The record · Transcript
Council Session — 2026-03-07
Transcript from the session's official auto-captions (51,272 words), shown in readable case and split into speaker turns. Speakers are not yet identified (colors just separate consecutive turns). Auto-captions can contain errors — check the recording for anything that matters.
Session summaryEditor-reviewed
Portland City Council held a retreat-style session on 2026-03-07, described as a strategic visioning workshop facilitated by outside consultants working with city leadership. The session opened with an interactive exercise in which members identified people who inspire, need, or challenge them, intended to build mutual understanding before policy discussion. Facilitators then outlined a governance framework distinguishing strategic vision (an elected-body role) from strategic planning and execution (a staff role), emphasizing citizen input, staff input, and council alignment as a repeating cycle. Using an online polling tool and later dot-voting, participants generated and ranked "hopes" and "fears" for Portland's future, then identified draft core services and five broad strategic priority areas: safety, housing and homelessness, economy, core services/delivery systems, and infrastructure. Extended discussion addressed distinctions between "community safety" and "public safety," definitions of core services, equity considerations, and the relationship between housing and homelessness policy. Participants brainstormed and ranked possible success measures under each priority area, covering topics such as emergency response times, housing units and affordability, small business support, permit processing, transportation infrastructure, and workforce retention. No formal votes with binding outcomes were described; participants noted that rankings and ideas would be compiled into a report for further committee-level discussion. The session closed with participants and staff offering reflections on the day's process.
AI-drafted from the session's auto-captions, reviewed by an editor — describes the discussion only; recorded votes live in the vote ledger. Captions contain errors.
Procedural markers in this session
Literal phrase counts from the official captions — a measurement of procedure, not a judgment of anyone's conduct. Click a marker to highlight its occurrences below. Captions contain errors.
Procedural episode · turns 0–0
Parliamentary activity detected in this stretch (see the markers above). An editor-reviewed analysis has not been published for this episode yet.
0 But what we want to do today is really kind of look at that higher level, bigger picture to give some highest level guidance and get some alignment between this new, you know, city management, city council, mayoral form of government, a guiding document, not a restrictive document. So we're going to ask some big open ended questions. And you also gave us a lot of good information about the more specific things that you're really targeting or interested in. And, and you think are value add and or important in the nearer term. So the the process today will be that we want this to be interactive. We want to hear from you. You're going to see cumulative reports that came from those pre-interviews that we did to get those conversations started. Obviously, we want everyone to have a chance to talk. We want it to feel a safe space so that we can express our opinions. And we is my responsibility. And my colleague mike, who you'll meet here in just a moment. It's our responsibility to keep us on track today and to get through all of the agenda that we have set forth. So for the purposes of today, the structure will be that we'll talk about sort of government dynamics, specifically in a city manager council form of government, how it works best, how we can reach alignment, how we can all be sort of moving in a similar direction so that we're maximizing efficiency and effectiveness. Then we're going to dive into some of those higher level questions. What is it that really inspires you? What makes you want to do what you do? What is going to to take Portland to the next level and the next generation? Y'all are playing the long game here today. So we're going to elevate that conversation with some some exercises. But then we're going to drill down into what we heard specifically from you. So I will detail for you the perspectives I received back as sort of the launching point for us to start the, the, the narrowing of what are our top priorities. And once we get to that layer, we will be able to start talking more specifically about definitions of what those priorities mean to us as a group, but also what does success look like with each of those priorities? Again, looking at the longer term, not the fixing what's broken right here today, but taking that longer view so that what we're what we're doing today is actually adding toward what the future is that we're trying to create. So it's a build over the day, we will use some technology. And please bear with us. We're we're hoping it's going to work the way we intend, but really tools and instruments to help keep the conversation going and to help us sort of hone in on what it is that we're all trying to achieve collectively. So with that, do you have any questions or thoughts or concerns about the the day's agenda? We plan to keep you right on time and not hold you a minute longer than we have to. And so now I'm going to turn it over so we can get started with the first exercise and introduce my colleague mike mallory, who you all met in the pre-interviews as well. And he's going to get us kicked off with our opening exercise. All right. Thank you hillary, take one and pass it down if you will. Well good morning council. Great to to get to to be with you. And we have some high tech exercises but always with me, some low tech exercises and post-it notes are in that low low tech category. I got to meet most of you on our on our phone calls, but I want to introduce you to our ceo, who is here with us, former city manager in fort collins, colorado, and now our ceo. And he came in for this session because he so cares about Portland. And so darren. Darren atterberry is there anything you want? Say say hi. Come on up to be here with you. I we get to work with hundreds of cities around the country and 42 different states and literally thousands of elected officials. And I think with mike and hillary, you're in great hands. I just want to say I lived here from 91 to 96. We fell in love with the Portland area. We're now in colorado and get to travel all around the country. So we love to visit here. And thank you and thanks. All right. Thanks, darren. Great to have you with us. And I think I mentioned to you I, I not lived in Portland, but I lived in the northwest for a while, and I love the trailblazers. I've gotten a chance to see jimmy buckets score 40 points one time when I was here, so that was exciting. He earned that name rightfully and so really thankful for this opportunity. So one of the things we want to do to kind of get things started and going is, is help you without being too touchy feely, open up that curtain a little bit about who you are and who's helped you become who you are. And so I got a little category here, three categories. And what I want you to do is on your fancy post-it notes that I just handed out, I want you to write the name. You'll need to use three of these. The name of someone could be living or dead. Who inspires you? It could be a mentor that you didn't know, like let's say abraham lincoln. Or it could be somebody that was a grandparent or an uncle, a coach or somebody like that, and then somebody on another piece of post-it note who you say they need me. And as you're sitting in that seat and you're leading and and you're thinking, this person needs me. And they they may have a name that we know, but then finally, somebody that challenges you, somebody that you may not even agree with, but they push the envelope some on you and and they challenge you. And so what I'm going to ask you to do is to write them down and then bring them up. So if you got comfortably seated, I'm so sorry. Because now you're going to be uncomfortably seated. And then you can go back to your seat. But I'm going to ask you then after we do it to, to talk us through them, okay. So you'll put the person who inspires you here, the person who needs you here, etc. And you only have about three minutes each to to say what you want to say about them to get. Yes. Just give us one and we'll do that. Okay. Questions for me. Need a pen? I have a pen. We've got some. I think I've got one right here. There you go. Councilor role just as a person. Yeah, yeah. Overall however you actually Tiffany however you want to do it. Anybody else need a pen? Yes. Okay, good. High tech. So I swear I'm very well prepared. Yeah. Thank you. That's alright. Alright everybody. Got it. Alright then. You can put them up here anytime you want to. But then we'll, we'll have you talk them through us. Today. I got rid of my cell phones. Just saying, I was just ready to do. I'm following. I'm following your lead, danny. Put mine away. Olivia has to check her tiktok. I'm looking for my id. Yeah. Oh, we can't help with that. Thank you. Sir. Yes? Yeah. What? One per sheet. Put them all in the in the right category. All right. You're welcome to do this if you want to, raymond. Anything you want to do and anything you don't want to do because that's that's all cool. Alright I think we've got everybody's. So hillary be my timekeeper. If we're if we're getting out of line, call me back. Let's, let's, let's start with the category inspires me. Go all the way around. Then we'll do needs me and then challenges me. So I've got this one I think was from Dan. I think you were first Dan, you put mom anything you want to say on that? Yeah. She had 14. Maybe turn the microphone. The microphone. Sorry. I keep thinking we're not formal today. So my mom was raised by 14 different caretakers her first 14 years of her life. And before we had systems. And she went on to raise eight children. Wow. And went back to school after I'm the youngest when I was in middle school and and then she died young of cancer. And so she's been dead like almost 25 years, but she just keeps growing in my heart. Wow. So she was a badass and it had of her time. And yeah, she inspires me. Yeah, yeah, I can see why. Thank you every day for sharing that. Okay. Somebody wrote nick fish. That was me. Okay, Jamie, talk to us. Nick was a city commissioner. I worked for him in the old form of government. He died prematurely of cancer in 2020, which ended my time in the city for a while and then inspired my decision to come back. Wow. All right. Well, thank you for sharing that. Dolly lama. Who's that? That would be me. Okay. Olivia. Yeah, I think just the inspiration for inner peace and joy and approach to life. Okay. All right. Good. Thank you for sharing that. Bill. James. Is it james? Yes. Okay. Steve. Bill james is responsible for modern baseball in the 1980s, he started asking questions about what really correlates with winning. And he discovered that walks were way undervalued. Home runs were undervalued, high batting averages were overvalued, wins for pitchers were overvalued, park effects were undervalued. And as a result of his largely of his work, the entire game has changed to emphasize on base percentage and slugging percentage and defense, and more sophisticated pitching statistics. The result has been a more boring game than we had previously, but. But he has made every major league baseball team far more rational than they were 50 years ago. And that's the inspiration for the book and movie moneyball, is that right? Right. Although the movie, they don't mention bill james at all, I don't think. Yeah. All right. Thank you angelina. Welcome. Here's what we're doing. We're asking you to write the name of one person that inspires you. It could be alive or dead. It could be somebody you know or somebody that you just looked up to. Somebody that you think of that needs me. This is something you they they're they're in your head, so to speak. And you're making decisions and doing life about needs. And then someone who challenges you, maybe somebody that you disagree with or agree with, but they sort of push you in a way a little different than inspiring. So when just when you get them, you can come put them up and we'll, we're just going through them. We just started okay. Grandpa Avalos. That's that right. Yep. Is it Avalos? Avalos okay. Talk to us. Candace. Yeah. My grandpa is my most single source of inspiration. He is why I am the person that I am. He had a hard start to his life in guatemala, raised by a single mom. And they she was the maid. And they lived in a, you know, rich people's house in guatemala. He grew up to and struggled with alcoholism for most of his life, or most of the first part of his life came to this country in the 1970s to start the Avalos life. My mom was already born in guatemala, and my grandma was there and he was drunk on the streets of dc for many years until he could get it together, and once he did, he brought the family over and built the beautiful life that I get to enjoy. And so he is the single source of all of my hope and inspiration and what the American dream believes, and it's what I fight for. So he inspires me. Wow, what a story. Thank you so much. And I have to say, you had me from the word grandpa because I have eight grandchildren and one on the way, so I'm pretty soon, Steve, I'm going to have a baseball team. So thank you. Thank you for sharing that. Okay, sticking with that theme, my grandma who wrote that I did okay. Elana, you know, are we doing first names or councilor Today? First names. Yeah. Thank you. Dan said something about his mom inspiring him, in part because she was ahead of her time. And I've always felt that way about my grandmother. She had a master's degree, balanced work and raising kids and being very active in her community was ahead of her time in terms of how she saw other people and social justice, and making sure that she was building the type of community that that she felt lived up to her values. And she also was tough. She was tough, and she held you to her expectations. And if you did not meet them, you heard about it. And that balance of of very high expectations, but also really working to make sure that everybody could meet her expectations and that everybody could succeed is a balance that I strive for, both personally and professionally and everything that I do. Wow. That's awesome. Thank you. Thank you so much. Okay. Is it mary lee? Yeah. Sorry if this embarrasses you. Mary. She's actually in the room. Oh, gosh. But I was like, am I going to be honest or not? She really does inspire me. I mary, I feel very lucky. I had to beg her and convince her to come and be my head of staff and say the the first asian American to be elected to Portland city government really needs you. Please come help me. And she's a beloved member in the asian American community and is very humble and doesn't like to share that she like founded a porno. Our big asian pacific islander advocacy group and coalitions for communities of color, and has done tons of work over decades and is really brave and I know is also seen as a queer hero in Portland. Her and her wife. When there was a small moment of time when they, in 2003 2000, could get married, her and her wife didn't care about getting married, but did it so other people so she could stand up. And when that was challenged at the state level, her and her wife sued the sued the state. And then shortly after gay marriage was legalized. And she, like, is a brave, strong person. But she also is like balances it with so much love. Sometimes I'm like, oh, there's like so much revolutionary love. Like but it's it's really important for me as I'm in this work that can get I know, I feel like we're like the heart and the love and the humanity piece can be kind of an afterthought. It is a really important reminder for me and my team and inspires me. All right. Good. Thank you, thank you. Alright, here's another one. That's a what's our first know? Second mom, another mom it's raymond. Yes I put my mom on here and I think I think a lot of people already know. Kind of. That's the reason why I'm in the profession that I am today is because of my mother. But the reason I listed her on this, and I don't think anybody may know this on the council. My father's no longer here. He was diagnosed with dementia four years ago. And the reason why I say my mother, the type of love and dedication that she put into my father, into his last day on this earth, just showed me a different level of love and admiration and selfless and unconditional love. And it's something that I aspire to be able to exhibit as I continue through life. But it was just something. Even though you grew up in a house with someone and you see them on a day to day basis, to see that side of them when they're losing someone, but they're still there fully for that person to the end. That gave me aspirations that nothing that we're going to be faced with is something that we can't overcome, or a burden too heavy to for us to carry. So she has inspired me from that moment on to continue to push him forward, no matter what that burden is or that problem is in your life, things will be better. That's good. Thank you, thank you. Alright, here's one. The people who do outreach in our unhoused community. Who wrote that? That's Mitch. Alright, Mitch. Yeah, I know my mom's watching these, so don't worry. You're my true one. True source of inspiration. But. But I know you'd want me to talk about folks who do invisible work. That's super important. And so there are these people in our community who do every night, whether you're paid for it or not, or you do it for free. They go out and they talk to some of the most vulnerable, the most vulnerable people in our community night after night. It's scary work. It's emotionally draining work. And, you know, it's challenging. So those people who continue to show up and do that, I don't know how they do it. And it inspires me to keep doing this work. And these are also sometimes people who who challenge me. So I struggled. I think about corinne, who does this work in old town. She challenged me a lot. I don't agree with her politics, but I'm so inspired by what she does for our community. So yeah, great. Thank you, thank you. Okay. My godparents. Who's that? Oh, okay. Angelina. Yeah. My I think folks have. Oh, can you hear me all right on this? Yeah. Okay. I think folks have probably heard this a million times already, but when I was homeless through part of college, my. I call them my godparents now. But they were my constitution team coaches in high school. They were my teachers. And they found out that I was homeless. And they took me in. And. I hate that we're on camera for this. That's it. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. And one more here. My ancestor sisters, particularly my grandfather. It's me. It has to be you, Sameer, because everybody else is gone. Yeah. So my family's from india. A lot of them are refugees between what is now pakistan and india. And all of them are pretty much on my. My dad's side are immigrants, but my my mom's father, my grandfather was a refugee who then became part of the the faculty at a, at a major boarding school in india and taught there for decades. He taught me algebra when I was in like fifth grade math teacher. And and when I you think of of math teachers in a certain way, but what actually getting to see him with the kids and the young adults that he had taught in the past, and they're, you know, devotion to him as he aged and coming to take care of him when he was in his 90s. He passed away in 2024 right before. And part of the reason I decided to run for office is the conversations I had with him. You know, a few months before when I got a chance to see him in india. So, yeah, someone who the kindest person I've ever had a chance to to be around. So. Yeah. Good. Thank you. Thank you for sharing. I have to say this. Who is not surprised that Sameer learned algebra in fifth grade? Loretta, welcome. Did you understand what we're doing? We'll get you. We'll get you folded in here when you're ready. We're doing a person that inspires you somewhat. And these can be alive or not alive. Somebody that needs you, that you think of as your leading and doing life and working as a counselor, and then somebody who challenges you, they may not be somebody you agree with. They may be, but somebody that pushes you to be your best. So okay, well that was that was great. That was great. Thank you so much for your transparency and and vulnerability. And you might not have learned anything new, but you might have. We're going to learn a little bit more, though, about who are the people who need you. So I know that that Dan finished first. So this I know this is Dan. You put children. Yeah I gave you that look because does that mean I always have to go first? No, not on the last one. Just this one. Okay. Thanks. Glad we covered that I put children. I could also have written the people I will never know that I serve. Yeah. So in this job, it's mission focused for me. And I always think of children as the moral compass on how I should behave as an adult, as an elected leader, they could be watching us on the school board. We always said that that we should remember that we're here for kids, and our behavior should be something that we could be proud of, right. If they're watching. Yeah. And then I always I have something written on my desk that says serve the person that you'll never know, because I do believe that the vast, vast majority of people never come to city hall. They don't write notes. They're just trying to survive. And I want to make sure that I'm listening to them. Right. Yeah. Very good. Thank you. Okay. My dog arthur, who got Jamie. Tell us about arthur. Well, you know, I thought, I mean, honestly, I, I got stuck on the word need and really thought about, like, my constituents, actually, no, they don't need me. They appreciate that I'm here. But if I'm not here, someone else will fill this spot. I am replaceable. I thought about my family and like, they desperately want me there, but like, as everybody want, but like. But the reality is that, like, you know, we all have gone through tragedies. We know that if a person you desperately love disappears, you do find a path forward. So the only person I could really think of who would be truly devastated is my dog, arthur. Fair enough. I probably would challenge that. But okay, it's your call. The rest of them will be fine. Arthur will have a pretty bad time. Oh, that's. That's good. Okay. My family. Who said that? That was me. Okay, I think it's self-explanatory, but, you know, I just had a call with my sister. It was her birthday the other day. We spent a long time gassing each other up. I love her, I think we need each other. There you go. I for sure. Okay. We got another. My dogs and cats. Who did that one? That's a. That was me. You know, if you've met my wife, you know she doesn't need me. Which is great, because she chooses to be with me. I don't have any kids, but I do have for for pets, for little, you know, fur babies. So my dogs and my cats maybe need me a little too much. So when I'm out late, they're really upset because then they eat late. But I love but I love my pets a lot. There you go. Well, nothing wrong with that. So I would say my wife and I have been married almost 44 years. And you know, when it says the two shall become one, we've decided what that means is as you get older, you really between the two of you, you might have one good brain. So we actually need each other more now than we ever did before just because of that. Yeah. Okay. My son and grandson. Who's that? That would. That would be me. I would have said my cat, but he died, so I'm sorry. He definitely needed me. But I think my son and my grandson, my grandson doesn't have a mommy, and we don't have to go into details as to why that is. So. Yeah, I think I guess I'd like to think they need me. Yes, I'm sure they do. Thank you. My brother max. No, no, just say it right. Novaseq. Yes. So I thought of my dog and then I realized, no, my dog is really disloyal. He'd be perfectly happy to go and live with fleas on her dog, and. But. But my brother, my brother is much smarter, much funnier than I am. But he also tends to be isolated, and he tends towards catastrophic thinking. And one example. Oh, sorry. One example of that is last year I didn't get paid for the first 34 days I was here, and at first I thought, okay, we get paid once a month and then it's like, wait a minute, it's been more than a month. And then I was like, oh god, I wrote down the wrong routing number, and it went to somebody else's account that I sent that to my girlfriend, and she said, you'll get it back. And I said, yeah, but what if it went into the account of somebody who's already planning to clean out their account and fake their own death, and it's just gone? And then I thought, that's exactly what max would think. And I called max and told him that he said no. For me, that would be the best case scenario. What I would assume happened is it went into the account of a sex trafficking ring, and I'm going to be arrested and thrown into jail for the rest of my life. So. Oh, man. So he kind of needs me. Yeah. Okay, then. That's that's good. Alright. Melito. Yeah. Melito or Eric is my little brother. He is. 20. Oh, god. He's going to be 27 soon. And the thing is, he doesn't need me. But not necessarily. But I just think of him as so emblematic of like who I believe needs us. And it's just young people, young people who are just really trying to get by. I've just watched my little brother, you know, as a young guatemalan man, like when he was in middle school, long story short, got into some trouble that, like in most scenarios, wouldn't have been a big deal. But because we have we live in a punishment bureaucracy. They just continue to just take him down. Take him down. And, you know, I'm 11 years older than him. So I was just in a completely different stage of my life when he was going through that. And so I felt, you know, I wasn't there for him in the way that I wish I could have because I was in college, and I'm trying to figure it out as a young adult, and just watching him go through life and is now married. He got married a couple days after the election, actually, and we got to celebrate my election and his marriage, and he got a house in north carolina with his new wife, his dogs. You know, he was a cook, a line cook, and went to like a boot camp for what is it programing. And so now he works at salesforce as a junior programmer. Like just watching him like build up his life. It just it makes me think back to grandpa who and it's short for emilio, which is his middle name, which is my grandpa's name. And so there's just a lot of him, of my grandpa in my little brother. And I just see the way that, like, his trajectory has been difficult but has moved quicker because of systems and people that were there for him. And I just those people need me, but particularly my brother. So thanks. Very good. Yes. Okay, Loretta, let's fold you in here. I'm going to skip over here. Your mom tell us. She inspires me. My mom inspires me. I'm the oldest of three children, and I saw her work at general motors to sometimes two shifts to take care of three kids and then go back to school and get her junior college education. And so she inspires me a lot, because even when I think things are difficult, she'll say. How about this? This person is going through this. I said, well, I guess I don't have any reason to complain. So she always reminds me of of things that could be worse. And she doesn't necessarily use herself, but she always tries to to go to the positive of where you know how far I've come. Yeah. