please do. I know a lot of trans people. Most of my friends are trans, actually, and they often rely on nontraditional living situations for housing and cost of living reasons. They're queer. Liberation is inseparable from their economic liberation. Please amend the language to explicitly protect nontraditional families. Thank you. I'll pass it on to my partners, robin and skye.

Go right ahead, robin.

You can go ahead.

Hello, I'm robin. I'm a constituent of district four. Like many queer people, my birth family is not necessarily friendly to how I live my life. If I lose housing, I don't even really have the safety nets that many other people my age typically do. In such a situation, the last thing I want is to be discriminated against in housing or employment based off of how I live my private life. Language in this bill is a great start, but we have opportunity to be real leaders here. I'd encourage city council to adopt some more specific language around these protections. Truly make sure these protections stick. We should be explicitly naming examples of what kind of relationships are protected. Polyamorous non-nuclear families, multi-generational households all deserve recognition and protection from potential discrimination. I'll wrap this up by saying there are many queer people that move to Portland to escape from unfriendly areas of the country, and as such, this is an incredibly important piece of legislation, and I'd like to thank those of you that worked to bring before to bring this before city council. I'd encourage you all to vote yes and to seriously consider that amendment. Thank you so much. I see my time.

Thank you very much.

Hello city council, for the record, my name is skylar cruz. I use she her pronouns. I'm a proud resident of Portland and very happy to be speaking on this issue. Last two testimonies were provided by my partners and like them and many others before us, I wish to express the importance of explicitly codifying a variety of relational, relational, and family dynamics in the language of this item. Throughout my life, I have never quite fit the mold of the typical family or relationship structure. I grew up in a lower income, multiple multiracial family with an ever fluctuating family structure with cousins, aunts and uncles, grandparents, family, friends moving in and out. It was never really kind of the same thing year to year. For all intents and purposes, though, I would consider every person who lived with me as part of my family structure. I'm also a polyamorous transgender woman. My relationship with my partners is just as valid as others are. I urge this council to amend this item with new language to explicitly include multi-partner multi parent families and relationships, stepfamilies multi-generational households, diverse family structures, consensually non-monogamous relationships, and consensual sexual and or intimate relationships, including asexual, aromantic, and polyamorous relationships. Portland is home to a variety of very happy relationship structures, and many of us are not represented legally in ways that can serve to undermine us in the future. That is why it's important to now to take a stand and codify these ideals into city law in ways that cannot be misconstrued. I'm very happy with the changes put forth, but we can and should do better. Lastly, I'd like to give flowers for the many people who came together today, today to make this possible. To everyone who helped put this ordinance together to council for hearing us today, to everyone who's testifying, and lastly, to my partners who joined me in testifying and who I love very, very much. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Next we have jennifer bitgood, eli gray, samuel lee boo, and kelli mason. At the table. You can you can start.

Feel free. Somebody jump in.

I can go first. Kelli mason used they them pronouns. I appreciate all of the work that people in this room being here today have done. And you folks as well. But I feel like there needs to be more specific language on the protections, especially for the city's frontline staff that are queer and trans. I work at a community center, and it's hard to talk about, but I had an incident where we had an incident where a member of the public called was following a trans employee, calling them multiple slurs, recording them and other frontline staff, and spewing hate speech, and had to be escorted out by the police. From that point on, other queer and trans frontline workers from that facility took calls repeatedly from his online supporters, saying hate speech and making threats via phone, facebook and youtube. Comments. I reached out to the supervisors for support and his reply was, do you know self-defense? What would you have me do? There needs to be a better plan, not box checking. These are lives we're up against a lot. Not to mention folks of color from blended families as well. There's a lot of intersections and identities that need support from you all. I asked others in the city for more support and a safety plan, but I received nothing concrete. So again, to say my point, please make it more specific. We need that. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Okay, I will go next. Hello, my name is sam lebow. I'm a resident of district two in the elliott neighborhood. I've been in the I've been in a polyamorous relationship for seven years now, and I have a partner in district three who works in a nonunion position in the public schools. Since taking this position, she's been worried that any indication of the nature of her relationships, even a sticker on her laptop with a hint of positive sentiment towards non-monogamy, could endanger her job if a parent reacted negatively to it. This is a very real concern, as societally we're still at the point where many people perceive non-monogamous relationships as inherently sexual or inappropriate for children, the same sentiment that's long been weaponized against gay relationships. Well, we hope that the proposed language of the family or relationship structure clause would provide safeguards against this kind of discrimination. Hope is not a legislative approach, codifying protections for intimate personal relationships, with no further detail about what is definitely covered is needlessly vague. Making the language more specific would increase portlanders certainty about their rights and protections, and reduce the risk of misinterpretation in a case that might reach the courts, as not every judge is familiar with or sympathetic to nontraditional relationships, to say the least. Additionally, the current language is an important omission. The language mentions actual or perceived involvement of consenting individuals in intimate personal relationships. This does not explicitly include relationship preference. For example, it seems possible that someone who is not currently in a polyamorous relationship but was seeking one, would not be adequately protected by this language. I urge the council to pass strong, clear and specific language protecting nontraditional relationship structures and styles. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Give another call for jennifer bitgood or eli gray. Then next we will move to maureen mcgovern, bebe anderson, kayla mcgrail, and danielle morris.

Welcome. Feel free to. Yeah, you sat down first. Go first.

Good afternoon. My name is maureen mcgovern. My pronouns are she her. And I'm here today to speak in solidarity with my LGBTQ+ neighbors. Last June I spoke to this council. Thank you to urge you to pass a resolution declaring declaring Portland an LGBTQ plus sanctuary city. But since that time, the federal administration has continued its unrelenting attack on the rights and the very existence of the LGBTQ community. The aclu is tracking hundreds of anti-lgbtq bills across the country, while access to life saving, gender affirming care is being further restricted. Meanwhile, the city of rochester, new york, has strengthened its sanctuary city policy, expanding protections for LGBTQ plus residents into their municipal code. And bellingham, Washington has also strengthened protections for their LGBTQ community. Recognizing the need to proactively protect their residents from rising national threats to their rights. These are just two examples of cities that have taken meaningful, tangible steps to protect their LGBTQ plus communities, and it is now time for Portland to act. We must say loudly and definitively that Portland, as a sanctuary city, is a safe place, a welcoming and supportive city for LGBTQ individuals and their families, and that local resources will not be used to enforce federal and out-of-state laws that threaten the ability of any person to access health care, education, housing and employment. The people of minnesota have shown us the power of standing up for our neighbors, and we must now commit to our LGBTQ plus community that they are welcome here and that we will stand with them and their families. Now is the time for courageous leadership, and the city of Portland must not back down. I am confident that you will do the right thing and pass this ordinance and this resolution. Thank you.