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Let's stay with you. Yes. On the. This is yours, right? The needs me. The grandkids. Yes. Grandchildren. Let's stay with you for that, okay? My grandkids need me because I reinforce what their parents say. And they need me to give them a history of their dad. Did you do this with your dad? With with your son? So they need me as a a historical checker. And I was teasing my granddaughter. She's a a track athlete and so was my son. And he teases her all the time and says, you know, he's the best in this and that. I said, let me tell you something. I was there. He was never an all-american at nine years old. He's always been good. But you, you you are very special. You he has never done some of the things that you have done at this early age. So I have to be the checker. I feel you saved my life. That's good. Thank you. Okay, let's keep going here. The portlanders, let's see. Somebody needs us who have given up on government and its ability to make things better for their lives. That's me. Okay, so I'm fortunate. I surround myself with highly capable people who do not need me in a in a direct, subsistence kind of way. But I think we have this fragile and amazing moment in time where people who may have given up on us as a government are willing to give us a second chance. And I think that's really, really fragile but really important and possible. And so trying to make that hope a reality is something that I think constitutes a need that people have from not just me, but from this whole group. Yeah. Can I just say interject? I shared with many of you that I watched some of your deliberations on choosing council president, and I know it was long and painful and hard for you, but to be honest, you want a lot of respect for me for it because you stayed at the table and it wasn't easy, but you did it. And it showed me a group of people who care a lot about this city, about its future. Nobody's perfect, no person, no body. But I think portland's fortunate to have a group of people that care as much as I do at this point in its history. And I think for that in a lot of reasons, there's a lot of reasons to think that there's a bright future for this city. So I just want to share that, okay, let's go on. My children and other people's children. That's me. The first part, the other people's children is kind of like what Dan said. I remember in my third grade class, we would talk about Portland history and talk about which identity groups have historically had more power, which ones have been more marginalized. And remember the kids really telling me, like, you need to put kids on the marginalized group, too, because kids don't have power necessarily, and they're oftentimes an identity group that we kind of think is cute or we'll talk about, but but really, that's you're in a very powerless situation when you're a kid. And so thinking about that and, and my duty as a someone that's worked with kids for decades to be uplifting their voices. And then the other piece there is reminding, like, I can easily fall into the role of like, caretaker mom, teacher. Some people have even said like, oh, you're like the council therapist. And I've had to be like, oh no, wait, that's not my job. And I'm not the only mama I am is to two boys. And those are the people that, like, truly need me. My kids aren't teenagers yet, like dunphy's kids. So maybe in a couple years they won't need me anymore. But while they do need me, I try to remember my that like that extra energy of caretaking. Really? It should go to those two kids. Okay. Thank you. Alright. We've got my daughter. Who put that. Yeah. So I have two kids. I like to think they both need me. The reality is neither one of them need me. They have another parent who's phenomenal and they'd be just fine without me. But when I was thinking about this question and trying to decide if I wanted to move in the direction of personal or my role as a counselor, I felt like those two things really came together in my daughter, who is this amazing, powerful, uncontrollable force. And she needs a world that has space for her, and she lives in a world that does not always make space for amazing, intelligent, powerful women. And she both needs me as a parent to help her find a way to make space for herself in this world. But she also is the type of person who needs leaders to make sure that she lives in a world that is built for amazing, strong, powerful women like her. And so I was thinking about holding both of those things, both as a policy maker. What world are we creating for our children? And as a parent, how am I making sure that that I am helping her learn how to navigate this world? Yeah, I love that. Thank you. All right. We're going to do one more. We'll save the challenges for a little bit. Somebody put children. Oh, raymond. I put children on mine because it was interesting. Most of my life, you know, I've gone through my life and I really felt like I was free. I could do what I want to, but the day that my daughter was born was the day that I realized, dang, this is no longer me anymore. I have someone that is totally, you know, as I held her even just a couple hours after she was born and said, this is a new feeling to hold someone that you know can't do anything if you're not there, and that I'm gonna have to be my better self all the time. And I can't have an excuse for not showing up, and I'm gonna have to be there for her, even on her worst days. So that just changed my perspective on really unconditional love. And what does that feel like, holding someone that ultimately is going to need you at the infant stages before you become a teenager? Probably won't remember me, but what she needs right now for me for protection, love and security. Yeah. That's good. Alright. Well thank you. We'll we'll come back. I want to move us on. We'll come back to that one at a break. We got time. Okay. I want to make sure. Alright, well let's just do the challenges then. And then we'll do something else when we come back from a break. Alright. Well we're not going to start. With with Dan, so let's start with this one. My choice. Well I can't on staff. I think that's me okay. I was like say what do you got there. Tell us that my chief of staff. Oh my chief of staff choice. Right. You know, he's not yet challenged me to fix my handwriting, but I thought you were my brother. Like, I look just like me. But spencer pushes me. He'll say, look, this is an issue that I know isn't automatically in your wheelhouse, but it's important that your physician do something about it, so you should do something about it. Or I'll say, no, you don't want to go to another evening event this week, but this evening event is important for the following three reasons. So you should go. Ooh, yeah. That's good, that's good. Alright. Pineal. That's my 14 year old. I mean yeah. No. Nuff said. Yeah. No. Well I will, I will say to the parents in the room you will recognize this, but at some point you raise your exact antithesis that you spend, you spend all these years with them and they learn your ways and they find the cracks and they're like, oh, this is how you want to operate, I got you. I'm going to operate this way, and it's going to get under your skin in a way that nobody else possibly can. You've genetically designed this thing to try and annoy you, Jamie. I feel you, man. I got three of them. And yes, the only thing worse than that is when you're. When they hit a point where you think they're just like me in all the wrong ways, that's the problem, too. That's. That's when my wife sees that and goes, oh, they're just like me. And there's two of us now. All right, that's good. Alright. Another another son, dorian or duran? Challenges my son. Oh, it's jordan, I'm sorry. I can't read. Very good. Yeah. My son, I only have one kid, but I feel like I have ten because all his friends are my sons too. So. But he challenges me when I was turned out as a county commissioner, and I was thinking about what to do next, and he's like, well, mom, you just need to do your own business. And so I was like, oh, I gotta sign up and do all this. But he challenged me because he had four businesses before that. And so he helped me sign up online and how to do it and get your ein and all that. And I was like, how do you know how to do all this? How do you know how to do it? But every little, big or small thing that he's ever done, he's always had a a business for it. So he challenged me in that way that I could do it. And so I just did it and it turned out okay. That's good. Yeah. That's good. Thank you. Alright, let's hop up here. Dan god, yeah. That's always a risk in Portland, Oregon to put the personal challenges you as god. Higher power. For those of us in the recovery community. And I, I could say so many things about who challenges me. I'm the youngest of eight and I have six older brothers, so just start there. But, you know, I remember when I was the first of my family to not get confirmed as a catholic in eighth grade because I didn't like the way the priest was treating my mom. So it doesn't mean I haven't challenged authority. And I don't see god as like people in those roles. But I think it was during the time with hiv and there was no medicine, and I had to find something aspirational. And so I came back to that. There's got to be something bigger going on. So it's been a really great journey. And then in recovery, it's become a loving of god loving higher power. And yeah, it challenges me all the time. And every day I have a practice ritual of meditating and trying to hold all of you in the light. And it's really challenging, but god tells me to do it. And and so that's what inspires me and challenges me the most. Alright. Yeah. Thanks. Thank you. Okay, along those lines, my fellow counselors with a heart. Go ahead. Olivia. Well, okay. At the risk of really people off, I have to say that my beloved fellow counselors challenged me. It's not the politics that challenge me. You know, I spent my career trying to influence people who are very different from me, I.e. Republicans. And I accomplished a lot. I got money for transit. I worked on affordable housing. I got the state's clean air act updated, and I had to work with people who were very, very different from me. But I was able to do that. But my fellow counselors here, although our politics are really not that far apart, I feel really challenged me. And I can feel my heart. My blood pressure is going up right now. I have to say that I don't understand that coming in to this job, which I think we all want to do the right thing for the people of Portland, coming in with such what I feel is animosity and what I see on the council as the tit for tat and the defensiveness and the grievances. And it just it's heartbreaking to me and challenging, and it challenges my calm and my, well, whatever. And I have a friend who's staying with me right now from college, who's cuban, and we've talked about this, and she says, you know, Olivia, you need agua de florida. You need to sprinkle some agua de florida over all of us to try to maintain kindness, benefit of the doubt to each other. So that's what challenges me is on a daily basis. Thank you for sharing. And one of the things I hope happens out of today, we take a step, you know, towards just pulling that curtain back a little bit on our own selves, because it's always easier to work with people we know a little bit better. And, you know, it doesn't mean we have to all agree. But sometimes just knowing what's what's challenging us, what's what's in our minds of like, this person, this group needs me. Who's the people in the background that have really inspired, makes it a little bit easier for us to work with each other. All right, let's keep moving east. Portlanders. Who I got there. It's me. All right. Candice. Yeah, yeah, I just feel like I had a really good year of being challenged by my constituents. And sometimes one by one, I mean, they literally sign up for my constituent office hours. I offer these, like 20 minute slots, and I've been doing that all year. I've met with dozens of portlanders, and boy, they definitely put me to task. And I think of one particular person who was really upset with me about something that I said, and, you know, they were hurt by it for various reasons. And they came in and they were like, I'm going to shake your hand right now because, you know, this is the nicest I'm going to be to you right now. It's like, okay, here we go. Let's, let's do it. And, you know, just spent like ten minutes just laying into it. And, but what I heard was shared experiences actually what I heard was like, yeah, I also have family who have dealt with addiction. My grandpa was the leader in alcoholics anonymous for 50 years. Like, that's really personal to me, right? I also have family who have dealt with poverty and, you know, so it was like, but so I understood that they took my words within that context. And so once I was able to share back that I actually shared a lot of that context. And, and we have mutual understanding. By the end of it, they were like, maybe this is inappropriate, but I kind of want to give you a hug. And I was like, let's do it. So I just feel like those are the moments where, you know, it really pushes me to think about how I say things, make sure that I'm taking into account all of these experiences to the best of my ability, and do my best to represent portlanders that are very different and the same for me in lots of ways. And so I feel like I've really been challenged in the best way. Yeah. That's good. One of the early leaders in my life would say to me sometimes in my as a professor, he would say, don't ask if you don't want to know which really was code for you're not asking and you need to. And I'm about to tell you and I'm glad he did. Okay, kathy and jenna. Jenna. So I've got about four friends, and I could have listed kathy or jen or brittany or elizabeth. There's a few others who. They check me in this work. They are the people who, when I am not sure if I am really moving in the direction that aligns with what I committed to, to portlanders that I would do, or if I am not moving in a direction that aligns with my values, they are the people who will call me out on it, and they're the people who I know I can get an honest answer from. In a in a world where a lot of people don't want to give me honest answers in this role, and they challenge me in a good way, I want them to challenge me. I need them to challenge me so that I can do my best work in this job. That's good, that's good. Thank you. Okay, the kitchen cabinet. That's me. I think a lot of you know that I really, really didn't want to run for this seat. And I had a lot of people really do work to try to convince me and ask me to run. But what I did do is, after all the people like when I decided I was going to run, I went back to all those people that told me I needed to run and made them all help. And so those folks really helped on the campaign. And then a lot of them now comprise my kitchen cabinet. And it's a group of people from, you know, I taught with them or I organized with them doing union stuff or we protested together or we, you know, work to get universal preschool on the ballot, or we've been raising our kids alongside each other. And so it's a diverse group that kind of mirror a lot of my different experiences and circles that I'm part of, and they will ask me questions and push me. And I can also bring bring them questions and see what their thoughts are. And they all have some different, different angles that they come at things. Good. Thank you, thank you. Okay. My old friend and sergeant in the army, tom. Well, eric's not here, so it's got to be me. So my buddy tom hughes is this. I might get emotional, so stay with me here. He kind of. He's like, kind of my older brother when I was in the army, and he kind of challenged me. And he never really let me never really make excuses. He saved my life. And to this day when he calls me, I pick up and he immediately just starts being like, what are you doing? Why are you doing this? And so I love him to death. He's the person I go to if I need to hear the straight truth. Thanks, boy. Thank you very much. Okay, my friends, I'm not sure who wrote that. Angelina. That was me. Yeah. I think I took a very positive approach to the word challenge. Actually, I like it. I think it's good, I think it's healthy. And I think I have I had a lot of people that I that came to mind. The first people that came to mind were my staff and particularly andre, because I think that he pushes me to be better in many ways that I wouldn't be otherwise. And but I also think I have a strong community outside of work, that it's folks who care a lot about politics. We we are mostly we think about this work a lot all the time, and it comes from a deeply personal place of being directly impacted by it oftentimes. And I don't really surround myself with people who are yes, people because I think that can be very detrimental to your work. So they challenge me privately, I think, in ways that are necessary and important, and I think have made me better over time. And I still have a lot to learn, but I'm very grateful to them. So I, I think it's positive and good and I'm very grateful for their feedback. All right. Thank you. Okay. Myself, I think that's raymond. Yeah. That's me I guess you might not know this. I'm a very competitive person, so I even put that to myself. So I always feel like, you know, even if I achieve something. Yeah, that wasn't good enough. Somebody else has already done that. You can do better. And I always just trying to push myself to the next level to for growth and trying to be a better me. So I always say I'm probably my worst critic with the work that I produce and the things that I do every day, and that's just my own self motivation just to be better. Yeah. Alright, good. Now leave anybody out. Everybody got it. Sameer did, did you? Yeah, I think it's the bottom. It's one of the light colored ones. What's it say? It says the same people that need me. Oh, okay. Go ahead. I didn't think we'd heard from you. To be needed is to be challenged. Unless you're perfect and we're not. So. Because if people need you, they need you to be everything they need you to be. And so, you know, because I'm not perfect, I get challenged to be a little bit better at doing the thing that I'm trying to do for people. And I think that's really healthy. And I also viewed it as a very positive thing, a challenge. So sure. Yeah. That's good. Very good. You know, in in leadership development, you know, I'm, I'm a real sports nut. And I know not everybody is. But one of the things sports teams do, they watch film. You play a game win or lose, you're studying the film. And it occurred to me probably 15 years ago, we never do that in leadership. Not enough, right? Where we look back and say, okay, how do I handle that? How could I have handled that better? What was I thinking, what was I expecting, etc. But that's how you get better. That's how you get better. And so I appreciate what you're saying and I'm curious. We don't have time to to go too far into it. But any takeaways from this little exercise that you want to share any like, oh, I hadn't thought of this or whatever. Mitch, I'll just say that. I mean, I think it's pretty clear to me that all of my colleagues up here are deeply caring, emotional and committed people. Yeah, yeah, that's true, that's true. Anybody else? What's the takeaway? Kenneth? I think the spread of the answers is the takeaway for me to for us, yes, we're all caring people and we all come from really different backgrounds who we believe, you know, needs us, challenges us, inspires us, is part of our strength. And so I think it's important that we look at that list and understand that everybody has, you know, they're people that are pushing them, that are guiding them. And we should honor each other's differences in that way. Yeah, that's a good point. You know, I say sometimes if anxiety goes up too high, good judgment comes down too low. And when we push people into a corner, sometimes that causes their anxiety to go up too high. And that means their good judgment goes down too low. So a wise part of leadership is learning, you know, not to push people into corners. That's going to diminish their good judgment. All right. Speaking of leadership, let's change gears a little bit. Oh, I'm sorry Elana. Oh that's okay. I was interestingly, I was I was going to jump in. And then counselor Avalos did to say almost the opposite thing, which is I noticed a lot of themes through there and a lot of similarities in what people pointed to. And yes, there were differences. We were pointing to different people, but there were a lot of people pointing to our constituents and how we're serving our community. There were a lot of people pointing to their family and what that means. There were a lot of people pointing to really key people who who hold us accountable. And so I noticed a lot of themes and similarities through what we all put up there. And even if it's different individuals, a lot of commonality in who we hold ourselves to. Right? That's one of the things hillary will get into the interviews a little bit later, but we noticed there's a lot of common themes when we talk to you. You have a lot for sure. So let's talk a little bit about the day. Oh wait, one more. Okay. Tiffany. Oh, one of my takeaways is just that Jamie dunphy's hilarious. Yes, he's got a sense of humor there. I kind of knew that, but I he was really cracking me up. I'm constantly competing with Steve. I can see that. That's good. Okay. Let's talk about roles and responsibilities and kind of frame the day. So we created a. Diagram I guess that I would say about how this form of governance, strategic visioning works. And I know that in a lot of circles we use the term strategic visioning interchangeably with strategic planning. But if you think about it, there's really a significant difference between those two things, because a strategic vision is about direction and priorities. And that is largely the role of elected officials to determine a strategic plan is really about how and budgets and timelines and allocation of resources or alignment of resources. And that's largely the responsibility of the city administrator and staff. Now, it doesn't do any good to have a great strategic plan. If you don't first have in place what a strategic vision, because you need to know where you're going, what are your priorities? And that's what we want to take a step towards doing today. So you can kind of see this this diagram and it's not perfect. I'll I'll tell you that for sure. But you know, we could start at the top and talk about citizen input. And one of the flaws in this diagram is that it sort of seems to indicate you only get citizen input at one point at the top of the cycle. And we don't really mean to communicate that. But just for simplicity's sake, we put it there. In truth, there should be another circle going on on the outside that shows you're always getting community input from surveys, from one on ones, from meetings at the starbucks or whatever it is. And that's right, you need both of those things, but you get that input, then you get input from staff. Now you are free to take some none or all of the input that staff gives you. I obviously would say you'd be wiser to take at least some, but that's your prerogative. But you're good that you get that input. But then comes that point, which is where we are today, where you say, okay, collectively, we think these should be our overarching strategic priorities that we focus on. Our goal today is to help you identify what those are collectively. We don't want to move into a thing where, okay, Olivia has her two priorities and alana has hers, and Dan has his because that's really hard for staff to follow, because you don't have any cohesiveness there. What we want is to get collectively. What do you collectively feel like? These are the big rocks of our strategic vision. From that, then we will help you establish some what we call objectives or milestones that give a little definition to what that means. But then raymond and his team will take that and will begin to create a work plan, a strategic plan that's in alignment with that. And, you know, we had some talk from you like, oh, we we have some of us have some concern that this might be a document that's used to, you know, beat us up or, or, you know, leverage and that that's not the case. That's not the intention at all. It's got to be a living document. It's got to be a guideline. It's really to give as much as anything. It's a direction for staff to know. Here's here's what where we need to go. And you have opportunity to affirm that because they'll come back to say, this is where we're headed. No, no, that's not quite it. And there's a lot of give and take that goes back and forth there I was in davenport, iowa last weekend, and new city manager and and the same kind of dynamic council had previously with a different administration said this is what we wanted. But there was some misunderstanding from the previous administrator on what they meant by that. And one of the things we were able to do last weekend was help them to clarify it so that the new manager could go, oh, I actually did not understand it that way. I'm glad we had this. So we hope that that we can do that. But then it's largely not exclusively but largely staff that executes on this vision, this plan. That's not to say you don't have your part, because absolutely you do. But in great cities, I hear this same thing comes up over and over. We'll be celebrating some great achievement in council. Members will say, yeah, we yeah. But really it's the staff that did it. Really. The staff could have. But then when that happens, I almost always hear staff say, well, yeah, but we couldn't do our part if elected officials hadn't first done their part. And that's what we're here to do today. Now, this is never a once and done thing. There has to be evaluations, check ins. You know, not for me to say what that cadence ought to be for you, but you need to determine what that check in cadence needs to be. And then staff adjust. And then we're kind of right back at the top. So you may see hillary or me saying, raise it up, get a higher 30 zero zero zero foot, not 3000ft. It's not that we don't think what you're saying is valuable, but at this task, we got to get up there now. I saw your hand, Tiffany. I'm sorry. No, I, I just wanted to name something that I'm really excited to see this anyone that that loop. It's something that many of us have been talking about for over a year. And I think it's healthy. I think it's what constituents overwhelmingly want. They want to see us moving in in a direction. And I also just want to name half of us are running for reelection. And I have learned the reality of electoral politics really is doesn't doesn't connect to that. There's a there is a piece of you need to show that you're winning, why you are better than others. And that's not anything that any of us have done. But that is also just how politics has tended to be set up. Hopefully that shifts and we're shifting that here in Portland with this new form of government. But I just wanted to name where those things come up against each other and where there's pressure to sometimes be like, well, I'm, I'm different, or here's my wins, or it's about me as a one councilor That really contradicts and conflicts with what I do think is also healthy for the body. It can be, there's no doubt. And what what I've found in doing this for 15 years is that we want to we do best by the city, like you guys were talking about, when we can guard the integrity of the process. Because if we can say this process has integrity, then people can get along and support it. And that's also the best way for you to get some of those. I'm going to call them secondary things that you really care about. You want to get them achieved. Understandable, but it's usually better if we get the basics done to the Sameer. Did you have your hand up? Yeah. The integrity of that process or the integrity of the process that we're coming up with here? Because I haven't seen that before in a way that we've agreed to here. No, no, I mean, the way you're developing it. Yes. Okay. Because I think there's a I would love to have the conversation not only about what you brought up, because I really appreciate the way our community input fits, and it's everywhere, as you put it, but also about, you know, council affirms, we've been dealing with rubber stamp expectations for a year now, and I think this is very staff driven, this process. So that's been laid out here that I and so I have a lot of concerns about that. Yeah. And when I say council affirms, I mean I, I mean that like there's a lot in in our perfect world, there's a like from the time staff creates that work plan and council says, yep, that's it. There's a lot of give and take there. And that's not, I would say bad governance. It's good governance because what we're trying to create is true alignment, not rubber stamping for sure. You're very, very important. Comment okay. So just kind of keep in mind that we may be saying, okay, is that a strategic priority or is that a tactic or an initiative. Because if it's a priority, let's talk about it. If it's an objective, let's talk about it. But if it's an initiative or tactic, let's write it down. Staff can consider it, not consider it. But today we want to push you up a little bit higher with those things. So again, not because we don't think what you might have to say is valuable or helpful, but where we're at in this process, we got to know where what you're what and the why. Okay, hillary, let me turn it over to you and let's get started with hopes and fears, okay? Alright. So we started before we go, could I just with that loop that you had up, let me flip back to it. Okay. The only part that. Oh yeah, it was built in in 15 minutes. But if you need it now, that's totally fine. Yeah, let's take it. Let's take 15 and we'll be back at ten and we'll, we'll yeah. That question if that's okay. Yeah. Okay. You had a the cycle had. Let's see. It was the second one was it goes to staff after being after the the people citizen input, staff input, then council and I. For me the way I experience a governance is that I would flip those two that I'm inspired by being out listening to the people, and then I share that with staff. Yes. As a as an elected independent nonpartizan leader, I think it's just so important for me to constantly be listening and and be inspired by I hear on the streets. Well, you're touching on something that's really important, and that is part of the role of council is to be a sort of a a thermometer. Back to the staff on the the mindset of the people. And, and we need that. We, we talk about that. We're not doing that. That's that 30,000 foot level that you're talking about. So that's how I can both. Yeah. Yeah that's right. Yeah. But we we talk about that in governance that you are, you do have your ear to the ground. The people in a way staff sometimes doesn't. So they need to hear from you. No doubt about it. You're right. Okay. Hilary, where are you? I'm going to turn it over to hilary, and we're going to try something technology wise. And if it doesn't work, we'll we'll make an adjustment, but let's give it a shot, okay. So we started kind of close in as individuals, as people. We looked at a system that is made up of individuals or people. And now we want to take a slightly wider view of kind of big picture from our individual perspectives. What are our greatest hopes and dreams for Portland? And then we want to look at what our greatest fears are. So we're going to look at or we're going to use this tool. And so if all of you will pull out your smartphone and click this link right here, we're going to see if this is going to work. Cobid certified. Right. So it should take you to a page where you can enter the answer to what is your greatest hope for Portland. Big picture, long term. Big think. A sentence is good. A paragraph is probably too long. Yes, it's coming up. A vote hasn't started until they've all contributed. Okay. You click. I don't need it yet, but. We have nine, so I think we're still waiting on just a couple. There's ten. Still waiting on one more. I think I hit submit. It's just getting like a spinning ball type thing. Oh, no. I'm not going to be playing this. Sometimes I have to disconnect from the wi-fi. Find that okay. Is yours not up there? Yeah. Okay. Copy it and then reload it. Perfect. Let's 123456789. Are there more? There's something just there. Went 11. Yes. So there's more. Yeah. Okay. So all of you have submitted. Do you feel like they. Okay. Now what we're going to do. Oh is you're still not there. Oh yeah we're there okay. So now what we're going to do is you all are going to vote on these. So we're going to hit start voting. Yes. You have three options. So just what are the top three that you see on that list that reflect your greatest hopes for Portland. So you vote for your own. Are you going to. They should show up in your and then you should be able to vote for them. It's when the voting is done, we're going to put it up there so that others can't. Three you can do up to three. The next round will be easier, I hope. The votes here. Oh is it program for just two okay, so then it's two. I apologize. For all of it. Although I like. Yeah. So you don't look for your. You can. We can cobid firms. Oh yeah. Of those words. Probably. Yeah. Oh. I'm well aware of my options. Okay. I'm getting close. Four out of 12 in control. Center. One more. I just. I think. So I don't know where we're at. I give it a Saturday at 830, but I yeah, I know. Somebody's giving me a number. The good news is. Okay, I think we're. Couch street. Six. Or something close. So either way. So. So we'll wait one more. Okay. Can we show results? Mike? There we go. Okay, so here we are. The top three had multiple votes and then the next ones. Was there anything on the list that any of you was just. Absolutely not. This is not a hope and dream for the future of Portland. Any way to make it bigger? Okay. That one's a bit bigger. Yeah. Sorry. So a city that embodies the opposite of the worst stereotype of late stage American capitalism. A safe and welcoming community with meaningful jobs and affordable neighborhoods. A city where everyone's needs are met, families see a future, great jobs are abundant, and equity and sustainability are at the core of how we build. And then next, individuals and businesses come back to Portland, build our policies around the people who actually need the most support and unwavering faith in portlanders, that this will be a city that can be a refuge for anyone who wants to come here, can afford to age in place here free from discrimination and displacement. Do we all, as a group, feel like that is our collective aspiration? Elements of those things? Okay, I would need someone to explain why a city that embodies the opposite of the worst stereotypes of late stage American capitalism. And no one's surprised that I said that. And I think I'm speaking for a lot of portlanders to ask that question, to define it. I'll define it more. I yeah, you could define it and then explain how it all pencil out. I realized that my plans changed. I mean, I just oh, yeah. Hey. Yeah, Mitch is the socialist economist, but I still have a lot of thoughts. You know? No, I had to speak for me and a lot of portlanders. Why? I live in Portland. Yeah. You know, I got. I was a touring musician. I got to go see the world. I got to go see how other cities live. And the reason I stay in Portland is because we are, in many ways, the opposite of what people think about this country. In a lot of ways, we are embracing our identity as a small business town. We don't pride ourselves as only being catering to the fortune 500. We embrace identities of of that everybody brings to the table and we don't as a city capital c and lowercase c tolerate intolerance. We don't, as a city, allow for bullies. That's not, you know, we American in my American stereotypes are that we are a bully nation that cares about corporate greed over the little people. And I think that everybody at this dais and the people who sent me here don't agree with that being the way that we choose to live our lives. And that is what gets me up in the morning. I think that's fair. I don't think we're a city that's full of many fortune 500 companies. You know that, right? Exactly. So that's the least amount of any city our size? Yeah. I think that's a brilliant thing. Yeah. I think that it is an amazing thing that we're able to lean into our identity as not being reliant on, on corporate overlords. Then why are so many small businesses leaving? I mean, you know, 90% of small businesses fail in their first year and 90% of those fail in the second year. These are ones that have been here for like ten, 20, 30, 50 years. So that's what makes me I mean, ask that question. Economy everywhere is collapsing right now, so small businesses are not doing well anywhere. And. You know, there's a lot to name that because it's true. We are leading the pack in terms of the exits around that. So Sameer. Yeah, so literal definition, late stage capitalism characterized by globalization, dominance of multinational corporations, broad commodification and consumerism, and extreme wealth inequality. That's what's happening. That's what we're all seeing the result of. And so to move away from that, continue to move away from that is to save small businesses. So it's not surprising to me that that got to the top of the list. And I see that for a lot of American cities, I just don't see that here in the same way that I see it in other American cities. The absence of social housing means that the number one expense on everyone's balance sheet is commodified. Are we going to be a welcoming place for entrepreneurs anymore? Well, not as much as we could be. No. But no, that's fair. That's the dialog we need to have, because I like it when ambitious people move here and build companies and hire people and provide for our economy. And that hopes for Portland. Not not what is on the ground now, but what do we what do we aspire to be? And I think that that's where we're sort of getting we're not going to necessarily solve the economic woes here today. But I think that it's important that we have a collective understanding that we want a mix, that we want something that is value add to Portland and does not exclude or include only this or that. And so I think I think that's the perspective is I believe that the, the, the understanding is that business is important. We haven't defined and we probably aren't here today going to define what those businesses should be. But ultimately we need to have the vision that business is part of our economy, and we need to figure out what the right path. That's true. Hillary. I'm just not hearing that. What if I was watching and I worked at adidas, or I worked at nike, or if I worked at columbia sportswear, would I think that our company should be have a footprint in the Portland market? If I listen to this conversation, that's my question to my colleagues. But you said that small businesses was what you cared about, and you named, not small businesses. So could you tell me what you mean? I care about having revenue in our budget, Candace. And I know a lot of other revenue comes from our business license taxes. It comes from property taxes. It comes from people being successful here. And I also have friends that work in some of those big companies are wonderful people. You'd probably all like them very much, but I think they wouldn't feel welcomed. Perhaps this conversation, that's all. Elana. So for what it's worth, in this conversation, just changed a little bit with the introduction of some of those larger businesses in our community. I actually think that what happened at the beginning of this conversation was a bit of talking past each other, because what I heard Jamie talk about was a place that cared a whole lot about our small businesses and wanted to be a community that was built around those small businesses. And then I heard Dan say, but what about the small businesses? And when I read that first item, a city that embodies the opposite of the worst stereotypes of late stage American capitalism, what I read is a hope that we are a city that, in fact, leans into those small businesses, among many other things. In the definition that Sameer read. But I think that we often have this conversation about pro or anti-business, and there may be a place for that, and there may be some some conversation we need to unearth about whether people really support a business community or not and what that takes. But I don't think that this thing on the list is anti-business. When we are talking about small, community driven businesses that keep their profits in the community. I, in fact, think that what that first thing on the list is saying is that what we want are those small, community, business driven businesses that keep their profits in our community. So I just I think there's two conversations to be had about business pro or anti generally and then corporate or not. But this one doesn't this one doesn't create a fight around that first that first question I don't think at all. And ultimately when we get to the priority level that's when we start to determine what are the conversations we need to have moving forward about what that looks like. So right here is really we're just trying to establish kind of the, the, the aspirational parts before we drill down into the more practical application of that moving forward. I appreciate that Dan spoke up and shared what he thinks. I think that just watching this is what we see play out on the dais often, is that we kind of feel put into two categories or two different camps. We're kind of pushed to be like, which side are you on? Or which endorsement, or which group are you with which? Sometimes there's more to that. To which leaders do you get along with? And it also made me think about, I mean, Dan and I have talked about this, that sometimes we're not as far apart as we think, but there are certain trigger words that come along with different things, like seeing late stage American capitalism. If it was written differently, that might not have triggered the same thing. Or hearing even the words like economic development or public safety or corporate interests like like it all, they connect to different people and lobbyists. And this is just making me think about kind of what Olivia, where Olivia started to is. There are times where we can. We can think we are farther apart in how we get somewhere. And and we we might have some different ideas, but certain language or ideas will, will push us kind of and think that we're farther apart than we are. Mitch. Yeah. I'd like to enter this discussion by kind of making an observation that there's an interesting coincidence that we have three categories that are merged. And in any of our districts, we elect three councilors. And oftentimes, I think speaking for my district, you'll have maybe two thirds of, of the of the population that thinks or frames a certain set of questions in a very common way. And then there's another third that maybe has the same objectives, the same desired outcomes, but frames it in a very, very different way that that just comes from different lived experiences. And so if I look at each of those three categories, I can pull out inclusivity, I can pull out affordability, I can pull out safety, I can pull out abundance and infrastructure and all those things, small businesses, that's all there. But I know that the people maybe who voted for me understand it through the language of avoiding the worst stereotypes of late stage capitalism. But as Sameer noted, it's really about making sure that we've got opportunities to grow our native kind of organic culture, cultural production, and economic production, while also feeling safe in our neighborhoods while also knowing that we can we can stay here and we're not being pushed out. And so I entered into this conversation today hoping that we can see those types of things and get past the sort of like hyper triggering kind of framing language and tease out those nuances. And so I actually think it's a kind of a blessing to see these things emerge and then have this kind of a dialog, I think just sort of bringing it up a level as I'm doing my hands, sorry, this is going to happen, but bringing it up that level is economy or business or economic development, however you want to call it may look like a grocery store in this district because there is a food desert existing, right? But in this district, it may look like some opportunity for increased tourism. So it's not they're not exclusive of one another. It's where do we come together and say, these are the highest level things that we hope for and fear for? And like Mitch was pulling out, it's those themes, those themes that come up that say, we don't want business development at the expense of safety. We don't want safety at the expense of inclusivity. We don't want inclusivity at the expense of insert whatever. So really, the purpose of this exercise is not to solve the issues, but to sort of get in each other's heads a bit before we start really trying to define what those top level priorities are. And I appreciate the, the interchange and I there's no pressure point here, which is what I like. I like that you're able to have a dialog without a decision necessarily having to be made, because I think it can be fruitful in understanding each other's perspectives a little more fully. Yeah. Thank you. I just have a request of my colleagues for this discussion that the the word capitalism or anti-capitalism, they describe different systems and they are not inherently triggering. They are different political systems that we might be working under as a values framework or as an economic framework. So if we don't understand what a term means, let's approach it with curiosity so that the discussion doesn't escalate. Because I think once we tease those things out, we actually end up realizing we want the same things, right? You're talking about a grocery store food desert. I think we all want affordable housing in Portland so that people can afford to live here. We have different ideas of how to get there, but if we don't understand what a term means, let's just ask each other. Rather than make assumptions that there is an underlying threat or attack. Because the reality is we only have four socialists on city council right now. We have others who are progressive and others who are have different perspectives. But I think those are all different, just economic, political systems that have to be addressed. And there are ways to achieve the same goal. So I'll just leave it at that. I'm going to come back to you, but you've already gotten to go once. So go ahead, Steve, personal question. Oh, sorry. Who? I want to know who wrote down the thing that started with joy in our streets? Because I voted for that and I didn't see and apparently they didn't vote for themselves. I just wanted to know who who that who had that. I thought I voted for myself. You did not. Okay, well, that could be more to. Yeah. It's got it's there somewhere. It's there somewhere. I also I also wanted to say that I realized that I'm among younger people because nobody put up. I want to be a city where all the women are strong, all the men are good looking and all the children are above average. Okay, Sameer anyone else first? Okay. Go ahead. Yeah. Just wanted to mention nike. It was a small business here in in the region. Right. And and so was columbia sportswear. And even though adidas wasn't, its north American presence was small when it first came here taking over an old hospital. Shout out to adidas because I was born there in that hospital. But anyway, the I actually think that that's a really good list of businesses because that's I think the people that are supporting small businesses are inherently wanting everybody else to have the same type of opportunity to grow, thrive and become successful in the way that those three did in, in this area. So I actually think that that's actually a a fantastic list of examples of what everybody here wants small businesses to succeed, wants them to be able to get to. And you all have an opportunity in your seats to create the circumstances by which that is possible may not be desirable for every business, but at least have the conversations where it becomes possible for those things to exist and thrive and other businesses, and whatever the correct balance is. Again, policy decisions you all will come back to at some future date. But thank you for indulging that process. Now we're going to go to the opposite. Oh, I'm so sorry. I just need to say that it was coming from nolita. It was coming from curiosity. That's why I asked the question. I needed a clarifying question on what that means. I hear those terms, but I've never had a chance to have you all. I really explain them. And so that's why I wanted this exercise. And I continue to say it'd be great if we weren't on our phones texting, because I just want to continue to have authentic dialog with all of you about these concepts. And when you say those terms, I'm like, okay, what does that really mean? And so I appreciate that we had an authentic dialog about it, because I'll tell you, my friends that are trying to build companies here, they don't feel like it's very friendly to build that company. So we ever build another nike, we ever build another adidas that came here, sorry, columbia sportswear and there's numerous others. Will they ever be able to build that type of company in Portland going forward? That's what I'm concerned about. Go ahead. Proportional ranked choice voting got us a very diverse group of people up here. And so we're going to keep having to do that and ask each other, what do you mean, what's your definition there? We did not understand steve's joke. And then Olivia said, prairie home companion. And we're like, oh, okay. Yeah, yeah. It's like, we're gonna have to keep being curious and and ask. But again, this it demonstrates that there are you all represent differing perspectives. You all represent constituents with differing perspectives. And so if we are able to bring all of those to the table, then perhaps we come with an outcome that is going to be more representative to the community as a whole, while also representing our own, our own constituencies. So next, we're going to switch to the opposite end of the spectrum and say, what is your greatest fear? So let me get that. Are you? Yes. Adam is going to help me. What is your greatest fear for Portland? And then we'll do the same exercise and have just a quick conversation about it. There you go. Oh. So. Okay. I'm just getting water. I have one more. There it is. Okay. That should be our 11. And so now the same rules apply where we're going to click the vote. And then we'll talk about those top level. It's on your it's in your you'll you'll be able to read it to vote on it. Yeah I believe it's two again. Whoopsie. I'm glad we got that on the official record. Finding commonality. Yes. That's the guy. I was I'm really proud of. That staff. I think we have one more. Just just anyone. And we have just one more. One more person needs to vote. Not cool. And it's like, I'm sorry. Did you hear that? That's okay. There's still needs to vote. Don't get distracted. Yeah. Who's know? Oh, there it is. Okay, now we can look at the results. Finish. Oh you're doing it from that computer. That's right. Sorry. We're working two different computers. Okay, everybody. Maybe everybody heard this, but we solved the ideological divisions of the council because unladen danbury the timothee chalamet is a. Finally. Unity. Alright, so we have tipped the scale. We have four on one of these. But what I noticed as soon as they started popping up was some of them were similar, even though you were entering them separately. So I think that's what you're going to find as we work through the rest of today. But just for the purposes of this discussion about sort of what it is that we are, we were talking about what it is we're trying to move toward. In the first question, this is what we're trying to guard against in the second question. So we don't ever want to pursue something with such vigor and such force that there are these fallouts on the other side. We want to make sure that we're considering those things that we hope to never see arise as part of that discussion, and not as a a spot where we're not clear or we're not concentrating on it. So the city will become poorer and poorer, no economic opportunity, streets crumbling, and will be mostly gravel in 25 years. Experiment of a new form of government fails to deliver results. We saw that in a couple of different spots. Political violence inflicted by the feds, neighbors getting snatched up and not fighting somewhere for for someone we don't know. I can't see what's behind that one. Oh thank you. We lose our identity and look like every other mid-sized American city. Greatest fear is families will be priced out of living in the city and have to move and too afraid of our differences, and don't use them as our strength to make policy that truly impacts and serves portlanders. Anybody disagree with any of those as being fears of the future of this community? Right. So so just in the the, the the broader context, these are thoughts that we want you to carry through the rest of our discussions today. Because again, there's give and take. There will be give and take. And it's not all or nothing, particularly in a city that's this diverse in all of its ways. And so we want to make sure that we are not turning away from these and instead encouraging or having them in suit. Yes. Go right ahead. Yeah. I don't necessarily disagree with anything that's up here. I just think the one that got for I think it's a little much like the streets are crumbling in 25 years. Like, I don't know, that actually concerns me if that's what people think we're headed, because that trajectory is incredibly bleak. And I think that we have shown that that is not where we're going. So that vision, that type of fear actually does concern me. And I just needed to name that because it just the way it's written, like I saw that and it was I was immediately repulsed by how it was written. I was like, I'm not voting for that. So to see that it got four actually surprised me because I don't I think, yes, we're allowed to have our fears. And of course, you know it. The underlying fear in it makes sense, but the way it was written concerns me. So I just had to name that. Yeah, Steve, I wrote that. And actually, at our current trajectory, the streets will mostly gravel. Maybe not 25 years, maybe 20, maybe 30. And this is one of my hobby horses. But I asked PBOT about six months ago, how much additional money will it take per year to keep our major streets in their current mediocre condition? And they said they never looked at it that way. They always look in terms of what it would take to make them good, but they looked at it and came back and said without an extra 45 to $50 million a year just on pavement, the major streets will continue to deteriorate. So either we come up with 45, 50 million a year just for pavement, or we start saying which of our major streets are going to be gravel in the next decades. So that's like a that's a literal fear. And that's the most specific thing that I had to say that's helpful to hear. I mean, I, I did not take it as literally as I guess you meant it, but because when I read it, I was just like, jesus. Like that just felt so dystopian, like, yeah, I know our streets suck, but it was like, in 25 years, we're going to be a crumbling society. I mean, we could I mean, where it's going, it could happen, but I just I have more hope for Portland. You know, I think the rest of the world is to be determined, but so helpful to know it was quite literal. I agree with the maybe literal sense, but I think the way that it was written really worried me about if people were feeling like we have some imminent deterioration in decline philosophically. And I think, again, we're all worried, right? We're leaders and we have a financial crisis and we have all these other problems. But I would hope that we don't, like enter the conversation with that level of fear. I would hope that we have a little bit more optimism for what we've already created and what is the potential in front of us. Olivia, I just want to riff on this, that I was triggered by other things that I didn't vote for, but I see the commonality between all of them. The things that I didn't vote for kind of showed up in a different way, spoken in a different way. So just interesting how we react to the way things are written, because it really is a bottom line commonality. Yeah, yeah. Mitch. Yeah. I just want to acknowledge that I immediately knew who wrote that question, because Steve has a very specific style of rhetorical play that I was like, that's jumping off the page, I, I did I did think it was literal, but I, you know, I don't think anyone else on this dais would, would describe that state as the appalachia of the west coast, except for Steve. Yeah, but I think I didn't vote for it, but I but I see it connected to some of the things I did vote for, which was like this loss of faith in the government and our ability to build administrative capacity under the duress of the federal government, all leading to this situation where we can no longer deliver administrative infrastructure services. And that that's like that doom loop for me. So I, I feel that I didn't vote