Bebe.

My name is bebe anderson.

Pronouns are they and them. And I'm also a coworker with kelly who gave their testimony. Thank you for your time council. I would like to talk about a firsthand experience that I had in April of last year. I'm a recreation lead at a community center. I'm also a queer and trans person, which our intersections which were used against me by an online first amendment auditor, and his followers, which numbered about 50,000. The individual entered my place of work, recording myself and my coworker without our consent. He then tried to insert himself into a classroom as an act of provocation, and when I intervened, he responded aggressively and insisted on staying. We were able to get him trespassed from our building, but the fallout seemed to only get worse after that. The following day, the recorded video was posted to youtube, and throughout the week the staff and I received threatening phone calls, email messages and facebook posts. They targeted me specifically, asking for my resignation and often using queerphobic and transphobic language. I also have many colleagues who share these intersections and were on the receiving end of this harassment. I did not try to get the video taken down for fear of retaliation. On the basis of censorship, I took the I used up the remainder of my pto and then went on a three month medical leave for fear for my own safety. What frustrated me in the aftermath of the event was that I was called on specifically to develop a training so soon after what was, frankly, a traumatic event. While I do think that our lgbtqia to plus workforce would have significant input into how best to keep ourselves protected, we should not be the only ones fighting for our safety. And with the amount of bigotry and vitriol we have to engage with on a daily basis, especially in online spaces, we ask for solidarity beyond just slogans. We want to ensure that our lives and livelihoods are not put on the line constantly, due to a lack of support. Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon, council president Dunphy and fellow councilors. My name is danielle morris. I use she her pronouns and I was born in Portland. Operated business here in live in damascus. I'm here today with the support of the board to speak in strong support of this policy package, both the code updates and the resolution affirming the city's commitment to the lgbtqia. Two people. People, thank you for bringing this forward. These updates are thoughtful, grounded in Oregon law, and long overdue. They modernize the protections across employment, housing, and public accommodations. And importantly, they clarify bathroom access for transgender and gender nonconforming people. I want to share briefly why that clarity matters. As a transgender woman, I use public bathrooms like many trans and even cisgendered people. I've experienced being stared at, scorned, and formally policed for simply using the restroom. I experienced this even while recently in Washington, dc, for a transgender day of lobbying in spaces initially dedicated for civil rights. In fact, a young high school junior from maine who was afraid to use the facilities was with me. Thankfully, our next appointment was with congresswoman dexter's office, and she offers gender expressive restroom access to all in her team. Allowed my new young acquaintance to access for relief. This is a terrible challenge as an adult, and even more so as a young person. This is never about safety. It's about those who feel entitled to decide who belongs. The code update means people may use restrooms consistent with their expressed gender, while fully preserving conduct and safety rules, and to improve and improves public safety by reducing conflict and affirming dignity. This broader anti-discrimination updates matter for the same reason they reflect how people actually live our families, our relationships, our work lives, and our access to everyday services. The or support board board supports this package is written. We also agree with the community partners who have added more inclusive and industrial industrial language around family relationships and structures. Thank you for your leadership.

Thank you.

Hello council, my name is kayla mcgrail. I'm the current board president of Oregon queer history collective, a 31 year old organization collecting, sharing and preserving our state's history. I'm also the former associate project manager of the lgbt, the city of portland's LGBTQ plus historic sites project. This multi-phase effort launched in 2022 with support from the national park service. At the time, city council, the Oregon state historic preservation office, and the bureau of planning and sustainability. Between 2022 and 2025, I identified over 400 places and spaces connected to portland's queer history, surveyed about 100 of those identified, supported nominations for three resources to go on to the national register of historic places specifically for their connection to our city's queer history, and authored LGBTQ plus history in Portland, Oregon a historic context statement. All of these are available online through the bureau of planning and sustainability's historic resources program. There's also a great story map that shows these resources. I highlight this project because it is valuable that our city supported such a historical project. It is valuable to know our histories and that we have several landmarks for queer history. When other agencies like the national park service and other municipalities are trying to erase our past, present and our futures, I support the resolution and code amendments today. I also ask that city council commits to actions that ensures we have a past, present and future. This includes funding the lgbtqia plus policy program, supporting queer businesses. Since we have lost so many of our institutions, supporting historic resources programs, and getting ice out of Portland, we are not free until we are all free.

And rebecca, before we call our next panel, can we take a five minute bio break for everybody? We're going to take a five minute restroom break, and we'll be back in five at 425. This week. We appreciate it. I get it, I might I was like, I got it, I got it all in a few minutes. And now I'm like, development. Director.

Need you to make some.

Yeah, I already practiced. Yeah. It is. Oh, no, I don't know too much. Just like. No, no. Not so good.

Okay.

Great. Yeah. Hi. My. Name. Is. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, exactly. Yeah.

We are back. Can we please call the next five testifiers, please?

80 steckel, ian barreto, scott moore, josiah davis. Aaron savage.

Welcome, folks. Please come on up. Name? For the record, pronouns if you'd prefer. And two minutes.

Good afternoon counselors. My name is a.d. Steckel and I am here on behalf of cascade aids project, also known as capp, where I am deputy director of strategic partnerships and advocacy. I'm here today first and foremost to in advance, thank you for your commitment to the LGBTQ community in Portland, as expressed in LGBTQ protections package. Secondly, I'm here to ask you to match this protections package with material investments in the organizations that serve LGBTQ plus portlanders. The city of Portland has a history of doing so. With your support, cap built a LGBTQ plus primary care and behavioral health clinic, prism health, and we now provide exceptional, culturally specific care to over 4000 patients. And one of the one time investment from the joint office. We provided housing services to over 140 LGBTQ plus portlanders. These are just a couple of examples of your support for our work. This kind of support is needed now more than ever. As you know, our community is under attack. We urge you to consider the LGBTQ plus individuals experience houselessness at nearly twice the rate of the general population. A 2024 policy paper on LGBTQ plus houselessness in the Portland region, developed by the LGBTQ plus housing collaborative, found significant gaps in services. The data clearly shows that despite our reputation compared to other areas in the country with large queer communities, Portland does not measure up in its investments in the LGBTQ community. Eviction prevention, specifically emergency rent assistance, was a primary recommendation of that paper. I urge you to let that paper, along with your own program report and strategic guide program strategic plan guide your decision making on the unspent Portland housing bureau funds. Cap has shared two proposals with council council members that exemplify the city's aims to improve housing opportunities for LGBTQ portlanders. And I urge you to consider those those proposals, along with the proposals of my fellow members of the lgbtqia to plus housing collaborative. Thanks.