for it, but I feel it. And I think that this is something you're going to see in the next section that we're going to get into, where I've actually compiled the results of our interviews together. But there is a strong concern for being the council that does not push the book again or doesn't push the book. Right. So if we know infrastructure is something that is so necessary to the future of our community, infrastructure in a lot of city governments is one of those things that, well, we can wait a year or we'll just do this piece or we'll just do that piece. And so really it comes down to what am I willing to invest in now and put off and what what are the trade offs. Right. So what what can we do to be that effective council that makes those changes, even though we have to realize that in our seats, we are going to take 100% of the blame today for none of the credit tomorrow. You're playing the long game. So we have to just sort of resolve ourselves to understanding that we're going to have to make some of those choices if we are going to be that council that changes the trajectory or sets the new course, or establishes this really successful new form of government, we may never get credit in five years. We may not be here in five years, but we have to have the resolve to say, this is what we have to do for the future of this community. So big kind of broad strokes that we wanted to get into with this. Before we start into the perspectives that I got from you all so we can move to that section, unless there's anything else on these. So if the powerpoint were on, I think we have to share the screen where there you are. Oh, we're sharing a powerpoint for portlanders who came here from appalachia. We mean no disrespect to where you're from. We just have a different vision for Portland. All right. Should come up in just a second. I apologize, jd vance against all of you. There's a proud tradition of militant labor union activity from appalachia, so I see it. Okay, so we thank you all for committing your time ahead of this retreat. What we wanted to do was the discovery process there so that we didn't have to we would never have gotten through it probably all the way today. So this is cumulative. This is what we heard from you all individually. And then we'll start to narrow in on what sort of bubbled up as the priority. So I just want you all to have this. So the common themes that we took from all of the interviews that we did is that each and every one of you cared deeply for those you represent. There's no question about that. You care deeply about being part of this form, this new form of government and making change in this community. There was a feeling that we needed to have this broader, higher level discussion about what we want Portland to be. We're we're busy dealing with issues. We're busy, you know, sort of making decisions in the nearer term and not necessarily zooming out enough to have the space for us to have conversations like this. So I felt like we were coming in here with with an open minded group. We want to understand the why. Why is that so high level for you? Why is that so important for you? Why does that bother you in a way, or why does that inspire you in a way? So some of what we've been doing today is just sort of opening the curtains a little bit and letting us understand each other a bit better. We want to know what our collective values are, what is it that we're really aspiring to be? So what is our what is that hope that we're trying to achieve or what are our our non-negotiables? Kind of as we move through decision making, we want alignment on top priorities to take the time to do what we're going to do today. And that's where we'll spend the bulk of our time this afternoon. There was also this feeling that we really need to deliver on core services, and so we're going to spend a moment to define what we believe those core services are. Give some direction to your management team so that we can make sure that we're investing in those core services, and that they're not being depleted with with other things that that we find are that we have priority for. And there are trade offs. We talked about that just here. It's like business may look one way in one district and may look different in another district. And so we have to be willing to have those open conversations about what we're willing to give and potentially give up in order to start moving the the ball forward. There was a general agreement that we need to enhance our government governance procedures. What does that look like? What are our what are our you know, what's our rule book? Where do we draw the lines? How do we work better as a team, as a unit and give more be more effective in moving policy decisions forward, understanding roles and responsibilities, because we ultimately we want to be most effective in our roles. And so if we all can come to a common playbook and then perhaps we can be better affect more effective in our roles, we want more respect and trust. That was not just amongst the body, which is very important. And I think that hopefully today we're getting a little bit of that started. But also and you saw in the fears that we want, we don't want people to not trust their government. Right. So the respect and trust was also we want to be operating in a way that the public can respect and trust that we're doing the right thing with, with the services that we're providing and that we have their interest at heart. And we want to communicate more effectively, both internally. There was some engagement conversation in some of these, but ultimately being more open, bringing the the right voices in and then speaking, you know, whatever it is out to the public that we need to in a more effective way so that people feel more engaged, more included and more informed. Anything there that that needs more definition. Okay. So we asked you, what do we want to be known for? What do we want this team that you are serving with right here, right now to be known for and establishing a successful form of government was not was number one. I heard that from many of you. We want to be looked at as the ones who took this opportunity in time to build the system that is going to be most effective for the community moving forward. We want to be smart in the decisions that we make and using data to the degree possible. However, we are representing people, we are representing needs and so data being part of the conversation, not necessarily the decider. Good stewards of stewards of public dollars respecting each other, employee, citizen, sort of setting the standard here that this is how we expect decorum to look and how we're going to hold ourselves accountable to that. Working together to solve problems, being open to having these conversations and and having the give and take that is necessary to ultimately, hopefully get to the best solution we can. Delivering on core services, investing in infrastructure, the roads crumbling. I think that was part of that. But but again, you know, really trying to take whatever next steps we need to knowing infrastructure is foundational to the community being innovative but also being implementers. So not just having big ideas but but having big ideas and then actually carrying them across the, the the lines. A great place to visit and invest. Setting Portland on a successful path. So really kind of making it go in whatever direction you all determine is the right direction. Taking action in difficult times. That was that was both with the change in government and the dynamics that exist, but that was also with economic issues and then federal practices that are happening right now, setting the course for the next 100 years, thinking long game, really trying to to to make decisions or have the clarity and vision for long term in the future next generations type thinking, protecting from federal overreach, democracy, having a very democratic system where all people can be represented and heard, and then equity. Equity in the services that we provide, equity in the way that we treat each other, equity in the way we treat the organization and and ultimately the way that we engage our community. Any of that need more. Okay. So then we asked you, are there strategic questions that need to be answered? These are not going to get answered today. I will tell you that right up front. But these are the things that we want to have in our minds that we can establish as we start saying, if this is a priority area, we need to determine what this strategic questions answer is, and that may be one of your success markers that it says, we're going to start moving in this direction. So these were these were the questions or the the questions that you all gave to us. So how can we institute a better governance system, putting the practices and procedures in place that will allow us to be the most effective and and give the greatest service to the community? Are our committees effective and aligned with whatever our priorities are? What are our priorities? Which is what we'll do here in just a moment? What are we willing to give and give up? So that's one of those questions that probably will be asked in every single decision that you make. It's not just, what are we willing to give and give up just in the the, you know, general sense. But really we have to start looking at what is it that we will prioritize now and what can wait. What do we what are we doing that we shouldn't be doing? What are we doing that we should be doing more of having having the open openness and willingness to consider all of that as organizational improvement or policy improvement. At what level should we deliver core services? So again, we'll define core services. But are we serving at the right level. Infrastructure came up a lot that comes up here in just a moment. And so if that's considered a core service are we investing in it appropriately. Big question. And that will come up in all of those areas. How should we handle our assets. So asset management maintenance replacement all of those sorts of things managing infrastructure. How should we be doing that? Should we be doing it differently than we are for different results? Limited revenue considering the the. The the revenue that is not available but the service level that we expect to get. So we've got to have conversations about how we close that gap over time, and then our housing and homelessness efforts separate. So that came up quite a bit in. Some of you felt that they were completely intertwined, and some of you felt that housing was sort of different and homelessness was sort of different. And so I think coming to a resolution about whether or not those are, of course, they they probably intersect at certain points, but are we treating them in a way that's diluting one or the other, or are they helping or communicating with one another? Can we define public safety, differing opinions on what that means and what success in that category looks like? What quality of life are we trying to offer? And then to what degree are we pursuing climate resilience? No pun intended. Right? I know I just read that and I was like, oh, sorry. And so again, big picture things that are on the tops of your minds. You're thinking about these things and we don't want these to get pushed aside. And that is not the intention. The intention is for these to be parts of these future conversations and not exclusive of the policy decisions you're making. Yes we are. You can make these those available. Absolutely. You're going to get every bit of this back in a report. Yes. And all of the things we worked on today, I want you to have that at your fingertips so that you can utilize it moving forward. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. It comes out in a in a report. Yeah. Please. Sameer on this list I think there's one thing that maybe got framed differently, but I think is is missing, which is, is homelessness a behavioral health issue or a affordability issue? I think we we spent a lot of time talking around that question. I think that's where that's where are they? Are they combined? Is it about housing right. Or is homelessness. Yeah. That's a that's a little different. So I wanted to make sure it was said the way that we actually talked about it. Yeah. And there, there was a little bit different. So some people had a more closely connected and some of them had had them more clearly defined. Yes, please. Candace. Well, on the last slide it said equity. But I'm not seeing that in these strategic questions. And I think that that's a big gap because if how we're structuring our questions, our strategic questions isn't around how we're ensuring that people who are left behind by government, communities that are being attacked by our federal government, that those are not part of our strategy, then I don't think we're going to serve portlanders well. So I just want to note that's a big gap that I hope we include in some way in a strategic question. I keep getting moved. I'm sorry. I'll, I like step out of frame. No, I think I actually think that that's a great point because oftentimes those conversations and or those expectations are outlined in values. So equity being something that is a non-negotiable for all of us and that every single thing should consider whether or not we are equitably distributing resources. We're equitably engaging our publics, those kinds of things. And so sometimes those even elevate above. But I think you're absolutely right. If we're not looking at what we're delivering through that lens or asking that question, then we may be missing serving, serving that over overlooked population or our service area. Yeah, yeah. Go ahead. And I just want to put a finer point on that and talk about like a racialized lens and being able to isolate race. It tends to be kind of shift when and how systems, school districts are talking about race and when things are pulled out and just talked about like equity. But we're not really isolating it and focusing on it. It can get lost. Yeah. And so I think that's a reason for it to be really part of strategy also. Okay. Anybody else the part where it says how can we handle limited revenue. And then it says what are we willing to give. What are we willing to give and then give up? I don't know who I'm trying to figure out if those are connected somewhat. Yes. They were said separately and some were by a couple of people and some were by a couple other people. But I would think that, yes, I would think that the that that would be a conversation about if we only have this much revenue, what are we willing to invest it in now and what are we willing to wait on later? So I do think I think the two communicate with each other, and a lot of these would communicate with each other, but these were just sort of those higher level questions that we wanted to have an awareness of. As we started looking at priorities, none of them mutually exclusive. And I think that's a great point that that, you know, some of them are are interconnected in a way that we want to make sure we're getting the full representation of that, that answer. Okay. So then we asked you short mid long term goals. So sort of just individually what are what's on your wish. Wish list your goal list of what you would want to to deliver to your constituents and ultimately the community. And so improving governance, meaning the system that you all are building currently, public trust and accountability, improving the council dynamics, trying to work better together, better community engagement and engagement with each other. But community engagement came up quite a few times about how to how can we be the most effective in getting out in our communities and really understanding and delivering messaging to to them in a in an effective way? Budget and revenue strategies, asset management, putting a system in place, really understanding core service delivery so that we can deliver on what we say we're going to do in the most efficient and effective way. Partnerships for services. So that was that came in different ways. So this is generalized. But basically what are those things that we're doing that other places are doing organizations, governments whatever. And how can we work more effectively understanding that we have maybe limited resources or they have limited resources, but could we work together in a way that that is effective alignment on public safety? Again, trying to just understand we have different ways of getting there. But what is the ultimate goal with public safety, protecting from federal overreach, the keller auditorium plan, having a plan for its future. The trailblazers came up a few times. Sidewalks, housing policy review revision, homeless response strategies, and bike and pedestrian corridors. So again, all maybe a little different flavor from from different individuals. And not everyone said the same things, but all of these were kind of on the lists of the, you know, 1 to 3 year, you know. Whatever that timeline. There we go, kind of in that range so that we could start not just looking at, okay, we want this big grand thing here, but also what are the iterative steps that we should be considering that are going to start moving us toward that. And these were the things that that popped up as, as important. Anything there that. Yeah. Go ahead. This is just about how it was described. Because better engagement also means moving away from the idea that engagement is communicating outward. Yeah. Oh, so just the way that the description of that was included, how we tell a story outward and where that's not engagement, that's communications. And that's part of why we have been, I think, the city as a whole, as someone who worked in community engagement for multiple years at the city, we are not good at it. Yeah, as a group. So I think that that first definitional aspect of it, which is that communication is communicating outward and engagement is actually having people shape what we do. Right? So it's the. Yeah, absolutely. It's the conversation I was I was talking to a couple of you sort of in the break and explaining how in a, in a governance system when we don't have sort of clearly defined processes and procedures, it becomes more difficult for the public to understand where they plug in and when they plug in. And so I even look at it through that framework of what are we doing to make sure that our systems create the opportunity for engagement and engagement, being that that sort of back and forth or the two way play. Because again, when you looked at that, that spiral or that circle that we looked at, the the citizen input to council is what should be driving a lot of what you're trying to do. I mean, ultimately that's who you're serving, right? So so I think that's a point well taken is, is it has to be the taking in of information as much as it is the putting out. Go ahead. Sometimes this can get lumped in with bike and pedestrian corridors. But the goal of vision zero and eliminating traffic deaths and traffic safety is can be connected but is is separate. And I think that's missing from up there okay. I think these are all really important goals. I want to make sure that having this slide that says goals, some of which are really high level and some of which are very specific, doesn't if this is where we're starting the conversation on priorities at, I want to know that because I think these are all really important goals, and I think there's a lot missing if this is what we start with as the breath for the priority, it's not okay. This is really just your kind of individual, the things that you're trying to move, but not not holding us accountable to any list. No votes are being taken. No one's saying that these are our official goals. This was just to give some context to the bigger categories of strategic priorities, which is where we're going to focus our time, because this has a lot of the good government stuff we need to do and some specific programs. But if I think about what we put up as our hopes and dreams for Portland, I don't actually see very many of the things up here that will get us to those hopes and dreams. And so I think there are some mid-level goals missing in between those really important structural, like, can we actually deliver government and earn public's trust and very specific we need sidewalks and vision zero. And to make sure that we have our major sports teams and venues in good working order. Right. So yeah, this was really just to add sort of flavor to what's important on people's minds as we start to make sure that all of these would plug into somewhere future conversations, future votes, future determinations. But what all of these fit within these broader categories that we're we're trying to determine. So really just a little bit of context from where people were coming from. Thanks. Okay. All right. So now let's do one more of these exercises with our cell phones where we're just going to kind of set the baseline with what we believe. Our our portland's core services. And this one you can put as many as you want. And it's a heat map. So it will start to bubble up. Which ones are the most said. There we go. And it'll just populate in real time here in just a second. So feel free to add as many as you want. Oh yes go ahead Portland. Portland. What the city government of Portland provides to Portland. Yes. Thanks for the clarification. When they break for lunch, they can go in. They can't break the law. So. Okay. Vibes cultivation. Love it. We did that one. I put it I like it, it just popped. It was like a little beacon of light. I just caught my attention. I love it. All right. Who wrote passive aggression? I assume it was. Oh, boy. Oh boy. Okay. Okay. That's right. I just make a bigger. That means we're working together. Okay. About there. Oh, I still see a couple of fast typing. Okay. Devices down. I'm just kidding. Okay, so we've got a pretty good list here. Pretty broad list, obviously. But some of them are the same. They're just set a little bit differently. But let's start with the one that's in the middle community safety. Again we're not necessarily defining what the the the tactics are to deliver on these things. We're just saying we all feel this is a core service that we have to deliver, and we can determine in what capacity do. Let me just ask this question first. Do any of you believe that you have the resources necessary to deliver on all of these things to the level that you expect? Absolutely not. Exactly. So part of this is really trying to to narrow in on those areas that either require additional investment or the things that we think are most important for investment. Did you have that could be repetitive, but this city does have the resources to meet people's expectations of passive aggressive. We've got that. We've got that in droves. Okay. So so let's start with the biggest one. So community safety, do we all agree that that is a core service. We disagree probably on the way it's delivered. But is community safety inclusive of public safety to some degree emergency response to some degree fire safety okay. So we we all think that is one of our essential services that we provide is community safety. And we're not trying to define, you know, sort of in what. Yes. Go ahead. Actually, I think we need more dialog on that because we have community safety. Then we have public safety. So if we're going to do this, let's figure out what the distinction is between the two. My hunch is aye, Morillo Sameer is that parks is included in community safety and not in public safety police, and is more of an old guard public safety definition to your to your brain. And so I just think it's important that we have that dialog. Yeah I a I agree we should have that dialog be I agree with your definitions. Actually. I think that those are the two distinctions that I think in the way that this building has historically used it, these terms. And I put both personally in community safety and public safety. Yeah. So I think that community safe, the two distinctions are the degree to which old guard, I think is the way you put it. Approaches are in public but not in community. And the holistic nature and breadth of the services in community safety, aka parks, community centers. So I personally put both. Yeah, because I do think that we've used it as two separate ideas. And that's why our committee is community and public safety. Like we've we've had them both in our committee name. Okay. So Jamie, you know, it occurs to me that in my head at least, and I'm interested to hear how people think about this differently. Community safety feels far broader. Public safety feels interventionist to me. It's that there is a situation that requires a trained professional to do a thing versus I think an activated park is part of community safety. I think a business district with people walking around in it is part of community safety, but there's no intervention that we could do to make a park. More safe. If there's an unsafe situation outside of the public safety system, we're not going to send in. I mean, I think that like. The maintenance crew who are mowing contribute towards community safety, but if there's an unsafe situation happening in a park, we don't send in the lawn mowers. What about park rangers? Sending emergency personnel? That would be part of I. In my argument, I would say that they're sort of part of the public safety. Interesting. Okay. Because that's been a I don't want to get too granular, but that's been a distinction in the past. But I think it's I think that's important to have an understanding that we, we, at this point in time, view those as, as separate, connected in some ways, but also we want to treat them in a way that respects both of them as, as their own service delivery hold. Oh, wait, who was were you next or were you next? Mitch was next. I'm trying. I also put both of them. Okay, I, I think of public safety as a very discrete set of activities that rely upon the sort of like it's what makes a city a city and not just a collection of people doing volunteer activities like we used to just have fire brigades or volunteer systems. Now we have fire bureaus, we have police bureau. That's an institutionalization of like a certain type of intervention. I think that's the right language. Community safety to me is like a systems level thing that if you've got I mean, if I look at all the top ranking pieces on the list, if you've got all that coherent and integrated in a efficient system, it produces community safety. And there are discrete activities under community safety that have like a very explicit commitment. But like if all these pieces are in harmony, I think you've got very safe communities, vision zero, community safety. That's only achievable if you've got your infrastructure bureau set up to enable it and so on and so forth. So yeah, it was a lot of next, I want to ask my colleagues who are differentiating here two questions because I, I don't know if we all answer them the same or not. And I think it's important to actually understand what our words mean as we have conversation. The first is for folks who are defining community safety and public safety. Do you define public safety and emergency response the same, or do you define those two things differently? And the second question is, is public safety a circle within community safety? And we're talking about concentric circles or is this a venn diagram. And there's a significant amount of overlap between public safety and community safety. But part of public safety is also outside of community safety. That's right. I don't know, to be honest, because I have not talked about these things at that 30,000 foot level. I try to often stay at the 15,000 foot level in between the tactical that you talked about and this high level, because I don't always know that the words at the high level mean what mean to me, the same thing that other people hear them as meaning. So I don't know that I have answers to those because I've talked about services and bureaus more than these big buckets, and I want to make sure I understand what you all mean when you say the big buckets. And so I actually don't draw a distinction. I mean, I said public safety, but I think my definition of that is as broad as that. If anybody has said community safety. And my assumption, although this might not be true, is the part of this is just sort of a matter of generational word choice. And people my age are using used to using the word public, and younger people are more used to using the word community. So that's my assumption. That's not a, you know, substantive difference. It's just a linguistic difference. Tiffany I tried to write community and public safety, but there was a limit on how long your your response could be. But something that I am, am surprised and interested in is how this conversation of definitions and what do our words mean? And it continues to come up, and I'm just seeing how important that is and find that curious and interesting. Yeah. Sameer I hate to disagree with my community and public safety committee co-chair. I actually think that you're partially right that there is a linguistic comfort with one or the other. But to answer alana's questions, I do not think emergency response is the same thing as public safety, because I think there are a lot of first response dispatches that are not for emergencies, but that are for things that people want to response to. So just in a practical sense, I think it's a subset. And then I would say it's a venn diagram with a much larger community safety, a of which mostly it's a subset, but there's a little piece of it that's outside of it. And I think that has to do largely with how we view. And the way I interpreted old guard is, is parts of policing and fire specifically. I personally think fire is in the overlap, but I've heard that expressed differently as well. I don't think I think some of it is. I think it kind of depends like like for example, there's a lot of different services under the police bureau. Ps3's victim advocacy. There's your classic patrol neighborhood response teams investigation. So it's really hard to just lump. These are very broad bureaus, same as parks PBOT and fire. They're all very broad bureaus. I think it might take some digging into their councilor is this when you say small and big and a lot of overlap like that? Okay. Thank you. I will draw that here for everyone. Okay. Probably not to scale. I think there's a lot more overlap in the little circle is just a tiny bit outside of the big circle is what I think I heard Sameer say. Sorry. Closer but not still not great. I tried. Go ahead. Yeah, I appreciate the discussion. I think the distinctions are important. That's probably how I would draw the venn diagram. I think of it kind of like these systems of like inputs and outputs and like the black box of the function that generates the outputs given the inputs can produce a whole range of different types of conditions that then affect the other part of it. And that's a little academic, but I actually wanted to kind of speak to councilor Steve's kind of distinction of the generational thing. Like I the way I think about the distinction is public safety by just the default standard is sort of almost paternalistic. So it's like our safety is being provided to us by an institution or a set of institutions. Community safety pervades space for like direct involvement. This sort of we we keep us safe slogan that is in my community law is a critical input. And so there's like this sort of direct democracy element to it as well that I think is there. It's it's it's fragile, it can go bad. But I think that that's the distinction that matters to me. And it's I mean, ultimately when you think about just that topic and specific, really the ultimate goal of both of those systems is a safe community. Right? So there's there are different strategies that are employed to get us to that sense of safety or feeling of safety that people have. But ultimately, that is your higher level goal, I believe, is that you want it to be a safe community and that everyone can see themselves in that and not feel either, you know, attacked by the system or excluded from the system. And so I think that that maybe is, you know, changing that sort of terminology a little bit from the when you say community safety or police or not police public safety, it feels like it's responsive, you know what I mean? And so perhaps we take a level up and view it from the lens or the framework of the highest level, what we're trying to achieve without trying to define that it has to be interventionist or it has to be preventative or this, that or the other. So I think it's a good conversation to have at some point. Yes. Go ahead. I'd like part of what you just said. Let's move up to the place where we can all be comfortable. But I also don't want us to lose something because I think there is a piece of community and public safety that is interventionist, and that many of our community members do want to make sure we have. And if we move to the language of community safety, because it's broader and maybe more comfortable for some people, but we lose in doing that. Some of the more traditional interventions. That's a that is a very meaningful change. And I don't actually think that we are prepared to make that change. Well, and that's that you all are in the position to define whatever it is. And so you know your public better than I ever will. And you know what the, the, the tolerance or the expectation is better than I ever will. But I think it's important for us to sort of figure out where they overlap, like your diagram and what it is that doesn't dilute either one of them in some significant way. That doesn't provide the level that's expected, but also communicates effectively what we're trying to to achieve, especially with safety, public and community safety. I see it also as I do love venn diagrams in general, but see it as something that's constantly kind of shifting and community gets like the people get to kind of decide sometimes, you know, what that safety piece feels and looks like. And so I think of it as a venn diagram that's not static but is changing and almost kind of like this menti meter that we were using that, that it can shift to. So that's my piece. Yeah I appreciate this discussion. I think that what I put community safety down because to me that does mean something different than public safety. I think what councilor Green outlined it as far as like a more democratic version versus a more paternalistic version of something being done to you. But I think that what we're kind of not talking about is who is served by these systems or who feels safe according to these systems. So when I think about community safety, it's because I think over the past few years, there has been a consciousness and an awakening around how certain public safety systems, like how police impact black and brown communities, and what it means to change those systems so that they serve everybody equally. And so to me, community safety means that we're taking into account the people who were historically not served by those systems and are not being served right now. So that means like for okay, for the people who have mental health crises, they were not necessarily served by police. So then we created Portland street response to have that sort of public safety response that needed to shift and change. That's part of community safety. I think that when we activate public spaces so that there aren't, your car window isn't getting smashed because there's a bunch of people walking in a downtown area because it's a lovely street and everyone's going shopping and having dinner with their families. That's public safety, too. But to me, I see that there's like an evolution in what public safety means. That is more inclusive of everybody's experiences. Oh, I'm sorry, I think can I just I just wanted to add to what Angelita was saying, that it's not just what public safety does to you, but it's what it does for you. I think there's also that the for you element. Candace. I actually don't see it as circles or venn diagrams at all. I see it as a spectrum, and I see public safety being on one end of it and community safety being on the other. And I think the spectrum for me is because I believe that public safety is more about response, it's more about answering to the ills of our lack of doing. The other end of the spectrum, which is creating safe parks, having opportunity, having jobs, having people live in, you know, have the income to be able to support their families. And so and then, you know, in the in between of that is where I see things like the chats and the sers, which are like somewhat responsive, but also trying to tackle more of the root problem. Whereas, you know, again, public safety is like there's a crime and we have to address a crime, right? We cannot let people, you know, come and shoot at people. Right? We have to respond with a blunt tool in that scenario. Whereas on the very, very other end is do young people in particular, if we don't build our systems around safety, around what young people need, then they're not going to be efficient. And so what do young people need is what I really see at the other end of it of like, how are we ensuring young people are able to, you know, be supported, have resources, have places to be safe, which are parks and community centers. So yeah, I don't see them as circles. I see them and not to and you know, I know that by saying a spectrum that feels like, oh, it's linear and I'm not trying to make it sound linear, but I do see I think spectrums don't have to be just, you know, one sided. But I do see them as a range. And I, I tend to see policies through that lens anyway. So that's just how my brain works. Yeah. Him and then I'll get you. First of all, glad we're doing this. When I envisioned wanting to have this day where we hung out and listened to each other, this is exactly what I was hoping we'd accomplish because we use words and I could sense during last year's budget especially, that we had different definitions for different words, and it allowed this to happen quite a bit. I put down infrastructure, public safety and parks, and the reason I didn't put community safety because I added parks and parks and arts, it's because I listed parks. I didn't feel like I needed to do community safety because that was part of that. Listening further, I get what you're saying, but I sometimes think that gets into the role clarity between the county and the city. When we start to get into behavioral health and mental health. So by listening to taxpayers and others, their biggest beef right now with us is that they see the amount of money that they're spending to live here has gone up so high in the last ten years, and their service delivery on pipes, paths, parks, permits, climate, all of the stuff, public safety has gone down. And so that's I think what we're struggling with as a city. And perhaps I'll just say this. We all say we have different constituents, different friend groups. Maybe I have the most amount of friends who have left the last ten years, and that that revenue left our city. And that's really hard for us to lose all that revenue. And I that's one reason I advocate the way that I do. I think I think this is such a good discussion to understand that there are the shades like there are the things, there are pieces and parts of all of these discussions that we want to make sure our communicating with each other so that we're not doing this thing over here, that could have a strong impact on this particular priority or this particular area. But we didn't consider it through the lens of what is this adding to that picture, or what is this taking from that picture? So back to this idea of what are what's the give and take amongst all of this. And so building this sort of structure is intended to help things reference each other, communicate with each other and not isolate each other. And so this this discussion about where community service or community safety intersects with public safety and then with economy and all of those other things. I think it's important to have that that spectrum, to use your word of, of, of nuance, of, of consideration, that, that oftentimes we just draw the hard line and don't necessarily communicate between the two. I think Mitch was next. I see you, yeah. Just briefly, thank you for kind of talking about the there's a theme that underlies a lot of this, which is what what are we getting for our public dollars? And, you know, it's not just folks maybe at the higher income distribution who have left. No, no, I know, but I but but I think what I'm about to say is going to validate what you were saying, which is that I also have friends who are socialists, who are working class folks who left because they didn't feel safe, because they weren't seeing that response. And so there's a range of reasons why people don't feel safe. I think, you know, our our traditional public safety bureaus are essential in, in that space. So it's not you can't necessarily fit it into any particular buckets, even on ideological spaces. And I'm not suggesting that's what you're trying to do, but it is a thing that people who observe our councils might, might suggest is a thing. I think what I need to name, though, is it's not higher income people I'm talking about. It's working class families. Sameer I got you. Yeah, I think there's a few things here and I want to I want everyone to hear both parts of this first thing, because it's kind of like when you say someone loses a loved one in an act of violence, and you can say that we have fewer acts of gun violence, we have fewer homicides in the city. That's true. But it doesn't help the person who just lost their loved one. So it's important that we look at the empirical data, which shows that we don't actually have this outflow of millions and millions of people leaving the city because of taxes or whatever, and also the real experience of the person who leaves the city because of either taxation and the feeling of not being served or safety or any other reason, is still important. It's still vital. Even though we can look, the empirical data doesn't change the anecdotal part of it. I did want to mention, because the response prevention recovery piece was really important, the public safety service area at the city did a strategic planning process actually in this room. And their mission of the service area is to advance safety through collaborative prevention, response and recovery. So in terms of the operational side, we've definitely recognized that there's components of all three parts of this. And we now and I will say the operational side uses these terms differently than the legislative side and the policy making side, because community safety division became the public safety service area and now has a subset of it called the division of community safety, which does, you know, Portland street response and violence prevention, ceasefire, all that work. So there's there's going to be differences in how we use these terms. And I appreciate that we're defining these for ourselves. But I did want to mention that on the operational side, the city has a role in all three. And there's the the one challenge with the city county, there's many challenges. The city county structure is, is that if we say that the county does something and this is true for shelters, this is true for for our different types of emergency response to and first response that in the event that we say something is their job and not ours, that often means we still respond to it with what we have. And sometimes what we have is not ideal. But because we are held democratically accountable for what we do, we still send something and that can have an opportunity cost or a direct cost in terms of a negative outcome. Because if we're if we're sending a resource towards something, that's the county's responsibility because we didn't develop something specifically for it, whatever that that thing that we are sending should be doing is now not being served as much, or it could actually be harming the situation, making it more complicated. So there's a complication here, and I know a lot of us have conversations and thoughts about the city, county, merger concepts, different proposals and all that. But for another day, no, no no no, you're not absolutely not alone. But there I think the that's something I just wanted to make sure is part of the conversation too. Candice. Tiffany had whispered something to me and so I want to reframe. It's all your fault. I'm just kidding. Well, you were like, oh, I see it in colors. And when I was talking about the spectrum and, and and I was like, yeah, you're right. Not only do I see it in colors, and because I was trying to explain, I was like, I, I know a spectrum sounds linear and I'm not trying to make it sound like that. So then I was like a color wheel. Yeah, exactly. That's how I pictured it. So yeah. So that that is actually how I see it. I see it as a color wheel where it all comes back. Right? It all is in it. Right? But it's a it's still a spectrum, but it all feeds into each other. That's how I see it. Yeah, I had Angelita. I think I think the reason I initially took your comments to mean high income earners was because you talked about taxes leaving the city, and that's usually how it's discussed. It's like wealthy people are fleeing the city, so we're not getting enough taxes. So I appreciate your clarification on that. I think that what I see is a lot of working class, lower income people leaving the city because they cannot afford to live here anymore. When my mom and my sister and me first moved to Portland when I was in seventh grade, my mom could rent a two bedroom apartment for 1200 a month. That would be impossible. Today my one bedroom is $1,600 a month, and I don't have children to take care of or anything like that, but I, I also think that community safety to me, means that you feel like your life is not going to be upended because of an economic issue randomly, that you can have a medical emergency and you're not going to suddenly be unable to pay your rent and get evicted. Because I can tell you, when I was homeless, it was the least safe I've ever felt in my life. And I was very lucky that a lot of circumstances, you know, I was protected and I didn't encounter what many people on the streets face. But the the immense loss of safety and inability to conceive of a future where you could do something different and you can actually dream is is something that poor people, unhoused people in our city feel very profoundly, and they are often treated as the safety problem instead of as people that are unsafe. So to me, that is like a large portion of the discussion around community safety to. Yeah, okay, so we've got 25 minutes and we've still got a few of these to get through before we have to break for lunch. So we're going to I'm going to let the last couple that had their hands up, and then we'll move on to the next, the next bubble. Steve I think you were next. Yeah. I just respond to what what Elana said a bit ago. I actually don't worry about this council abandoning the interventionist part of public safety. And I'll explain why, when I've had conversations with people out in the world that talk about, you know, that band of radicals in the city council, one of the things they'll say is, oh, come on, it's not like defunding the police. They proposed eliminating a $2 million increase to $300 million budget, and I voted with them. So they're not dismantling the existing public safety structures. Now, somebody could correct me and say, no. The only reason somebody didn't propose 20% cut in the police budget was you wouldn't get Novick vote. But my assumption has been that there is not like a groundswell for eliminating the traditional interventionist parts of the public safety system. And Elana last word, I think it's really I think it's really important for us to have this conversation, because it's where a lot of division on council sits. But before we leave this slide and this agenda item, I just think it's really important to note that that is just one thing up on this list. We're moving to the next one, okay. That's where we're headed because I don't want to lose some of the other really important core services that we need to make sure we're funding. It can't just be public. That's exactly where we're headed. So the next biggest bubble is parks. Do we all agree that parks and providing Green spaces, activity spaces that is one of our core services again, not defining levels. Okay. Parks got a thumbs up. Okay. So then we have housing I think would be next. And so that was one where the question was was sort of our housing and homelessness completely intertwined. Are they similar to these two where there's there's commonality but there's some differentiation. Give me a sense of where you stand with housing being one of our fundamental services. Go ahead Mitch. Thank you. I, I see the capacity of our housing stock. I see our ability to produce it and preserve it and in some sense influence its cost as a fundamental core service. Okay. I also wrote up there things like land use and permitting that, you know, not as interesting. So it's a tiny font. But I think the way that we influence that is largely through that book of business, we have gotten ourselves into a space in the city where we we spend a lot of money subsidizing and facilitating the production of different forms of housing, whether directly or indirectly. And so I think one of the challenges that we're going to have to face in the city as we an opportunity, frankly, is to rethink some of that. And we don't need to get into my own pet ideas at this point. But I think if we don't solve that capacity piece, then we are going to generate homelessness. So so housing you're thinking of in the sense of policy decisions, affordability, availability, sort of that framework. Yes. I think our our job is to make sure there is abundant housing at all times, irrespective of of the of the demand. Do we feel that that is a standalone kind of effort in this, or give me some other flavor on whether or not you believe that that homelessness is in there, kind of define that a little bit better, because this will this will come into play here when we set our priorities. Yes. Sameer I think it was oh, was it okay? I'm trying to look out of both eyes. I agree with everything that Mitch said, but I guess the way I would phrase it is, is homelessness is the symptom of the failure to do housing, right? Okay. And when we build enough abundant housing of, of all across the spectrum, and we make it so that people can afford to live in, sheltered of, you know, in homes, we won't have this problem to the same degree. Elana I think what my colleagues said is right, and I do think we need to treat housing as a different item on our agenda than homelessness or homeless services. But I also think that housing is first and foremost. Absolutely. Or homelessness, rather, is first and foremost absolutely an economic issue. And the housing solutions that Mitch and Sameer are talking about means that we have far less people falling into homelessness if we as a city take on homelessness, which we may not decide is a priority for us. And I think that's okay. But if we do, then we have to start to talk about what services go along with that housing and whether we have housing of different types with different services attached, not just of different levels of affordability. And so I think that there are two pieces to housing affordability and also our services attached or not. And what are the restrictions and requirements around housing that we need to address at some point? I want to note that we are talking about housing as a core service, but the city does not actually house very many people. We subsidize the creation of housing. We create a planning and permitting and zoning system that makes it easier or harder to build different types of housing in different areas. But as of right now, creating housing, making, ensuring we supply housing is not actually a core book of business for us. Maybe it should be. I know some of my colleagues would argue that it should be. I'd probably agree that it should be. But are we talking about the right now, or are we talking about what we want it to be? And when we say housing, what do we actually mean? And I think you just hammered in on one of those discussions. So if we say a priority for us is housing and it includes many of these things, one of the strategies, expectation success markers that we may establish as part of that could be creating or building or investing in affordable housing or whatever the right answer is. But it could be that that's one of the strategies that's related to that issue that would be determined at some, you know, in some future discussions, some future date, some future capacity. Yes. As far as answering the question, I think that housing and homelessness are inextricably intertwined. And I think the cost of housing is a I mean, statistically, it is a very large factor in why people become homeless in the first place. And we also see that if you are homeless for a sustained period of time, you are going to have mental health, physical and addiction problems, because what it takes to cope, to live on the streets long term is very difficult and painful. And human beings seek comfort in the ways that they can, under very difficult and painful circumstances. So I think that the city does need to take on the creation of housing. I'm obviously in favor of social housing, because what we learned in the housing committee from the folks who presented on social housing is that if people do not make a dedicated, sustained, like a true choice to continue to build housing that is outside of the profit market, we will not address homelessness. And that is going to take a political will and commitment to do that. And I think it's going to take the partnership of a lot of people who want to see homelessness end so that their businesses can thrive, which means that we also need them to be team players in this discussion as well, because I think wealthy people used to build libraries and museums and things for the public good, and I don't see that happening as much anymore. There's a demand to be given everything without giving anything back to the community, and I have concerns about that. But people, you know, if you're if you have an emergency, you can't pay your rent, you're on the street. No one has $1,600 in their bank account to just pay for a new deposit to get a new apartment. They don't have that. Most people are living paycheck to paycheck to the sent. So I think it is inherently economic, and I think that the city has to do has to make the strident choice and the courageous choice to remove profit from the equation for some of the housing that we create, or we're not going to get out of this again, I'm going to do this to you. Not no offense, but but we're getting into sort of like the strategies we want to employ. And right now we're just trying to define core services. But that will come back as one of those indicators here in just a moment. Oh, Loretta. Yes. Thank you. Housing is one of our core services because we we fund affordable housing projects and we also fund homeownership activities with down payment assistance. And we also help seniors who are in their homes to to do rehabilitation of their, of their homes. That is our core services. That is the infrastructure piece of what we do for for housing. That's a part of our housing Portland housing bureau, right. Okay. Yeah. So so the the support or the systems that support the being in housing. Right. Is what. Yes. And so you have pieces and parts that are different. You have different pieces. Right. And it's very probably confusing to folks because. We don't have our homeless services in the Portland housing bureau. And so for me, that seems so. It seems not like it shouldn't be. We we created a whole new system for folks to use our services through the Portland solutions. And it seems like if we're going to do homeless services, that they should be done out of the Portland housing bureau. Okay. So you view them as interconnected. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yes. Steve, I, I think that I tend to agree with what Mitch said originally was that the city's primary role in terms of housing, at least at this point, is through zoning and planning and making it possible to build housing. At this point, although I think a lot of us think of housing as it should be a core service, we just don't have enough money to move the needle a hell of a lot in terms of how much affordable housing is available. So I think that if we really want to think of that as being a core service, we need to figure out a major funding source to deal with it. I also just want to say, I agree with most of my colleagues that homelessness is largely a symptom of unaffordability, and there's plenty of behavioral health problems in west virginia, and there's not very much homelessness, because even people with problems can find a place to live. It's still true. As Elana was saying, there are some people who are homeless who reached a point in their lives where if you gave them a house, they would need support to stay there. But the fundamental driver is unaffordability. And finally, I did just want to say that 20 years ago housing was look as now largely produced by the private market, and we didn't have as much homelessness. And so I think that we should keep that in mind and realize that there's sort of national forces that have driven down housing production everywhere since the great recession, that have prevented the private market from keeping up with the demand for housing. I mean, I'm not saying that we should all that the private market was great 20 years ago, but I think that we should keep in mind that there was a time we didn't have this much homelessness, even though we had a commodified housing system. Did I see you earlier? You sure? Okay. Yeah. Last one on this topic. Unless. Unless I'm giving you the right to to go if you need to, before we have to move on to the next one. So go right ahead. I just want to say that I agree with everything you said on about housing being the affordability, housing being the main driver and then once you're homeless, addictions tend to I mean, who wouldn't after a week or two on the streets and in my life, it's an and and I think we don't lean into the word and enough on this body. And what I've experienced in my life from family and from friends. And it's on two hands, at least, that I can think of those people. They had escalating behavioral health issues, and that caused them to lose their jobs, to lose their, their, their spouse. And then they found themselves homeless. And it was absolutely their addiction and not getting into recovery that escalated that exit into the streets. And I don't think it's helpful for us to be in denial about that. And our city has a addiction crisis that's that tends to stick out nationally. And most people know that with raw data given you, I figured, yeah, I'll just end my thought. You know, I agree with a lot of what I've heard. I'll just end my thought with I have been listening to homelessness as a housing problem, a book. I've been listening to it on my way into work over the last month. And I think what stuck out to me the most in what I heard is that the places that have the highest issues with homelessness have the most wealth, and it's because they don't cater to the people that need it, the places that have the most wealth. They cater to wealthy people and so they build things for wealthy people. They create resources for wealthy people. And that is our problem, is that we do. And that is very clearly shown in the fact that we have very little production in 0 to 30 ami we keep building housing for people that I'm like, who are these people? Who are you building this for? People can't afford that. And that is the common thread across the country. And what's interesting about the book is it's talking about, you know, the threads that people think are the threads aren't actually the main thread is that so many of these cities keep catering to the people that don't need it, which is why when one of those questions I wrote that we make policies for people that actually need it, that's my goal. It's creating the creating the balance, creating more opportunity, and creating the policies that afford that or incent that in some way. Okay. The last one that we're probably going to have time for before we have to break is infrastructure. So there's a bunch of different things that'll say streets. It might say water. Those is is infrastructure one of our core services okay. And is it one that. That we can define as all of those things, all of the pieces and parts, the foundational stuff. Do we define buildings as part of our infrastructure, city buildings and assets and that kind of stuff is part of the the infrastructure that allows the city to to work. Right. Okay. And do we feel that infrastructure right now is a policy level discussion or is it a a resources level discussion? Do we feel we're okay on policy? Do we feel like we need to revise policy, and do we feel like we need to focus some of our resources toward some particular part of infrastructure? Okay. Elana, I think I saw you first. So I think the number one issue with infrastructure right now is certainly a resource and a budget piece. I think of everything up here. Infrastructure is actually the most core core service because it is the thing that we don't have a city. If we don't provide that and we can't provide it the way we need to because of budget. But I think there is more agreement, probably when we start getting into this than we might think there is around what the priorities are for infrastructure. But it feels to me like a place where there is a lot of effort to bring up really important want to haves. Sometimes that the distraction of what is the core service in infrastructure, what is the must do? And I don't know that we have talked about yet what the must do is, as opposed to the really nice to have within infrastructure. Candace, I saw you next. Infrastructure is absolutely policy and you can ask any east portlander that because we have and this is where equity comes back, because we have constantly been waiting for basic infrastructure. And that was also what I noticed in our first budget cycle was, you know, I kept hearing, oh, we're cutting everything across the board. Oh, across the board, across the board. That's not the case. Not when you look in the line items. It is disproportionately cutting things in our district. I was pretty peeved off by the fact that we were cutting maintenance for parks, that we hadn't even opened in east Portland. That was infuriating because I kept being told it's just across the board. And so that's why the details really matter. That's why we keep fighting. That's why councilor Smith or Loretta keeps fighting for the spreadsheets, because that's where those things show up. And that's where the policy happens. You know, when we talk about anti-displacement policy, when we talk about being able to use our our resources or distribute our resources equitably, that's all policy. Okay. Olivia. Yeah, I just wanted to echo what Elana said that for a long time, we've been chasing shiny objects and not taking care of what we have. And at least three auditors have said to the city that that's exactly what's going on here. So it's one of the first things that this council took on was asset management and trying to understand what's at risk and across the board in all of our infrastructure. So and now we're also once that's done, we're going to start talking about how how do we fix it. But in the immediate we're already taking on the, the the street issue. So we're on it both policy wise and budget. This is this isn't on like every single other city because that road we can keep paving those potholes for another year or two years. But roads if you've ever looked at the life cycle, they go like this and then they go like this. And so really kind of taking that one by the horns and trying to push it forward in some meaningful way has dividends that are very long term. Can is that a is yours just a follow up on your own. Oh to hers okay. Go ahead I think you're right on that. But again I have to bring it back to it's really hard for east portlanders to hear that we have we it's now time to just do maintenance. We have to maintain what we have. We don't have those things. So that's why like, you have to talk about equity, right? So I want to raise that because I keep hearing this right of like, oh, we we keep looking for shiny new things. And it's like sounds great to people that have had shiny new things. But for people that don't have those, we don't have things to maintain. So if that is our core frame that we like, because I just keep us here, I keep I hear us keeping to return to that. And as an east portlander, I have a problem with it because we I am not prepared for us to say that we are in maintenance mode when you have to continue to build where you owe us infrastructure. Yeah. And Mitch next. And then I see you. Yeah, I think it's definitely a policy and sort of resources question. They are inextricably connected. I think they want to go back to something that Tiffany raised early on in the discussion, which was our ability to be successful in this strategic priority setting process is the willingness to take the risk and maybe risk our own seats because we are in an election cycle to to say like, what are we doing today that is maybe politically unpopular but sets our city ups, our grants, have a shot. All of the blame today and none of none of the benefits. Right. So I think we've we've we've gotten the ball rolling. We have asset management focus now. We have but we also have opportunities to take that other kind of land use zoning permit like some of these sort of regulatory approaches that don't necessarily have a direct cost and use those to enable our ability to expand into areas that that solve those deficits of, of, of, of attention. I say this as an adhd person, so I can say that, but well, also just spreading our resources further, I think, I think I think that we can we can approach this with a qualitative shift and also say we need to go and raise our resources and be more sensible about this. So yeah. Anyway, Elana, I hope that our discussion around infrastructure doesn't become only maintenance or only shiny things, because I hope that the answer is we absolutely must build to a foundational level anywhere that doesn't have that. And as we build to that foundational level, let's do it in the best possible way, which means we do incorporate some of the shiny things from the start. But let's not add shiny things where we are already at that level until we've gotten our basic maintenance up to up to snuff. So I hope it doesn't become a one or the other conversation. We need to get everybody to that level. We need to stop doing things above that level in places that already have it, while we have crumbling roads, creating and enforcing the baseline equitably in all areas as sort of a foundational shift of of what we're willing to do and when and how. Sameer. Yeah, I think it's worth pointing out, like all the community centers in, in districts two, three and four have names, and east Portland has eastport and community center because they got one in east Portland. And so like there is a there is a gap there that needs to get, you know, remedied that that doesn't mean that the other three districts don't have needs that that are unique to each specific district and north portland's historically underserved. True. And I'm not neglecting that, I think I think maybe one of the things is shiny doesn't mean new always shiny. Really, what we're talking about is in excess of the basic. And so we have parts of the city that don't have the basic. They will be new and shiny when they're built. They're at the moment that they open, but they are getting to that core level. And then beyond that might be what we're. So it's kind of a word choice usage here. And both to your original question but and then so so when you look at this what we're talking about here is balance. It's figuring out what we have to absolutely do right now and commit our resources to right now to set ourselves up, to keep moving everything else in the right direction and infrastructure, if we're talking facilities, may look like they need a this just as much as they need roads, and they're not mutually exclusive necessarily. And so I want to it we can have multiple priorities. Two things can be true at the same time. Right. And so we don't want to look at this through the lens of one moving forward in one excludes the other. It just may be may be the pace at which we're able to move with one or the other. But they should all be talking to each other, because if you build the shiniest thing ever in wherever and nobody can get to it because the roads are terrible, what have you accomplished? So we have to have the collective conversations where as we establish priorities, they are working together in concert, and we're willing to have those difficult conversations about what we're willing to wait a budget cycle on so that we can invest in whatever this is. And that's a policy decision for you all. So you all get to have those conversations and make those decisions again, not necessarily establishing any of that. Today. What we're trying to do is say, and this isn't your priority list, we're going to come back to it and I'll show you what you told me. We've just run up on lunch, so we'll take that break. Just I know that your job includes summarizing, so I'm not faulting you for doing that. I think the word that you used is not reflective of what was said. I think equity is actually what we're talking about, not balance here. Okay, well, I'm sorry, interchangeable in my head, but I understand that there's a difference for you. Yeah. Thanks. Yeah. Okay. Final final thoughts. So first of all, I want to say that I think the extent to which the city is frittered away its money on shiny objects is exaggerated. I mean, possibly the biggest shiny object I can think of is the streetcar and maybe the streetcar. We spent more money than we should, but it also, there are a variety of reasons why earl and charlie championed it, and it turns out that it serves more low income people than you would think. And it's also been a tangible development strategy. So I don't think that. And also I want to say that I was I got the ten cent a gallon gas tax pass, and what we tried to do with that was not enough of two different things. We spent a slight majority of it on pavement and a slight minority of it on safety, investments and sidewalks, you know, including a chunk in east Portland. But what I think that we need when we think about infrastructure and particularly about transportation, I think that we need to build up, you know, have realistic lists and realistic discussions about trade offs. And either we raise enough money to keep the major streets throughout the city from deteriorating, or we say we're going to let some of them deteriorate. And if we have x amount of money and we have to allocate it, then we say, okay, here's some fundamental infrastructure problems in east Portland that we want to fix, even if that means that division between 39th and the river becomes gravel. I mean, we literally need to talk about those trade offs. And in transportation, there's more urgency. I mean, going back to Elana saying about infrastructure is sort of the most fundamental. I mean, a city can have rampant crime for a while and recover. A city can have rampant homelessness for a while and recover. A city cannot have no water, no clean water and recover. A city cannot have cannot have no sewer system recover, and a city cannot have a totally nonexistent transportation system and recover. And every year transportation is different in that. Streets are like teeth. And if you're not doing regular brushing and cleaning, then you're into root canals and extractions. So it's I heard the mayor was talking to him about this a couple of days ago. He said, well, we need to start the work on transportation, raise enough money to start the work. It's like, no, it doesn't work that way. You can raise enough to slow the bleeding, but unless you raise a certain amount, the bleeding will continue and get worse. So, I mean, those are the conversations I think. I mean, I think we literally need to sit down and say, okay, here is what it would cost to build the amount of sidewalks we want in east and and west Portland. And here's the amount of cost to maintain our major streets. How much are we willing to raise and how do we divide it between the two of them? And I'm not presupposing the outcome. I'm just saying those are discussions we need to have. Okay. We have run up on lunch, so we need to be back. Is 55 minutes enough time? Can we come back right at one. Is that agreeable? Okay. So we will pick oh sorry mike. Oh yes. You can't have a no quorum. And I'm not sure what that's going to mean. That'd be a lot. No, but yeah I mean like. Oh yeah. Can't all have. Yeah. You can't have six. I think we can't either. You guys know what committees you're on. Just take a look at who's around okay okay. So don't. And we'll be back at 1:00. 1:00. Great discussion guys. So we did a significant amount of the kind of higher level discovery type work earlier, kind of the open conversations. And now we're going to hone in on what those highest levels of priority are. I do not believe any of them are going to be a surprise to you. And then I'm going to turn it over to mike. And mike is going to work through what some of those success strategies are that you all agree, walking away from here would would mean that we are moving toward in the right direction under whatever these priorities are that we establish. So if I can get the slide show up, let's see. Adam, I think it's up on this. There we go. Okay. We did that. Yes. Success. But that is not controlling it. It's not clicking now. Sorry y'all. Technology is difficult. So we can say it now so that it's there we go. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So when I spoke to you individually and we asked you what your priority areas are, your strategic priorities were. These were the things that came up on your list. This should not be a surprise because it looks very much like what we talked about over here. Obviously we would finesse wording in those sorts of things. But just for a starting point of this conversation, these are ranked in the number of responses that were the same or were in, in concert with the the ideas. So public safety, obviously we had the big discussion about community safety and how we want to turn that, but that came up as the most responses gotten. So it was nine of you said that was one of your highest priorities, whether it was community safety, public safety, but something related to safety. The next one that was even to that, again, nine responses was housing and or homelessness. We discussed that a little bit earlier about how they're intertwined or how they might be treated or defined differently. The next one, which came in at seven people, said that the economy, different ways that we said economy, economy through jobs, economy through business development, economy through revenue streams, economy was next, and then the next one, which was the same, seven was core services and or service delivery and or systems. So kind of all working together, how do we become the most effective and efficient government at providing services and at the level that we expect them to be? And then followed by that with six votes was infrastructure. There were a couple of things like sustainability and environment that came into play in those conversations, but weren't necessarily, you know, their own topic. So I put it there. It may not belong there. I just wanted to have the note for the discussion. And then finally the last bullet, which could be because transportation maybe was viewed as part of infrastructure for many of you. But it came up sort of on its own with just one person, and another person said quality of life. So if we go back to this list and talk about what we named as core services, the things that we thought were those most important things, like quality of life amenities. So parks and that type of stuff might fit within core services or some of the other human services that we provide might fit in that category. But this was just sort of the starting point for you to see. These were kind of the top five ish categories, big buckets that we think are the most important areas for us to focus our efforts on and to create real progress within thoughts. Can you elaborate on the core services delivery systems? You okay? Yes. I'll tell you how we got there, but you all will get to define these things if you wish to sort of move them forward to the next section of definition, and then sort of high level strategies. So that one was we should be delivering on what we defining our core services and what it is that we absolutely must provide to the public. So that was. Water roads. It was a number of things. So what are what is our service? What should our service levels be? There was also the discussion of systems through, you know, either policy making, deliberation as a body. Some governance kinds of things happened there. So really it was about the the function of government. And are we doing it in an efficient and effective way for whatever our standards are, if that makes sense. So they they kind of got lumped because they didn't necessarily exclude one another. But that's to you to define I think I saw Mitch first and then I'll come to you. Yeah. I think I'm not surprised to see that that list of six things rise to the top roughly in the same ranking, more or less depending upon how you define certain things. That's what I see when I see the kind of community insight survey stuff, any kind of polling. Those are the categories I see. And so we're a proportionately represented body of the public. So it makes sense that we're reflecting that. And then I guess just sort of a big picture question to to to you all is I'm glad to hear that. That's what's being what you're taking in from the public and that surveys are in force or reinforcing those ideas. I also want to make sure that we're not categorizing based on the, the, the committee system that exists, though they should be in concert, they should complement or work together. I just want to make sure that that you don't feel that you're confined in that way. But this really is the right list. Maybe not in the same order, maybe no order. But but really, this was just our starting point for this next layer. Yes. Oh, no. Elana was next. Elana. So if we're talking about where are the big decision points in terms of policy and how do we do things that we need to make? I think this is the right list. Okay. But if we are using this list to choose what we fund, I'm going to argue very strongly against this because parks is not up here. And parks was one of the biggest things in our last exercise around what we thought our core services were. I don't think it pops on something like this, because there are a lot of complaints about what we need to do more of in our system, but it's less the trade offs. What do we want our systems focus to be conversations that we need to have? So I don't think it pops in the same way for a list like what you just put up. But at some point we're going to move from these are our priorities to this is what we need to fund. And at that point, I'm going to want to jump up and down and say parks has to be higher than it looks like when I look at that list. And I think that is a perfect point for this part of the discussion, is, is parks part of some other category that we want to call out as an important key element of whatever that is or is parks at a level that we want it to set as its own priority topic and then define it further underneath it. And it it could be that maybe it's not one of those that's up there. Parks is a huge part of it, but maybe it's something more. Don't use my words. But quality of life a little bit broader than parks. But but maybe it needs to be parks. And it could be that parks is part of sustainable infrastructure. Certainly open space is part of having a sustainable infrastructure in our city and that our parks services, our rec programs are part of core service delivery. And if we're calling those two things out in different places, and we all understand that sustainable infrastructure includes publicly accessible open space and core service delivery includes rec programing, I'm perfectly happy with that. But the words aren't there. So I think we need to say out loud that we believe they're there, or I need to fight the fight, that they get put up there somewhere. Totally. That's exactly what we needed to hear. I think there was one before you, was it? It was Sameer was next. Yeah. Thanks. That's one of the two changes I noticed too. I agree, and I think for me, when I heard your question back in the one on ones about strategic priorities, I think maybe I assume that the things that we all agree on might not be as worthy of mention. And you may have noticed when you said parks, when you first wrote it up just now, it was like, yeah, cool, thumbs up, let's move on. Because we all like and I think there's there's some nibbling around the edges in terms of changes that might need to be made or whatever, but other things, parks is super broad and it falls into several categories depending on how you slice it. And we sliced it a little differently as a group than one on one. The other thing, though, is economy, which is not on this list. But if you look at the word cloud, there's like 500 things that are in the small text from, you know, permitting and all that. And I'm noting, you know, Saturday. So I think dca is back there in trucker hat for economic development, didn't make the list as its own thing. But the but it is there's a ton of them just phrased differently in there. Right. And I think the other piece of it is and Dan I think says this the most, but I think we all understand the economy is how you get the tax dollars to fund everything else you want to do. So that's a core part of it. But I think it's just worth mentioning that I think both parks is in this list, and economy's in that list just in different ways than we sliced it. Yes. So, so from from your perspective, if we can play in Elana, from your perspective, if we can place the pieces of parks, open space, those things as definitions within some of these categories, that is sufficient. Or are we saying we want parks to have its own independent identity within? I don't know that we were answering that question because I do want to go first. If we are all assuming that core services includes our rec programing and sustainable infrastructure includes publicly accessible open space, I don't need it to say parks up there, but I do need to know that the majority of my colleagues believe that a key piece, not a not a smaller piece, but a key piece of those two things, are those programs okay to be comfortable? Yeah, I agree with that. I'll also add, you know, park rangers parks are part of public safety too, especially the recreation side and the ranger side. So I think parks is sort of a method like our the parks bureau. Okay, Portland parks and recreation are a delivery vehicle for many of our strategic priorities. Okay. So in fact, I think it's actually all five of well, maybe not housing homeless, but the other four and the quality of life. Yeah. So, Loretta, you had your hand. Yeah. Thank you I do when I, when I saw the list, I thought that parks would be in core services. But as we're talking about it, I think parks needs to be their own thing because they're one of our general fund budget areas. So as we're talking about public safety and what we're doing around homelessness and housing, there's a lot of general fund money there. And I think we need to have that front and center to with parks. Okay, angelina. Thank you. Yeah, I completely agree with you. Elana. I when I thought about sustainable infrastructure, I immediately thought that I assumed that parks was part of that. But you're right that we should call that out. And I think it is really important. And I do think our recs, our the rec side of parks and recs does need to be under court services because so much of that I think we view as luxury. But it's actually like critical. That's where kids are getting food. That's where families who don't have access to affordable daycare are sending their kids. So just want to very strongly assert that I completely agree with that analysis, and I assumed that it was there. I'm glad it was called out. Okay. So for the purposes of the rest of our afternoon, can we start with those five groupings? Understanding that parks belongs within a couple of different categories, and we will call those things out as we move forward and define okay. So if, if and again I just want to say this is the start of the conversation on all of these. So what we're trying to do is figure out what these highest level areas are, what we think moves the needle in the positive direction, and what needs to come back for a more thorough, thoughtful discussion to give greater direction to all that we're trying to achieve and can provide some of those equity points and some of those district focused points moving forward. But for the purposes of