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon, council president Dunphy. Members of the council, my name is scott moore, and I am a community affairs officer at quest center for integrative health. I also stand here as a member of the LGBTQ, LGBTQ plus housing collaborative. Quest center has served Portland since 1989. Born out of the hiv aids crisis for over three decades, we operated as the on the foundational premise that housing is health care for our clients, for those adhering to hiv medications, to those in substance use recovery, stable housing, and is a medical and behavioral health prerequisite. Clinical stability is impossible without residential stability. When housing is scarce, the needs of marginalized populations are the first to be deprioritized. In today's political climate, the active erasure of LGBTQ plus populations through the suppression of demographic data is a stark reality. We strongly we strongly support this policy protection package and sanctuary resolution. It is an essential first step towards operationalizing the city's LGBTQ issues, plus, strategic plan codification is critical. With federal cuts looming, you must remove these protections into city code now to ensure Portland does not divest from our community safety. Furthermore, Portland has housing funds available right now that could be utilized to address equity gaps. Passing this ordinance creates the legal framework to ensure those funds support the diverse family and relational structure of our community. As we move forward in this new district government, we ask you not to step back, show us how the city intends to show up by funding equity and and defending the rights of transgender portlanders. We deeply appreciate the policy packages in the city's verbal commitment to LGBTQ plus equity, and we want to be and we want to be clear equity requires infrastructure, and infrastructure requires investment. Policy is the promise. Investment is the delivery. We urge the council to pass this package in its entirety. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Hello, council.

My name is josiah davis. I will be running as a candidate for public office in the 2028 election, and so I look forward to seeing many of your faces in the workplace. Our city is a historically proud, albeit generally peaceful one, boasting our strength most commonly and kindness, compassion, empathy, community and history of outspoken protest against the government when they need to be checked, particularly when it comes to the rights, respect and sanctity of life of the people. The actions and events of the trump administration have left our city with much to reflect on and our choice of leaders, our view of our government, and the connection versus isolated detachment of our community. They have crossed boundaries that those in other countries would have raised cities for, without exaggeration, they have displayed myriad blatantly unjust, hateful, spiteful, authoritarian, dystopian, malicious, and egregious acts and behaviors that show clearly what lies in the shadows of our nation. What has been going on? Will we chose to live in complacency and ignorance, allowing our government to be controlled by mongrels that claim to be anything like us? These monsters have traumatized, killed, and raped countless men, women, children while using power that we granted to them because we chose to be negligent with our power as the people of the united states of America. Our country was founded on the premise of the power of the people, because we hold so much more power than any of the government figures, agents, any corporations, executives, or rich individuals, and the community of the lgbtqia is no different from that. We have stood for long and strongly against tyranny, against those who would see others put down and discriminated against simply for the way that they are. We ask that you pass this package and that you continue to fight for those in our community, and that you continue to fight for the rest of us in Portland, because we are fighting along with you. And thank you for the work that you have all done thus far.

Thank you very much.

Hello, my name is aaron savage. I live in district three and my pronouns are she her. I'm here to speak for kids. I run camp out which has run in Portland for almost four years now. We you may not have heard of us because we fill every single year serving middle school youth with joyful, artistic, creative summer and winter solstice activities. And intentionally. This is essentially campouts coming out. We've really not needed to be in the limelight and quietly have really found that what we do is we bring artists and activists to middle school kids to share how that art form has brought them hope, joy or community through hard times, how they can raise together and find something to anchor to that is a positive outlet for them. We take data and we have over the last three years, and I'm here to share what we have found for the first time, actually, and what we have found is that what we're doing is working that bringing kids something and adults in their lives to look forward to gives them something to have hope and faith. And unfortunately, last summer our data tanked. So the teacher in me wishes I had a whiteboard. I do not, so you can replay my testimony. I'm just going to read to you my data. When we also parcel out kids of color, we're finding that this and self-identifying this data holds, I feel, part of a community of kids. We had 30% growth in that, and it tanked last year to 15%. I am glad that I am alive in the originally 2023 20% growth. Last year. 3% of the kids agreed with that over a week's time. I'm going to share one more. My skills, talents and interests have value 25% growth in one week's time in 2023. Last year flatlined. Nothing changed about our programing. The only thing that has changed is the climate these kids are in. I'm going to continue just to say Portland public schools is facing a $50 million budget shortfall at the chopping block. Our counselors, the supports that kids need.

Cut you off. Sorry. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Hello. My name is e barreto. My pronouns are he and bay, and I work with new avenues for youth as the program manager for the sexual and gender minority youth resource center. Smirk. We provide resources, systems and application, gender affirming peer one on one mentorship, basic needs access and most notably, the only LGBTQ plus culturally specific third space for young queer folks in Multnomah county. We also act as an entry point for referring youth to other programs within new avenues to access shelter, education and sustainable employment. I'm here today to speak on my behalf, the behalf of my family, the youth this program serves, and new avenues for youth within the homeless youth continuum here in Portland. In 2025, this country experienced new attempts at oppression and isolation of lgbtqia. Plus, folks, that goes much farther than just pretending we don't exist. Instead, we saw a rollback of rights and minimization of harm done to communities and efforts to limit our abilities to find solidarity with our peers. In June of last year, the supreme court of the united states released their ruling in the case of united states versus grumeti, codifying this federal administration's commitment to preventing access to life saving, gender affirming care for trans and nonbinary Americans. These policies and rhetoric have created uncertainty and fear for many young people in our community. Portland's resolution and declaration of intent to defend the right of lgbtqia to plus people is a great first step in protecting the thousands of folks like myself who are proud to call ourselves portlanders. It's a reaffirmation of a reputation our city already has, and a wonderful commitment to recognizing the contributions of queer portlanders throughout our city's history. But it is that a first step. I'm urging the city to continue this momentum beyond a statement and commitment. What queer portlanders, especially young queer portlanders, need, is a government that prioritizes the continued funding and stewardship of culturally specific programs that ensure safety and stability needed for a fully affirmed life. This looks like continued existence and involvement of the office of equity's lgbtqia plus team intentionality, ensuring the new position of equity officer within the city administrator's office is cognizant and representative of these needs and the city's funding of programs and community organizations that support LGBTQ portlanders.