today, we're going to try and again keep it a little bit higher level and get into some of those definitions that you all just described. So I think I think we're ready to move into that section if everyone's okay with that. Okay. And so mike is going to start working with you through defining and establishing some expectations. Yeah. Good. We may have to trade places after a while okay. So I want to I want to make another list just to make sure we've got it. And it's, it's like what you you have. And then what we'll do is we'll take each one of them just in order that, that you give them. And we want to talk about some of what, you know, use parks as an example. If we're talking about core services, delivery systems, parks and rec bureau and what do we want from that. And we'll just have some discussion on it. And then that will that will be our list that we create in the report. So as you're saying I want to make sure it's down there. It'll be down there for sure. And then we'll we'll kind of go and see how how far that takes us. So it for our list, are we at public safety or should that say community and public safety? I'm just going back from yesterday or this morning's discussion. Okay. Yeah. I didn't hear you. Sameer safety is that. That's great with me. Is that good with everybody? Any. You know, sometimes I don't know if this is the right thing to say, but sometimes we we ask when we're trying to get like, okay, just what's everybody's feeling fist to five. This is a texas thing. Maybe I don't know. Fist is I'll fight you over this. I'm so unhappy about it. Then we know, like, okay, we can't do that. Five is I'm all in and, you know, somewhere in there. So any any fist over safety only I. I don't necessarily want to just call it safety, because when you think about public safety, you think about 911. You think about police, you think about fire. So I just think it's it's not complete. When you say just safety. Okay. Do we need to include the word community? I think that's really my, my the heart of my question. Or does public safety capture what you meant? Well, process wise I guess some like how do you expect to facilitate this? Are you expecting to get consensus because 55 is purposefully not consensus. So if we're doing 55 then let's do that. Right. But no, the 55 is to kind of give me a temperature to like, okay, let's talk about it. So we find the consensus. Sure. I just 55 is used to address models around consensus is why I bring it up. So so I just yeah I guess I want to understand that before we keep going because I think that's been my biggest anticipation coming into thi%-pd like to what extent? Because we're not going to be 100% on everything. So what is it that we're documenting and how are we documenting the things where we're not 100% where we are? And what does the in-between look like? Because I yeah, I worry that. At least from my perspective, not everything has to be consensus. So if 99% of us want something, then I think it needs to go on the board. I don't think, you know, but again, that's why I'm asking are we going for consensus or not? Because that determines how I will I will approach this next phase of the conversation. Tiffany, we have kind of decided on some priorities in terms of forming and naming our committee structures. So does it make sense that we go off of some of those names and what we decided on? Okay. Which I think all of these could probably fit under. I just want to make sure I'm representing what you want. That's that's all I'm asking. Because if we put public safety, you're going to have some things under there on community safety. But if it's important to you to have it up there, then I want to have it up there. I'm good with safety. I'm good with community and public safety. I think if we spend time, we're probably going to spend more time than it might be worth debating otherwise. So that's why I suggested just the word safety. And we maybe as you get from 30 to 28,000ft you start getting into that. Yeah. But I also agree with candice. I'd like a little more clarity on on our approach to this conversation, because I think we saw some near but not quite consensus. I agree with what Sameer language, and I say that because that usually helps us get to a place of consensus and moving on. So what I'm hearing from most of you that you you're happy with the word safety. Hey, we'll okay, we're going to go with safety. We'll make sure that we delineate when we talk about them through housing and homelessness together. Is that right? Is that right? We talked about how they were inextricably linked but also separate in the policy. And we never came back and talked about whether homelessness is a strategic priority for this council or not. Is there have we defined the distinction between strategic priority and core service yet? Because I think that that that's where a lot of the disagreement might land in terms of whether or not we should be paying for homelessness services, and that's that's more of a core services conversation. Whereas if we have a strategic priority to reduce homelessness and the intervention is in the housing side of it, then it makes sense in one conversation, but not the other is what I'm trying to say. And I think Elana is bringing up the right question there. I don't know what what's your sense on it council? I think it needs to be homeless housing and homelessness. I think that it is the number one thing that we have to tackle, and I think we get so caught up in like whose responsibility it is, and I'm tired of pointing fingers. It's our responsibility to solve homelessness and housing, and we do that in our way, right? Like we provide more housing, we create social housing. Right? So I think we need to like that's where I want us to get unstuck on that. Like, yes, there's lots of details about how to go about it, but it's very clearly something that we all ran on talking about and is a priority. So so once we, you know, we're really just making sure we've got the right priorities, and then we're going to dive down into what are some of the success measures for each of this. So I don't want to get too wrapped up. But what I'm hearing from most of you is you want them together, even though you're going to distinguish them as we we go lower. Is that right? I think that the strategic priority is to house portlanders. And does that not solve homelessness? I don't think there's a point to removing both. I, I would offer that for for the sake of this, this stage in the a little too close to this for the sake of us kind of settling on like these big categorical variables that we think about homelessness as a symptom of how we approach our housing problem. So I think it's okay to have them together in this category when we get to the place of how we fund things, whether they're upstream or downstream or somewhere in between, that's our budget setting process. But I but I would advocate that they they're still two sides of the same coin in a sense. But I agree that our strategic goal is to house all portlanders. I think we're all saying the same thing in that regard. Again, as we break down, we're going to see different things that address different portions of it. All right. Economy, is that okay? Is the word or do you want to say economic development or what's this economy. Good. Okay. Core services. Do we need to call that out as the strategic priority? We spent a lot of time talking about what those were. Do we want to say that's we're still there? All right. And the last one infrastructure. Do we just want to say infrastructure or do you want it to say sustainable infrastructure. Okay. All right. Very good. Okay. So. I'm going to tear this so we can keep it. Yes I'm sorry. So I'm good with everything that we've done so far except core services delivery systems I guess that's what we do. I feel like that's where we're not naming parks. So I'd be good with like safety, housing and homelessness, economy, infrastructure, that sustainable infrastructure we're calling it. And then parks because we're basically talking about infrastructure except parks. And I feel like parks will get lost. I was at arts to it, but that's just me. Maybe. Here's the list from the discussion this morning on core services. Yeah. There's infrastructure. Is there anything that's not listed there that's core services besides parks? The parks is. Can we call it parks and other core services? Okay. Olivia says, no, I hear you. I mean, I think about 311 as an example of a core service. I mean, our ability to intake complaints from the city collects and route sort of priorities from our community. That's a service, I think, and that cuts across pretty much the only things. But that's the plumbing of our city. That's that's the customer service plumbing of our city. That's a core service. And I think it's bigger than parks. So I think we need to name core service like more broadly. And then Loretta and then I agree with that. I think there are practices as well that we talk about, like, you know, the democracy portion is 3 in 1 is a part of that. Equity is a part of it. Community engagement is part of it. I think that those are different from the question you're asking. The conflation of what is a core service and what is a strategic priority. Those are not I interpret those as two different questions. So but when you're getting to this, I did want to mention that that last piece, that of the quality of life transportation piece, I think the transportation piece falls under core services and sustainable infrastructure. Quality of life might be something that's kind of nebulous, but around and kind of is all of the above, but. I do think it's more than just parks. I think we're I'm having a different definition is I think of infrastructure as all our pipes and all, you know, water, sewer, transportation, that's infrastructure to me. And so that's probably where I'm hung up. Do can I ask, do you think and I don't I think parks gets lost in that. So that's why I call out parks and services I think yeah, we should be delivering all of our services better. Let's go to Loretta and then Elana, I think. Thank you. When I think about core services, I think about water and sewer, you know, do we have drinking water? Is that sustainable? Do we have water to bathe in and to do our, our, our grass and flushing of the toilets in our parks and our transportation system, which includes the roads? That's what I consider core services. And it's the infrastructure of what we do. It's the base of what our book of business is. That's when I think about core services. Okay. Elana so none of these buckets are exactly how I would have named them. I think everybody would have named them a little bit differently. That's okay. We're working through this together. But I'm wondering, Dan, if we can take a leap of faith because I kind of want to see where we're going with these and do the next part without parks being up there. And if parks doesn't show up in the next level in the way that it needs to, I will be right beside you fighting to actually take a step backwards and change this list to put it up there. Yeah, sure. I think really what I was also getting at was that my definition of infrastructure, which I know a lot of portlanders have as well, is water, sewer, it's all pipes and it's the streets and it's the it's all a PBOT. Yeah. Like when I hear from people complaining, it's like we got to take care of our infrastructure and that's what they name. So I was I was putting that out there. I was putting that into infrastructure, not core services. Got it. But yes, don waiting and be patient with parks. Candace. Well, I think that, you know, the parks thing, I don't know. I think it's infrastructure. So I'll say that I think core services is also about navigation. Like there are a lot of services that we offer the community now how to buy a home, how to file a complaint. Right. There's so many like soft services that aren't just putting a road somewhere or building a building. So I think that's why it needs its own category, because it encompasses what Mitch was saying around like 311. It's like navigational services is what I see as core, because that's the main thing of government, right? It's the infrastructure and it's providing service to people who need it so that they can get what they need accomplished. So I think that needs to be its own category. I think parks can be under infrastructure. I mean, it's very clear we all care about parks, and we actually have to think about parks as infrastructure, because if we're talking about our roads deteriorating, we need to talk about our parks deteriorating. And so I think that's all like sticks, bricks stuff is infrastructure in which parks falls for me. So so let's do that. Thank you. I think let's let's jump in. I think we'll see that parks get covered. And to your point, Elana if they're not, then we you know, we're going to take a step back and say, did we get it? And we'll add to it if we need to. Yes. But for for sustainable infrastructure and public spaces. Exactly. It's beyond just the foundation of roads and the sewer, but it gives you kind of some of the asset management pieces and buildings, parks, those sorts of just throwing it out there. Y'all don't have to take it. That works for me. Sustainable infrastructure and open public spaces. Okay. I think core services is a big picture item that covers everything. The delivery. It's a practice, not a function area. And that practice of offering good services is in each of these categories. So I was having trouble separating it in this game or including it parallel construct. That's where I'm at. Let let's go down a level now and we'll, we'll worry about where where those go. Elana I was just wondering if talking about the delivery piece helps with making it a strategic priority, that it's about how we deliver them, as opposed to just writing core services up there. All right. Yeah, that's a good one. Accept bid exercise. Well, I'm leaving verbs out, but look, okay, let's talk about now what I want to get into for our next little bit is what are the success measures for public safety. So we'll just get some bullets out there and then we'll see if we need to synthesize and work through some things. But when you think about what is success look like? And think about it in a way that raymond and staff can say, okay, we get what you mean by this. So then initiatives and programs in conjunction with your committees can be created. What does that look like? Let's see. I think Olivia had her hand up first and then angelina. I'll just do one, okay? And let other people do more. I think improving the 911 response time. Yeah. Okay. Angelina, I was going to say that. And I think something we haven't really talked about in public safety yet is the like, do we have the resiliency to handle and to protect our constituents if there's a natural disaster or an earthquake, we don't really have like a metric for that because we have we haven't done the policy work to make sure the ci hub doesn't collapse and stuff like that. Okay. How would you say that? Give it to me in a short. Let me see. It. Yeah. Disaster response. But it's not preparedness, right. It's it's survival and ability to rebuild after a disaster. Right? That's correct. Yeah. I think Elana is hitting more what I'm trying to say because I sorry I don't know how to put this succinctly. I raised my hand before figuring out a way to say it for you in an efficient way. I'm sorry, is every portlander knowing their plan in an emergency and understanding how we will respond to save lives and rebuild? Yeah, like I don't know what the metric is when you create. Like if we address the ci hub or like the oil train before the earthquake happens, then the metric is that we saved the river. But there is no metric for that. If we don't do that work preemptively. So I'm not sure how to say that. I probably didn't get it exactly right. But I put resilience to natural disaster. Sure. I think that that encompasses it for right now. Maybe like resilience and recovery of natural disaster, like it's like the pre and post disaster response, just disaster response. Can we add any teas to that neighborhood emergency teams. There's a couple of words that are in the emergency management ether which are mitigation, meaning you're doing things ahead of time to deal with potential disaster. And then there's this other word which talks about more physical things or network type things called harvey. So you'll hear those words often in emergency response. But I don't, you know, just throwing those out there. That's so helpful. I think that's exactly more what I was going for. So I think yeah. Mitigation hardening. I think those are good options to. Okay. Very good. I forgot who was next. But I see mitch's hands. So I'm going to go there. The right responder to the right call type. Did you say time at the end of it. Type each type. Like that okay Steve. First of all, Mitch, I'm going to invoke Sameer rule that there is no wrong call. So it's not the right response to the right call. But I just wanted as a compliment to improve 911 response times. I would add solving crimes. Okay. Loretta. And then Olivia. Yeah. And I think that response time by our police, I was at a at a wilkes neighborhood association meeting, and there was a robbery at, at a house, and it took about 2.5 hours for the police to actually respond to it. So I think we also need to hold that system accountable to in terms of how they respond. And maybe it's it's lower on the response table. I mean, they're going to go to guns and violence and stuff first, but I think there is an expectation from our neighbors that police come when they when they call. And that's a little different than 911 response. Right? Yes. Okay. I just want to underscore that when you said response times, I thought you meant that when someone would actually show up. Okay. Do one or the other. Well, it's both it's both how long it takes for the 911 to answer the call and for the response. So I think the first bullet, second bullet, fourth bullet, it all means we need more police officers. But I that's not what it means. But. That was brave. We're going to let raymond worry about that. Tiffany. And then Elana. I don't know if I would say increasing public trust. Okay. Can I just add to that, Tiffany, that it's an intangible sense of safety and trust? I don't know how you measure that sense of safety that that the public has. Would you say? But he said vibes cultivation. I think there are ways to pull the community and check in and ask for feedback and Elana you. I think you had your hand up. Now that we have police response time up there, I'm feeling the need to channel my colleague Steve Novick because we do need improved response time on immediate items, on calls for actions in progress. And I think if we are giving direction to our city administrator with these priorities, we need to decide whether we want improved response time for every call or if we want improved response time for certain types of calls where you need an immediate response and waiting any amount of time is too much time. And if we're okay with somebody waiting two hours or even a day or two for a response when you come home and something's been stolen out of your house, but there's nobody there, and what you're actually waiting for is for somebody to come and look for fingerprints and catalog what happened and all of that. And I, I don't know if we want an improved time for that also. But when we start talking about staffing resources, there's a really big difference. If we want an improved response time for everything or just for the immediate in progress crimes, I think they already triaged like that. I think there probably is priority order. There is. And are we okay keeping that? Are we asking it to improve on everything, or are we asking for it to improve on specific things that we care most about, which is our ask when we put it up there? Sameer we're going to comment on that look. Confused? No, I agree with that first off, but I wanted to mention first do no harm as a goal. The thing we can control the most is what we as a city do. And so that's number one, is make sure we are not doing any of the harm. Okay. And that relates to equity. But it's I'd say there's an overlap but not the same thing. So very good I want if we can somebody come back to alana's question. But she when we put improved response time on the board, are we asking raymond and our dca back there to improve response time by police on every single call? Or are we asking for an improved response time on? I don't know how we are going to describe it, but active in progress, imminent threat calls, imminent threat calls I like let's hear from Sameer and then from angelina. And so first we should also have ambulances fire psr response times on this list. The other responders. Secondly to to this I think it is I think it's worth exploring. And I don't know if the solution is to say these types of calls or that or to actually relook at the priority order list. You know, there's a there's a nine tier. They use seven of them priority list. And what is up or down in that list can affect, you know, if you're on your way to a priority, whatever call and something higher comes up, you deviate what you're doing. And I think having a conversation around that is is worth, you know, worth engaging council with. Right now, it's entirely at the administrative level. So the answer yes is a short answer. But the long answer is I think I'm not sure if the best way to do that is for us to create a new classification system for what gets prioritized and what doesn't, versus just engaging with the administrative side on their existing priority order. Okay, I'm going to hear from everybody. I'm going, let's go, angelina. And then Dan yeah, I think I agree with Sameer that we need to include all the calls, not just police, but our response times for all the other types of emergency calls as well, which would include Portland street response for mental health crises and amongst other things, and fire response as well. I think what obviously we would want all the call response types to improve, but if we had to choose, if that's sort of what you're asking more, I would say the imminent threat calls are the most important. I think realistically, like with police, I think statistically, if they respond to an imminent threat call, they could potentially intervene if they're responding to your tv, got stolen from your house, are the police going to open a full blown investigation to get your tv back? That would be ideal. I don't think that from my understanding that police really solve that type of crime. And I think that kind of gets to steve's point of like our police actually solving crimes, or are they responding in documenting? Because that's two different things. Okay. I'm going to wait till I write anything down to kind of finish this off. Dan and then Mitch. Yes, to the question. And I trust that raymond, bob and their teams can provide us with what that looks like. I think that's what you all can do for us. I think more relational time in general would be something I'd like to see improved relational time, face time. People are really missing having conversations, not when they're responding to a crime, but actually seeing more of Portland street response out on the street, talking to people. The police out on the street talking to people. Fire out on the police talking to people. And candice, you're shaking your head. So you should tell me why. But I think it's really important that we have more relational time. Okay. And that would get us back to core services, whatever about improving our core services. Go to mention it and then we'll come to you candice okay. Because has his hand up there. Yeah. I wanted to respond to alana's question. I think for me it would be not a proportional increase in service or resource scaling to, to to preserve our existing distribution of response times. It'd be more trying to trying to respond much more quickly to the most acute issues that your house is on fire. You know, someone's waving a machete at you like a block away, like someone's having a mental health crisis, getting the right response out there within minutes. And then the other things are, you know, those are things you can we can prioritize as such. But that's because we don't have the I don't think we're gonna have the resources to scale all that to. So it's especially acute issues. Yeah. Before I write down, candice, you had your hand up there. Yeah. I mean, I'm shaking my head to dan's comments because it goes back to one of the things that I think we need to talk about and we're not going to be able to dive into, but I think is always the missing piece when we talk about this is how do you define safety? I don't want to be friends with police just for the sake of being friends with police, okay? I want them to do their job. I want them to respond when there's emergencies, and then I want them to move out of the way so that we can fill in the rest of the spectrum with all of the other things. Because a lot of people, it doesn't matter. They're not going to feel safe by seeing more police. And and if we are stuck with that, if the answer is always police, no, it's not. And I think that's it's just really hard to continue to define safety by one way. And, you know, I know that it's unpopular to say, but I don't really believe in community policing. I don't think that that's the job of police. I think their job is to do solve crimes and deal with emergencies, not to take kids to the grocery store. I just don't. So I think that that to me is a aye, Morillo is a low priority of what I want them spending their time on, especially because we have supposedly a crisis of their time. And I do not want to see police on the clock doing community engagement. That's not their job, and I don't want our kids having to engage with police. I think they can engage with plenty of other kinds of leaders. I don't want to spend the very precious, expensive dollar on time for police doing the work that they do not need to be doing. I have to respond because I. I didn't just say police, but that's the only the only division focused on everything else. I said everything else. So what I'm saying is I think we dehumanize our public safety responders, and I think them having more opportunity to be relational in the community is I can't understand why that wouldn't be good, because if we're talking about fiscal responsibility, I am tired of seeing us waste public dollars for police to go to events when that's not addressing the core public safety problem. If we agree that they are public safety, then let's have them do that. And the community safety aspect has so many other kinds of service providers, whether government or nonprofit, that deal with that. So again, this to me is about fiscal responsibility. I really do not want us wasting dollars building relationships with police when we are struggling for them to meet, to answer their phone calls. I need to be listened to. So I said, I said all those other things before that. So we were just adding to the list. So it's an and equation and did I not say and I mean I know it sounded like this doesn't matter. Well you're allowed. Well yeah. But this is a constant problem that Dan and I have and I'm frankly tired of it. You always say that you have to be listened to. You don't listen to me. So if I am going to make a statement, you always feel like you have to respond constantly on the dais. And so if this is a space for us all to share our opinion, please let me have my space. Granted, I just hope you did hear me earlier say all the other things I heard. You and I had my own opinion, and I'm allowed to respond without you having to say that it's about you. It's not about you. Okay, I have my opinion. And you did hear that I said beyond police, even though you only focused on police. I'm done. Thank you. Okay, let's go on to Sameer. So. I think when we're talking about core services, just to take a quick step back and then get into this, I think we've agreed that the core service, the the responsibility for defining a core service is in spaces like this, right? It's elected leaders defining those core services. I think we've all kind of come to that conclusion. And that's the premise for what I'm about to say here, which is that I think if we're talking about what the core services of the fire bureau, there's the fire marshal part, the prevention piece, there's responding to fires. Right. There's some things that they have to do that support that work. But the core mission