Thank you very much. Thank you all for being here.

Next we have eddie wang, alex morrell, kendall mason, deborah porta, lyndsey fry.

Eddie, why don't you go ahead? See you online.

City councilors, I want to thank you for all the opportunity to to testify. For the record, my name is eddie wong. He him. I currently serve as chair of the board. However, tonight I'm speaking on behalf of myself and also as a former teacher. I'm here to urge you to vote yes on both the amendment and to the code and resolution. Instead of probably repeating a whole list of whys, I'll share a little story. At risk of dating myself, around almost 20 years ago, before it was common to see pride flags in schools, I remember putting up one of those little stickers of a pride flag on my classroom door window. It was just a little gesture to show support, and to be honest, I was a little paranoid that I was going to be performative at best. However, what came about surprised me. That week, a group of five students asked if they could eat lunch in my classroom as a teacher, managing about 160 kids over two days. I needed some quiet time. But I knew these kids, they were wonderful kids. Weird. Good weird. Like high school kids are. But I also knew that three of them were LGBTQ, and one of which had parents that didn't even know. Soon word got out, my classroom became known as a safe space. The following week, five grew to 30 and stayed packed for the rest of the year. Surprisingly, you would think the classroom would be a big mess, but the kids were so thankful to have the space they took real care to keep it clean. So why am I sharing this story? Two reasons actually. Like 20, but I'll just share two. One there's really not enough space spaces for our LGBTQ ia to s-plus populations. Yes, vote will create a little bit more and provide much needed equity and access and protections. Second, and this is my main point here, is to not underestimate the power of impact that you have and can make. If one little sticker can create a safe space for 30 students, imagine what a whole city ordinance or resolution can do. So please vote yes. The language updates are frankly long overdue, and these updates will bring it in line with what is currently practiced in other government institutions. The updated protections are also incredibly important today, especially since all of our rights are LGBTQ. Plus rights are human rights. Let's stay Portland strong as always, I'm super appreciative of your time. Thank you for what you do.

Thank you very much.

Kendall.

Hi. Thank you for having me. My name is kendall mason. I am a resident in district three, and I'm also the executive director of basic rights Oregon, which is an organization that is celebrating its 30th year this year, actually, and has fought for those 30 years to affirm and protect the rights of trans and queer Oregonians. We've been responsible in having a hand in a lot of really positive policy that has made Oregon the best place to live and work. If you are a queer and trans person, and I do think that our reputation of being an open and accepting state and city is all over this country, and I do think people would be shocked to know how far behind some of our city codes are. So I commend you for bringing this before council and updating the codes to reflect what we say we are, and I would like to take it a step further and to request that you follow through on your commitment to defend trans and queer Oregonians with more than just platitudes. It's really wonderful to not criminalize our bodies and to not criminalize us for accessing the health care that we need. It would be it would be. It would make a difference in people's lives that would be under. I could not overstate. We have $100 million right now that we are sitting on. And I think we sat here and we listened to a lot of folks talk about access to housing, access to health care, and fear for safety. There's an opportunity here in Portland to make investments in our communities that would make a difference, not just in lives of individuals, but in our economy. I've heard our economy be brought up several times when people are houseless, when people have insecure housing, when people have insecure access to health care. We have a weak and sick economy. If you want to see that economy grow, I urge you to make these investments in our community. And I think it's time that we show queer and trans Oregonians and portlanders that we care by putting our money where our mouth is. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Alex.

Good afternoon. Councilors. My name is alex morrell. Pronouns. He. Him. I'm a parent of two kids, a district three resident and the executive director of dream big city here in Portland. I've been in recovery for 25 years. I work in violence prevention and community support. Every week I see what happens when people feel excluded or targeted. Withdrawal and isolation increase. Isolation increases the risk of relapse and violence. Our whole goal is to provide an environment where youth and adults can be themselves. When that happens, people thrive. They become more creative. They help build stronger communities. When people feel safe and respected, they connect, they participate. They build healthy relationships. That sense of belonging reduces harm and supports healthier lives. Belonging is prevention. When the city reaffirms the transgender youth and the LGBTQ community are protected here, it supports that same principle that people deserve to feel safe and respected in our public spaces and in their lives. From what I see on the ground, strengthening belonging reduces harm in our city. I support this resolution. Thank you.

Deborah's online. You can unmute and go ahead. Deborah.

Good afternoon, council president. Councilors. My name is deborah porter, executive director of pride northwest, founding member of the LGBTQ plus housing collaborative. I'm here in strong support of this resolution, affirming that the city of Portland will defend the rights of transgender people in the broader queer community. Through my work, I speak regularly with queer portlanders and increasingly with folks relocating here from states that have become hostile to their existence. These are parents seeking lawful health care for their children, young people searching for a place where they can live safely as themselves, and so many more. They're coming for safety, stability and dignity. This resolution provides something critical clarity. It affirms that Portland will not use city resources to assist in out-of-state investigations or prosecutions related to healthcare. That's legal in Oregon. That clarity reduces fear and strengthens trust between community and government. It ensures our local practices align with Oregon law and our stated commitment to equity. When we talk about public safety, it must include the ability to access legal health care without fear. It must include affirming young people and who they are, and it must include ensuring that public institutions are never used to undermine the rights of our neighbors. In addition, intentions of equity without material investment are just that intention. Portland must not only take this opportunity to reaffirm its values, but to materially support the systems that make those values real. This is a start. Resilience is built through policy, not platitudes. Thank you.

Thank you.

Lindsay.

My name is lindsay frye. She her I own total games, a queer focused game store across from the convention center with 13 employees. We are well known throughout. Portland is one of the largest game stores in the pacific northwest. It is easy to believe with stores such as mine with two pride flags out front and a largely queer staff, that Portland has reached some kind of benchmark of progress. I started total in 2021 and I poured all of my savings, risking my home and career, because the discrimination facing me and my community made it a burning necessity. The passion I had driving me was not joy of my craft, but an overwhelming desire for a place where my community could work without a boss handing, waving away slurs from a coworker without the risk of losing a job for wearing a skirt without further discrimination. Not fit to say in this chamber. Our city is well known for its queer population. It is easy to believe that this is a reflection of Portland being accepting and safe. To that, I would say that a visibility of a minority group has not, nor will ever indicate they have achieved equal rights or freedom from discrimination. Being a city people flee to from states that celebrate said discrimination doesn't make us a sanctuary, it only reflects that we are less cruel. I could talk about the constant discrimination we have faced since we have opened the shouted slurs, the bricks thrown at our windows, the flags stolen, the human excrement smeared on our front door. I'd rather talk about how every time I recruit staff, I hear new horror stories about how my community is treated today in this city, from bosses and uncaring corporations. Our employee onboarding covers how to handle excessive amounts of traumatic discussions because for too many, we are the only place they feel safe expressing who they are and the terrible things they deal with every day. We are a game store, but we are one of the places people flee to in order to escape the rest of the city. The city known for its progressive values. This is not a safe city. It is a city with safe spaces. You can help change that. The resolutions in front of you are the bare minimum moral necessity. Vote yes, for there is no religion or moral belief system that doesn't call on you to stand up for the most vulnerable. You can either do what is right and declare that you value our lives, or you can hope your hands are not taken when you offer us up to be consumed. There is no in between. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Next we have babatunde azubuike, katie cox, stephen hoda, bruce ross, kestrel björnstad.

And colleagues. After this panel, I believe there are three more people in the queue who are signed up. We are currently at 455. I'm going to ask to try and help us get through the rest of the testimony. We may not be able to get to the remainder of the conversation today, but I'd like to make sure everybody who's here can testify if folks are able to stick around. Thank you bob.

Attendees online, you can go ahead.

Good afternoon chair and councilors. Cbo. My name is babatunde azubuike. My pronouns are they them. And I'm the executive director and founder of black and beyond the binary collective, and a member of the lgbtqia to plus housing collaborative. I rent and district two, and our organization operates in districts one and four and serves all districts of communities nationwide. Anti-lgbtq ia two plus especially trans policy is rising. Our community is being targeted, and we need elected leaders to stand clearly on the side of justice. Thank you to city council for advancing the LGBTQ plus protection resolution. I asked the city to make an explicit commitment to protecting LGBTQ plus individuals and back that commitment with concrete action, specifically, with the over $1 million of unspent funding that has been discovered. Symbols matter, but symbols do not create safety alone. Safety is housing. Safety is access to care. Safety is culturally specific. Support safety is organizations with resources to stay open. We urge the city to adopt a transparent procurement process so efficient organizations, community organizations like ours can compete for housing focused funding. This will ensure that funds reach groups already directly delivering results for our most vulnerable neighbors. Black and beyond. The binary collective has moved over $1 million in eviction prevention in the last four years. The aye, Morillo equity institute has completed over 300 intakes since 2024. These outcomes show culturally specific organizations deploying housing stabilization resources quickly and effectively. B3c is the first LGBTQ plus organization to become a 500 1c3 in the state of Oregon. Yet none of y'all have ever met with any of us. Like I said, we operate in districts one and four and serve all of districts in the city of Portland. Direct ongoing engagement with district with districts and district organizations, transparent funding pathways, and sustained operating support for culturally specific queer and trans organizations provide essential care. Nothing about us without us, please. Again.

Sorry.

Package.

I have to cut you off. Thank you very much.

Katie.

Hello. Council president Dunphy and city councilors. My name is katie cox. I use the pronouns, and I am the executive director and co-founder of the equity center. I'm also a founding member of the LGBTQ plus housing collaborative. Thank you for bringing forward the LGBTQ plus protection resolution. At a time where anti LGBTQ legislation is escalating across the country, and transgender people are being targeted at every level of government, it matters that Portland is clear about where it stands. Policy clarity matters, public affirmation matters, and affirmation alone does not create safety. In practice, safety is housing stability. Safety is access to care. Safety is culturally specific. Support systems that prevent isolation and crisis. I'd like to ask a few questions for you to ponder. Do you know how many LGBTQ h2s+ serving organizations operate in the tri county area? Do you know how many are located in your respective districts? How many of their leaders have you had an active and working relationship with across the city? Lgbtq plus organizations are providing eviction prevention, housing stabilization, peer support, health care, navigation, harm reduction services, and community space for people who often do not access larger systems. We are not symbolic entities. We are civic infrastructure. For years, small and midsize LGBTQ nonprofits have carried extraordinary responsibility with inconsistent and insufficient public investment. We stretch limited dollars to meet growing need, especially as LGBTQ individuals and families continue to relocate to Portland from unsafe states. If you want to walk your talk, the next step must be inclusion and investment. We deeply appreciate this policy package and the city's verbal commitment, and we want to be clear equity requires infrastructure. Sustainable infrastructure requires investment. If Portland is serious about these protections, it must also be serious about materially supporting the organizations that keep our community alive. Policy is the promise. Investment is the delivery. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Stephen.

Hi, I'm stephen higham, I live in district three and I work in district two. I'm not sad that you're gay. I'm sad because of how hard your life is going to be. These are the words my 15 year old self heard when I came out in the early 2000. Like the large majority of queer people, I wasn't born into a queer family, though I must say for a lower income household in south mississippi, they were accepting, kind and full of love. They raised me to treat folks with respect, mind my manners, and always answer queries with yes ma'am or yes sir. Still, when it came to being a gay boy trying to find his way in the world, I didn't have access to queer elders, role models, or history. I had no idea what waited for me outside of the south. If I were to guess what my life would be like, I only had those encouraging words from my family and the trope narrative that I would probably get sick and die at an early age if the plague didn't get me, someone's fist certainly would. Thankfully, that hasn't come to pass. If only I had the gift to see the future, I would have known how very untrue that would be. Because as a queer person, I have the spirit of revolutionaries and warriors, writers and artists, saints and queens. But more importantly, this southern gentle them found community, friends and love in a place where the rain is cold, the coffee is hot and the roses bloom with every color in the rainbow. I found Portland, Oregon. My name is stephen hoda. I am a middle school teacher and Portland is my home. I was married in Portland, took my first classroom in Portland and have invested in a future here. You might say I'm one of those community members and their families who are fleeing anti lgbtqia to plus states and cities. While I knew the best coast would welcome me and mine with open arms, what I didn't realize I discover is a heritage. I am part of a queer history and culture that reaches back generations. I also discovered in my classroom an imperative that snuck up on me somewhere between the age of 37 and the day. A student referred to me as an elder millennial, though I must say they're now calling me unc and some call me auntie. I may not have had those elders myself, but it was time to accept the mantle of queer elder myself. We start every academic year by establishing classroom norms as a community. Norms embodying our care. Values communicate accountability, respect, and excellence. Tonight, I encourage you to do the same by acknowledging this resolution as a statement of our city norms. And I quote, be it further resolved, the city of Portland reaffirms its commitment to lgbt equity and commitment to fostering a community where all people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, can live authentically and thrive. Let's keep Portland weird.

Hi there. My name is bruce. I work with travel Oregon. I'm here on behalf of myself personally a resident in district four. Real quick I want to say, raymond, welcome to the squad of Portland. I hope Oregon gives you some glory days like colorado and texas. And I also want to say last night, no buddy should be fearful in this city hall or intimidated. And we should never, as portlanders stoop to the level. Excuse me. It's very it's a lot right now. Stoop to the level of fear and intimidation that those federal goons are doing to our communities right now, and that goes for all portlanders. So I just want to make that very clear and thank you for sticking through that. But today we're going to talk about our communities. I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak today. This declaration of values is important in a time when our queer people face threats for their fundamental rights. Statements of support on their own don't guarantee lasting change. As we can see from dai language that was rolled back. Our community shapes culture, sets values, and sends a clear signal about who belongs here. But without a deliberate strategy to turn those values into long term stability, even the strongest declarations can feel temporary or even symbolic. It's crucial that this resolution be paired with follow through that builds permanence and opportunity for the communities as it tends to uplift. Portland has been a historic home and refuge for many queer people, a place where queer culture thrives. Queer businesses create opportunity, and queer spaces form the social infrastructure of community life. To truly live up to the spirit of this resolution, we need to go beyond protection from discrimination and invest in the economic and cultural impacts and foundations that make community life possible. Like darcel plaza. I know some of the people in here are really excited for that. So supporting those permanent LGBTQ spaces, community centers, youth hubs and art venues, our gathering places that aren't that should not be vulnerable for displacement. Building structural support for queer owned allied businesses that anchor neighborhoods and contribute to portland's economy. Tools, avenues of opportunity that sustain these spaces and enterprises for the long term are vital. Protection from discrimination is essential, but protection without permanence is fragile. Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much.

Kestrels online. You can go ahead. Kestrel.

Thank you. Good evening. My name is kestrel bjornstad. My pronouns are they them. I appreciate the policy put forward by the by the council and the commitment to the lgbtqia to us plus equity. I work with nonprofit called work together. I'm the program director of the bloom house, a shelter diversion house that houses two spirit non-binary and trans lives. Because, quite honestly, the systems in place are. Inadequate in meeting everybody's needs in a timely manner. Some of the folks who are living here showed up with a plan, and the plan turned out to be a scam, and then shelters were too full, so they had to live in their car. And while they were doing that, they were accosted by several people on the street. They were asked for drugs. This was all pretty traumatizing for people who are new to our city, is not our best foot forward, and it's not what my historic district one and two was about. At least not not from, you know, when when I lived there. Now I live in district four. So it's. The infrastructure and the investment is is what's required after these symbolic protections. So thank you very much for the work. And work together is here to work together.

Thank you very much. Thank you all.

Timing. Thank you.

And then we have johnny sheckler, harold mcnair and judge kemp, robin knauer, hayes and howard thorne.

Welcome everybody.

Thank you.

Hi, I'm johnny sheckler. I use they them pronouns. First I just want to bring attention that the county just announced it's closing. Closing seven shelters. As a vulnerable population, trans people are more likely to experience homelessness. And I hope the city considers this when claiming to protect and advocate for trans people and in specific ways to help our community, not just passing ordinances. I moved here in 2014 because I knew this to be a fairly accepting place for trans people, and 2026, it has maintained its reputation as a very queer city. Portland's commitment to civil rights for lgbtqia two plus people is so important because it doesn't just protect current portlanders, protects all the people that have heard about Portland and want to come here as the rest of the nation gets scary for us. I'm so proud that Portland will declare itself a sanctuary city and an inclusive city for all. We're seeing the federal government build internment camps for other minorities, as targeting. A lot of trans people worry that we're next. It's hard to process the disparity between what's happening in the rest of the country and my life here. It is comparatively easy for me to be a trans person in Portland. I know that some of the privileges around my representation and like, affect my experience, and I have a lot of protection at work. I was able to use fmla for gender affirming care, and there are supportive company policies at my job that have made a positive impact on my life. But there is no doubt in my mind that this corporation would have zero interest in implementing these kind of rules and protections for legally required to meet basic civil rights for LGBTQ plus people. This is why the city's commitment to ending discrimination is imperative, not just for the basic safety of trans people, but so we can thrive. Thank you.

Thank you.

Harold is online. Harold, you can go ahead.

Good afternoon, councilors and neighbors. My name is harold mcnaron. I use he him pronouns and live in district three. I'm zooming in my support for this resolution with the amendment that I understand. Councilors Koyama Lane and Green will put forward. I appreciate all the work y'all have done to get the resolution to this point. At a time when trans lives are under attack, what do we do? Stand up. Fight back. When queer families are under attack, what do we do? Stand up and fight back. When polyamorous and non-monogamous folks and other relations that just don't fit into the boxes built by dominant heteronormative elites, when those folks are under attack, what do we do? We stand up and fight back. One of the reasons I moved here from georgia, and almost 15 years ago, was to be in a place that more publicly and effectively honors the breadth and depth of humanity. I believe this resolution is a step in that direction. Like others here, I'm also concerned about the limitations of the current language and do encourage the reintroduction of the definition of intimate personal relationship, which is critical to explicitly protecting folks and expansive families and relationships. Furthermore, I echo previous testimony urge encouraging our city to match these value statements with resources moved in direction of justice. I actually don't think that most portlanders want the government in our bedrooms or bathrooms. Our relationship decisions, our partnerships, or on dates with us. Yet, as other jurisdictions around the country try to legislate away the loves, the body parts and the chromosomes that they don't like, it makes sense to me that we portlanders clarify our values with this resolution. So let's do that. And let's do it in a way that honors the expansive and generative ways. Families, partnerships, and other intimate relationships happen in this town. Thanks.

Thank you very much. Judge.

Good afternoon. Councilors. Happy black history month. My name is judge kemp. I use he him pronouns. I'm here today to give my personal voice to the LGBTQ. I ai 2000s plus protections, resolution and to represent the city of portland's queer alliance employee resource group. I'm excited to see this resolution and accompanying ordinance up for consideration. As a gay black man and one of the leaders of the city's queer alliance employee resource group, I personally appreciate the policy and the recommended amendment changes that council is moving forward. The urgency of your actions is also very real and very timely, especially where members of our trans and queer community are under constant attack. Our queer alliance members have expressed concerns as well as valid interests, and the chief equity officer hiring process. As the city recommits itself to equity, it's crucial that the first chief equity officer understands the equity considerations specific to the LGBTQ, ia, two plus people, and particularly transgender and gender nonconforming people. We queer employees and portlanders deserve an equity officer who understands the unique issues and challenges facing our communities, and who is committed to advancing the city's LGBTQ, ia two plus equity work. Portland has a long seen itself as a sanctuary city that protects and affirms vulnerable communities. This moment is an opportunity for explicit and boldly affirm those commitments to trans and queer people. Council has the opportunity to make the city of Portland truly a safe place for queer portlanders and staff, and let them know that we are protected here. In closing, words are great, but actions and deeds carry more weight and can even save lives. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon everyone. I am robin. My pronouns are she her. I am proudly out as a woman of transgender experience and I live right downtown here in district four. Last week, Willamette week published a piece titled quote, I don't go a day without seeing a trans or genderqueer person in Portland. Quote. Our city is already a trans haven. Now we can be a trans sanctuary. I don't need to repeat the explicit attacks on trans rights and health care by the regime in the district of columbia and across the country. This resolution is critically important on behalf of not just myself, but also on behalf of the community advisory board for the transgender health program at the Oregon health and science university. I want to express deep gratitude for everyone involved in passing these resolutions, since I have a little bit of time. I'm thrilled at the number of organizations here. I am thrilled with your grace in listening to constituents over time, and I note and specifically appreciate councilor Koyama Lane t-shirt. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Hello to the council. My name is howard thorn. I'm a vietnam veteran. I have lived in Portland for about 40 years. Originally from philadelphia, moved to los angeles. In here I came out as gay right after I got out of vietnam. I appreciate being here because we we urgently need all kinds of civil protections for all of the associations that we want to get into. All of our relationships. Human sexuality is very diverse, very complex. But thank you for considering protections for all of this. We desperately need them. In particular, we need protections for trans health care for people who want to play on sports teams. Use of public bathrooms if you can find them, and for marriage protections, people must have the right to have any relationship that suits them. That that is, you know, something that they're comfortable with. Nationally because of our shared humanity. We all need access to basic needs. In other words, health care, housing, education, and full civil protections for all of our rights. The progress here in Oregon will be challenging. We will face attacks here, but we have to get through them. And nationally, of course, we we face the oppression of a billionaire, imperial billionaire fascist dictatorship, which is targeting 16 groups nationally and nationally. The only the only group, the only group that can push permanent guarantees for our civil rights would be a working people's democratic, ecosocialist government. So we need a people's united front for a revolutionary battle against fascism. Thank you all for being here and please vote yes.

Thank you very much.

That concludes testimony.

Okay, colleagues, it is 517. We are over and we have an absolute hard out at 530. But I do understand the sponsors are interested in passing this resolution today. But I will note that the ordinance will move to a second reading, I believe on the 4th of March. I think it's going to be two weeks, but so we now are going to move to council. Discussion. Councilor Koyama Lane.

Tiffany Koyama Lane: Thank you so much to everyone who's joined us today to make your voices heard, especially with such short notice. I am genuinely moved by everything I've heard today, and I assure you that my team also has read all the emails and written testimony that's been flooding in. We're seeing it as a teacher. As a parent, I've I've seen firsthand how families have come here to Portland in order to find a place where their transgender child can grow up and thrive, where their multi parent family can hopefully feel a bit safer. It's vitally important that we support our community when it's under attack and stand up against the vile transphobic and homophobic attacks that are happening across the country and colleagues, it is so important to center the voices of community that's most impacted by legislation that we pass today. We've heard loud and clear that we need to be clear and say what we mean. Our legislative intent is, is to ensure all families, including multi-partner non-monogamous relationships, are intentionally included, and we need to ensure that there is no room for misinterpretation. So my office has talked to city attorney robert taylor many times about this, this legislation, both pieces. And he has advised that our current definition should very likely include multi-partner households. Based on what I've heard from community, though, more concrete language is being called for. And so I would like to move amendment Koyama Lane to to specify the definition of family status. The current definition reads family or relationship structure means the actual or perceived involvement or lack thereof, of consenting individuals and intimate personal relationship. I'd like to add what community members are calling for, which is an addition of intimate personal relationships include, but are not limited to multi-partner multi parent families and relationships. Stepfamilies multi-generational households, diverse family structures, consensual non-monogamous relationships, and consensual sexual and or intimate relationships, including asexual and aromatic relationships. This amendment uses the exact family or relationship status definition that is used in the city of oakland that is used in the city of berkeley. All of our sponsoring offices also received an official letter from the LGBTQ plus advocacy clinic clinic from the harvard law school, from staff attorney andy isaacson. And the amendment language is exactly what's recommended from the harvard law team. Additionally, none of the municipalities that have used this definition have experienced legal challenges, public controversy, or any administrative difficulties as a result of being more specific. And I'd like to ask my colleagues to consider and listen to what community is saying. The folks who have showed up to testify today, I believe they deserve to hear us consider this language in a public, transparent way. And thank you again to all the community who came here today and for making yourself heard. Thank you.

Second, second. Oh.

Councilor Koyama Lane has moved an amendment. Councilor Avalos has seconded. Colleagues, is there a discussion of this amendment in the queue? Counselors in the queue? Are you to the amendment, counselor? Morillo.

Thank you all. Thank you all so much for being here today and to talk about such an important issue for our city. I think a lot of folks have worked on this for a while, and I really appreciate councilmember Koyama Lane spearheading this forward. I think that we all have to be responsive to community needs, and this is something that folks have been asking us to do for a very long time. I am supportive of the amendment because I think that adding specificity only adds more protections. So I think it only benefits things. It doesn't create any unique harm that I can see. It seems like it's very legally strong. So because of that, I will be supportive of the amendment. I also think that, frankly, within our community, I'm by, you know, there's a lot of different types of relationships that exist within our community that don't always fall into monogamous, specific relationships. And so it makes sense to add this language that's more expansive and protective of different types of people and different types of relationships, so that we can be both specific, precise, and cover our bases. So because of that, I support this amendment. I hope that we can get this passed today. I think it's really important, and I'm very grateful for all of the testifiers who were here today as well. It means a lot to have your voices in these spaces. So thank you.

Thank you, councilor Morillo. I will note that it is 523 and we have a hard leave at 530, so we will carry any unfinished business over at that point. Counselor. Avalos.

Yeah. Thank you. I also want to speak in support of this amendment. I think at the core, this ordinance is about protection from discrimination, and protections only work if they are clearly protecting the people that they are meant to include. And I think that this definition of family or relationship structure matters because discrimination does not only occur along traditional lines. And I think the testimony today was really compelling and is important that we are being responsive to that, because people's lived experiences and family structures are fall outside of these narrow, outdated assumptions. And that, to me, is the whole point of this effort is to get away from those outdated assumptions. Portland is home to many multigenerational homes, blended families, chosen families, consensually non-monogamous relationships, etc. And so these are real people and real households and real relationships structures. And if our code is silent about them, then we leave room for ambiguity. And ambiguity is often where discrimination hides. So I think that this amendment, it doesn't create new rights. It just clarifies that our existing protections apply to families and relationships as they actually exist in our communities, not just as how they've been historically defined. And I think that discrimination based on family structure is not hypothetical. People can be denied housing, employment or services because their relationship doesn't fit someone else's definition of normal. And so by explicitly recognizing diverse family and intimate structures, we're reducing that risk. And I think it also sends a clear signal that protection applies regardless of whether someone's household includes multiple multiple caregivers or stepparents or multi-partner relationships. I think this really expands it in a way that is much more inclusive to everybody, and I think it's also grounded in consent, referring to consenting adults and consenting relationships. I think that distinction really matters, so that we ensure that we're not penalizing people who and exclude them based on who they build their lives with. So I think our code should reflect our residents real lives that we've heard in the testimony. And so I'm glad to support this amendment. Thanks.

Thank you. Councilor Avalos councilor Pirtle-guiney.

Elana Pirtle-Guiney: Thank you, council president. Colleagues, we have five minutes. I was hoping we could pass this today. We heard compelling testimony from a number of different communities, including the trans community, that this language before us in the underlying was written to ensure we protect at a time when that is critical. And we heard today from communities who don't think that they are included here, I think the language actually does include the protections that they're asking for. But I also think that if we're going to have a conversation about broader protections, we should have that conversation in its own right to figure out what language we need that works with our laws here in Oregon to make sure we're not passing something that has conflicting language anywhere else in our statute, to make sure that we're putting it in the right place in our code. Because I don't actually know, sitting here today, if this is where we would put some of the protections that were listed in our code, because along with the things that we heard about today and that my colleagues have spoken to, making sure that our non-monogamous families, our polyamorous families are protected, we're also being given language about multigenerational families, about step families. All of these are important families to make sure we are protecting. But I don't actually know if this is the right language in the right place to do it. I want to pass some measurable, meaningful changes for the trans community. Today, I want to talk about the concerns we've heard from our city employees that we're not doing enough. I want to sit down with the groups who came forward today and said, there are next steps we need to take, and yes, we should absolutely address the concerns that were raised by our polyamorous communities in Portland. But let's do that in a meaningful way, where we sit down and work through that and make sure it's the right language and the right part of code to comply with the other parts of our code, instead of taking something that was passed elsewhere because it was passed elsewhere. And assuming it will work with our code here, I'm frustrated. We can do all of the things we need to do, but we can't pass something today if we're suddenly introducing brand new language at the dais.

Thank you. Councilor pirtle-guiney. Councilor Novick.

Steve Novick: I have a concern about this, this amendment, which maybe I'm just like being paranoid and worrying too much about what people will think. But I'm concerned about the last line, including asexual, a romantic relationships. And I realize the word intimate precedes everything, but I am just sure that there's going to be some people that look at this and say, oh, okay, then any set of golfing buddies is a family. So I think that if this amendment goes forward, it would benefit from just adding the word intimate in front of asexual and a romantic to make it clear that that's what we're talking about.

Thank you, councilor Novick councilor Zimmerman.

Eric Zimmerman: Thank you. We're going to run out of time, right? You said 530. Is that right, mr. President? So I'm just going to filibuster a little bit and appreciate everybody who came out to speak. That is important. Obviously, something has just been introduced in the 11th minute of the 11th hour. And so I think there's some digesting to do with that. But the it it on a topic about discrimination, it takes guts to then show up and testify on it. And to the folks who did testify greatly, I am grateful to you in terms of either your courage or the path that you have set for others. I think for many of us in the gay community, we can think about these changes sometimes about what does it mean for us. But there was a few pieces of testimony that remind me that there was a young Eric Zimmerman at some point, and there is a young person today who does look up and does see mentors, or sees examples or sees people of representation in different seats. And each of you who testified today, you were that for somebody. So I hope that I hope that when people do google this or do google your name, that they look to you as leaders on a topic, because I think each of us, when we were a young person, if we're from this community, we did yearn for more examples of us or of our story. And I think in the year 2026, it can be a little easy for us to think that the story is more prevalent today and that that therefore that's good enough. But we know it's not. And so I am just so grateful there has been months. That's not an exaggeration. Months and months of work done by the LGBTQ members of this council to bring this forward, and that's why I was hoping to be able to to do this tonight. But I think, mr. President, we're going to have to go ahead and postpone. But thank you for showing up. Your testimony is not lost on us, and we will continue to represent the community, the LGBTQ community, as we go forward, because what we face from other sectors of this government and, and certain activist groups can't take hold here in Portland. So thanks to all of you.

Thank you all. And we are at time. I will continue these items to our next scheduled agenda next Wednesday. And with that, we are adjourned.