is related to fire and rescue. That's in the name. Similarly with police, the core piece of it is responding to those calls and all of that. So when we talk about core services, going to walk around in the community with folks is not part of that. It's a thing that maybe in the supports there, you know, the secondary thing that supports it, it may not be I think that's what we're talking about here, but I will say that the city council did vote, and I think I don't know if the facilitators are aware of this. I want to remind them we did vote to actually deprioritize for overtime dollars, specifically, this idea of police being out in the community and prioritize things like human trafficking and other things for overtime, dollar expenditures. And you can see my press release from two weeks ago as to how they haven't been following that, but that's a that's a thing we've already decided and don't need to relitigate. On the use of overtime dollars. Having said that, I think there's a bigger conversation here that is worth having, and I still haven't seen the conversation because there's a similar conversation in terms of prioritization of calls with fire. There's a similar conversation with ambulances, a similar conversation with psr. It goes down the list. It's not maybe as acute or as high stakes to to everybody, but there is a conversation over how do we direct when we have multiple competing priorities? What are the places where bringing response times down matter? What are the types of calls coming into 911 that we need to respond to? And I also wanted to just put a quick, unrelated plug that the improved nine over 11 response times to me also includes the non-emergency line that the 911 folks also staff. Okay, we have a non-emergency response line, so I just don't need to be written down. I just wanted to fly that. So in terms of kind of grabbing that, are we do we need to have an now I'm I have a lot maybe a lack of words here but analyze our system for evaluating responses. Can you clarify what you mean by evaluating response earlier. Like, you know, you have you have already a protocol for what item gets responded to, etc. Are you guys saying that needs to be reexamined? I don't know if that's a I don't think it's the idea behind it needs to be examined. I think there's a conversation we should have with the administrative side over. Is a self-initiated call really a second tier priority? By definition versus is a you know, and the steve's brought up the welfare checks issue. Steve's also brought up the idea that if a burglary happened three hours before the person got home, and then they call it in, it doesn't matter as much. And so maybe it's not about the system needing to change, but maybe just where the items go in it. At the same time, I don't know that we should be doing that as a blunt instrument through a council resolution, without talking to the police officers and brass that are doing it. So maybe, you know, I've got it here. Improved response time of police, especially to acute issues. Maybe under that there that becomes a discussion on here's how we're doing it and what tweaks need to be made. All right let's see angelina. And then I see you Steve. Thanks I just wanted to say that we have the call time restructuring project going on right now. So bureaus are already investigating and getting an analysis for us on what the best procedure is, for which responders should go to which calls and how we prioritize that. So we don't have to make that decision, even politically. It can be from a factual basis about what the best responses are, and I think that's beneficial. But I do want to highlight something that I think Candace said, which is I think what what you were trying to say, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, is that not everyone feels the same sense of safety from the same sense of from the same responder because of a lot of complicated reasons. And our communities are not monoliths. Right. So you have some people don't feel safe with police. Some people do. Some people want to see police at community events, some people that would make them not want to attend the event. And so if we're talking about core services and like the thing that they have to respond to, that's part of what I why I said, I think it needs to be those immediate situations that require that. Yeah, that's very helpful. Steve, you had your hand up. Yeah. Three things. One, I actually I think that there's a lot of people who say we need to improve response times without giving gradations. So if there is a consensus among us, and I think there is that we agree there are gradations, and improving response times is more important to some things than others. I think that's important for our folks to know. So that's one thing. Second, I just have to say that Elana actually did a poll last year. We asked the question, is it important for people, for the police to build relationships in the community? And people were split. The it was like barely more than half said, yes, it is important. Sameer thought that the question was phrased in a way that pushed towards that. I didn't, but I mean, it was I will say that the one district people, a majority, clearly said no, we don't care about relationships with police was tiffany's and angelina's in mind. But it was over. I mean, it was not. I mean, you see the division in this council, there's also division in the public about whether that's important. And the third thing is, I just realized I'd like to see in the safety list fewer unnecessary deaths, because I think that's one of the core results we want out of what we do in safety is fewer people dying by gunfire, fewer people dying in car crashes, fewer people overdosing. Okay, let's go to Jamie and Candace and Loretta first. Councilor Novick. Thank you for saying that. That has been running in my head, that I have been trying to think of how to articulate that a core service, not necessarily just to safety, but to the city of as government, I guess, is how many people get home safely tonight and whether that means someone who dies on the way home in a car accident is shot in a drug deal gone bad, is arrested and sleeps the night in jail, or doesn't have a home to go to. Like that is a thing that I've been thinking about. Ultimately, how many people in our city are going to get home safely tonight. I need to also voice something. Colleagues, I am getting really frustrated already because this conversation is devolving the way that I thought it would, because we are supposed to be looking for areas of commonality, compromise, and everybody is instead defaulting to points of pedantic. No need to be heard. And I'm asking everybody to please stop defending yourselves. No one is attacking anybody. Let's try to find, rather than wordsmithing and getting down into the nuance, tiny details. If we can start recognizing that the point of this is to find commonality, and if we have a conflict, then let's just move on from that and find a path towards the common middle. Because I'm honestly pretty frustrated right now. Okay, thanks. We'll keep moving, Candace. Then we're going to yeah, move ourselves on to the next topic here. Yeah. I mean, I'm frustrated too. I think that what frustrates me is that people aren't allowed to just state their opinions and not have to, like, have to have this back and forth. Like, if I don't agree with you and I tell you, it's not about you, it's about the idea. And it's because I represent specific people that those are the ideas I'm bringing forward. So I don't appreciate having to have this. Who gets to have the last word on what's more important? Because that's what's happening. And that's where I get irritated because I am speaking from my experience. I'm speaking from the constituents that I came here to represent, and I do not need to be lectured about what my constituents need. I think one thing that I hear a lot in particular, that I talk a lot with my neighbors about, actually, because, you know, I always joke that our ho chat is kind of like a microcosm of Portland. I kind of see all the dynamics of like, their frustrations with the city and, you know, the mix of frustration and compassion and all of that. And I think one thing, something I talked about a lot on the trail actually, was how do we explain expectations of our systems? Right? So if somebody is like, I expect that when I call this happens. That is where a lot of the frustration happens. When I was sitting on the task force that the governor put on, I was on the public safety one. And this is a lot of what I talked about. And I talked with officers about like, how do you communicate, like what your actual capacity is in certain scenarios, right? So it's like, you know, if a robbery already happened, then it's like we're not going to rush to get somebody there to you because it already happened. And we're just there to document versus there's something else happening in the moment. And that lack of understanding, I think, causes more frustration than is necessary. And if people had a little bit also more of a way to triage their needs, because I think also we just create everything is just one blunt tool, one entryway for so many of our things. And we need to explain there are different entryways. I would talk to my neighbors a lot about like 311 because they were constantly calling 311, but it was they were doing it like, because that was the only tool that they felt like they had available to them, but it wasn't meeting their needs because it wasn't designed for their needs. And then they get frustrated. So there's something in here that like, we need to talk about, like communicating expectations around how you get responses that I think would go a long way in us redesigning our systems to to lessen the dissatisfaction people feel when they understand what each tool is for. So I'm going to put it here. We may decide later it should move or also goes under core services. But what I'm hearing you say is we need clear communication of services and so we won't lose it. Okay. Before we move on. You know, earlier you talked, had a great discussion about community safety. Most of what I'm seeing up here doesn't really fall under that. Do we want to say anything about, you know, in terms of measures, success measures that relate more to community safety? And I'm going to turn the page to see and I think Loretta or Sameer, can you say it again? Sorry. What's the do you want to say anything about success measures for community safety? Because y'all talked a lot this morning about kind of the distinction and the overlap in the between community safety and public safety. So that was great. But everything we've listed so far this afternoon related mostly to, I think, public safety. So I just want to make sure we're giving direction if there's anything okay. We need to call out on community safety specific. We've got it in terms of success measures, Loretta and Sameer and Mitch, I think we do need to to have a measure. I do a coffee every month. It's called coffee with a cop, and we've been doing that for about the last seven months. And there are about between 40 and 60 people who come there every month. And they are concerned about their own individual safety and things that happen in their community. And so I look at that as a measure of success because they keep coming back every month. New questions. And so I bring a police officer, captain foxworth, and he brings someone else on his team, and they come for two hours and they get to have build a relationship. So I think it is important, Steve, for constituents in district one to build a relationship with police. And they enjoyed this coffee with a cop. They've never had anything like this before. So I try to continue to do that and we focus on different issues sometimes for part of the meeting. But I think I measure the the attendance of the number of people that come and they keep coming back every month that that is something that they want and need because they didn't have that before. Okay, alright. Sameer. So I'll start by noting that some of the previous page does relate to that, and including what I said the first time, but I'll say, you know, having street medicine available 24 over seven is a success metric to me right now. It's not available having I'm sorry. Say it again street medicine. So we have two different types of that. We have the chat program and fire. And we have the Portland street response program. Violence prevention. And I think you can do violence prevention in several different ways. But the main three that I wanted to shout out, one is the very people oriented part. The office of violence prevention and ceasefire does. And I'm mentioning that not to say those programs are what we're talking about now, but for my colleagues who are familiar with those programs to know what I'm talking about, there's violence prevention on the playspace side, which is like safe blocks the crime prevention through environmental design or septet. And then there's the prevention of recurrence, which we've already talked about, which is investigating. And, you know, the person most likely to do a shooting is probably someone who's already done one more than the average population. If you catch them after the first one, you've prevented the second one, right? So those the way that we can go about all those things is a part of it. And the last thing I'll say is, is free third spaces, third places for people to go. And that's where the community centers piece comes into it, that if you have good stuff for people to do in a place, bad stuff is less likely to happen there. Okay. And, Mitch, you had your hand up. Yeah. I think in terms of metrics and this is going to get into whether or not we even do this line of work. But I mean, I think if you're if you're thinking about there's someone in your community who's unhoused is dealing with a, an acute crisis, an immediate crisis, being able to have a clear there's one number you call and then it's just it's pretty clear that folks just show up and there's like a seamless like, we've got you rather than this kind of confusing array of like, well, we got to call this other number. And then there's that person on that phone's going to call the other number, and then no one ever shows up that to me that's it feels like that's something we can measure. And then the community feels feels like they have a a basis for understanding whether we're investing in a way that improves that system. And that's I think that touches on community safety from both the perspective of the person who's experiencing the crisis as well as the people around them. Okay, so improved system of responding to people experiencing mental health crises or or just generally being unhoused. Okay. Oftentimes the same type of condition and experience. Okay. So just to clarify, you wrote improved system of responding. But I think, Mitch, were you talking about response only or also how you enter the system through the call, like having a single number to call? I was thinking about it's from response to just resolution and care, like it's that it's like there's no gaps for someone to fall through the cracks once you start that call. Okay? And that's kind of complicated. No, I I'll kind of synthesize it later for sure. Okay. I gotta move us on. Do you need a break? Are we ready to go? Can we do another one? No. Do another. Let's take an easy one. Oh, wait, there aren't any easy ones on that list. Let's just take the next one. Let's take housing and homelessness. And so again, you know, think what are the success measures that you would say, okay, raymond, these are the things we're wanting to see progress wise. And I'll just go here, here and there. Units built okay. Increased. Units built. Tiffany increasing the number of people that go from sleeping, living on streets, unhoused all the way to being housed and having data of along the way. So going that whole process, going across that whole continuum. Okay. Got it. Elana next Elana. I'm sorry. Increasing the number of portlanders who can find an affordable home in a convenient location to their work or activities. I guess I'll say work, school or activities. Okay, repeat it for me again, increasing the number of portlanders who can find an affordable home in a location proximate to their work, school, or activities. Okay. Got it. I think richard is here, and I'm sorry. Then. Dan okay. Yeah, I mean, I just put a plus next to it. Elana just said I was going to say something very similar, but that's we just put a plus to it and then we we can move on. Okay. Sameer. And then so I've, it's related and then I have a quick transit oriented development is the first thing I'd like to add to that. And I think that relates to what Elana said, which I would also agree with. But I wanted to ask and maybe it's we can circle back if you'd prefer this way, but if I can offer a friendly amendment from units to bedrooms, because I think our focus on units built has led to us overbuilding studios and underbuilding three and four bedroom apartments. So bedrooms. Yeah. Or it might be two separate metrics, increasing the number of units built so that more families have housing and increasing the number of units that cater not just to the singles and couples who we often see pop in our homeless population, but the people who we know need housing in our community who don't often show up in that data. Yeah, I think the the thing we're trying to do right now is, is, is measures of success, right? And so I think the thing we should be measuring is the number of people. And you can't measure that without a door to door count. But you can estimate pretty well with bedrooms. Okay. So that's why let's go to Dan and then Jamie and Mitch. A lot of our public housing that we have, affordable housing, are the time between when someone leaves and when a new person is too long. So our vacancy rates. Okay. Put down. So we're leaving our units, our precious units, empty. Too long. Okay. Jamie, permit issuance time. Ooh! That's very good. I mean, I've kind of lost my order. I think it was Mitch. And then Candace or Tiffany. Candace sustained quarter over quarter reductions in evictions filed for. Not for cause. Not for cause. Is that what you said? Okay, say that for me. Again, that was a very nuanced I'm getting very into the metrics. So sorry about that. That's what we need. Just a sustained reduction. Another the number of folks in our community who are being brought to court for eviction because they haven't paid the rent. Okay. Is that something that we're creating services at the city to affect right now, or is that something where you want us to do something new to affect it? It's something that I want us to evaluate as we identify the policies that we do have control over, what do we think the impact on that metric will be? So if we're doing good housing policy, we're going to do the thing that you said. And then I put a checkbox on it, which should then feed to fewer people being evicted. All right, Tiffany. And then Candace decreasing the number of people losing housing and falling into homelessness and increasing access to eviction protection, legal services. Okay. Is that similar to this? How's that different than that one sustained reduction in the number of people brought to court for eviction due to not paying rent. I think there's some connection, but I also there are a lot of people that don't understand that they can get support, and that is something that we we can support them in finding legal representation and support. Okay. So say it for me again, the number for homeless. And what was your second one? Increased connection to eviction protection legal services okay. All right. Candace. I don't think it's up there yet. Stabilized the affordable housing market. I know there's like rent, buy downs and stuff maybe up there, but I can't read it all now. But just overall, that portfolio, social housing, I thought Mitch or Jamie was going to say it. So I guess I'll say it. Social housing. And then, you know, it's somewhat up there, but I've been calling it gap financing for humans. Like there's just these like little spurts of help that we can give with our resources that go a long way. And I think we need to consider that. How would you say that increase. Just say get financing for humans, okay. Okay. Can I ask a clarifying question of Candace? Housing included limited equity co op because I would say let's let's get a limited equity co op in the next three years. Yeah, it actually includes that and a couple other things. I think that's why I use it because it's a pretty yeah, pretty broad Elana increase opportunities for affordable homeownership okay. Alright. Did we have improved retention rates, retention rates. I don't think we have improve housing retention rates. Is that what you said? All right. And then Steve and then Sameer, I just wanted to underscore what I think is the importance of what Sameer said, transit oriented development, because transportation is the second largest expense of the typical family after housing. And if we can plan a city where people can live in an affordable home and don't have to drive, then we make the city overall more affordable. And in fact, there's some cases where you might be able to house. Having a house here might be somewhat more expensive than having it there. But if you can reduce your transportation costs, the overall expense to the family is lower. So I just I was really glad that Sameer said that and just wanted to underscore it. Sameer you had your hand up? Yeah. Thanks, Steve. Reduce, reducing and repairing displacement. And here, I mean, not only our legacy of redlining and gentrification and all that, which I absolutely do mean, but also ensuring that elders are able to age in not necessarily the same home, but at least the same neighborhood, the same area, ideally the same home, if they'd like to like anything that keeps people where they want to be is, I think, good. Okay. Yeah. Very good. Okay. It's a great list. I often I will say okay, administrator, just give you a direction. Anything you have you want to ask about. Nothing I want to ask about. But what I will say as we come back to council with how we plan on achieving this, there is going to be some dollars associated with this, so we're going to have to make some decisions as we go through this as well. Elana are we in this process going to take these lists and prioritize them? Because we we weren't asking about consensus on all of the things on this list. The way we started to on some of the earlier lists. So before mr. City administrator, you go through and start to design programs, I think it's important for you to know from us either what are the priorities or what has the most and strongest support. Those might be different things and we haven't had that part of the conversation. Yes, that would be beneficial. Yeah, we'll we'll use mentimeter for that here in just a minute. I think maybe we'll try that. Or we can use dots. We've got dots. So everybody loves dots Mitch. Then we'll then we'll either move on or take a break. Yeah. I just wanted to say, you know, there's a lot of stuff that I'm very specifically trying to champion through council right now, but I've been trying to do this exercise at a pretty high level of generality and metrics. And so to your point and to your kind of question, city administrator, the there will be dollars that we would have to execute. And so I, I'm going to be really keen on making sure that one of our strategic priorities is setting our city up bts in particular, to kind of identify what is the fastest way that we can move from point a to point b on any kind of code. Land use changes, anything that we can unlock without any direct dollar expense. The ability to develop and consider transit oriented development in an easier way. So we don't take six years of process because that's extremely costly. We can't afford to get that time back. So that's kind of how I've been showing up in this discussion. Of course, I have very specific interests in housing. Of course. Okay, let's it's 220. Let's take about a ten minute break. Come back at 230. And we'll either kind of keep doing these or we'll, we'll do our priority of these and then take the next one. So ten minutes and hillary and I'll decide how we want to plan this. The committees are already working on other things that are important. What do you think about handing these lists to the appropriate committees to have them determine what moves forward? Okay, that's what I wanted to know. We're not pushing. We're wanting your opinion. No, no. Okay. All. Can you take over. You're going to get this next one and then I can get him in. And. Lori is putting into mentimeter the items you listed. And we'll take a break after 1 or 2 more of these, let you rank them. We'll give you five votes. You get to vote for your top five. And that way we'll we'll see the ranking of them. That'll help. They'll help raymond. We won't lose any of those ideas, but they'll be ranked. Okay. So now we have about an hour and a half. We've got three more to do. And then the rankings. The rankings won't take too long because you can vote as fast as your fingers work. But. And let me just say, you're doing good. It's not easy. It's not easy. And you know, you get everybody gets feelings ruffled every once in a while. It's okay. You're just human. We're all just human and and it's hard work. If it was easy, everybody would do it. But you took on hard jobs because you want to make a big difference and and you're doing just fine. So let's take on the economy. What now again, let's we might have gotten a little too granular on some of those. So it's okay. But let's keep it up at the high level. I think success measures. What would you look at, say, 2 or 3 years down the road from now and say, we've been successful, one of the measures and we'll go with the first hand up Sameer. So I'll say, I'll say two, one is reduced in reduced inequality, okay. And the other is a higher percentage of portlanders who have a percentage of portlanders have living wage jobs that have, let's say, say it again, a higher percentage of portlanders who have. It's on. Yeah, a higher percentage of portlanders who have living wage jobs. Got it. I think it's on word now, right when I finished. Okay, Mitch, I think I saw your hand and Elana and and Dan. Yeah, I would, I would echo just growth and wages, particularly at the bottom end of the income distribution growth and real wages. I also would like to see commercial rents come in line with reality. So small businesses can afford to operate in this city. I want to put more affordable. Is that fair? Okay. Elana. I'm going to second the higher percent of portlanders with living wage jobs, but I want to make sure that we're not just using an outsourced calculator for living wages, that what we're actually talking about is the ability to afford to live within our city limits. Yes, I think that's really important that that's tied to living in the city. I would like us to have a higher standard for wages for. When we when we subsidize and company or hire a contractor and say you have to pay average median wage. I would like to change that to a living wage. So a higher subsidy for or a higher standard for wages for contractors. We do business with. I think that's measurable. And I think my third one is similar enough to mitch's that I'll leave yours around commercial spaces for small businesses. Okay. I think Dan and then Steve. Yeah. Business license tax revenues up increase. And less exits, a decrease in exits of businesses established in our city for the last for ten years plus. Say that one again for me. Fewer exits or closures of established businesses that have been in our city ten plus years. Okay. Tiffany. And then Loretta increased resources and support for small businesses. And also that those supports that there's an awareness of those that everyday portlanders understand that they can access those if they're starting a small business or they run one. Okay. A second. All right. Thank you. I think it was 43% of the storefronts had left in downtown Portland, and I would consider our economy getting back on track if we could reduce that number at least by half. Okay. So do you mean reverse that trend and raise the number that increase the number of storefronts that come back to downtown Portland? Okay. Sameer and and Jamie or Jamie Sameer. Thanks. Lower incidence of childhood poverty and lower incidence of poverty related crime. Okay. And Sameer. Yeah. Broad based engagement with small businesses, which I think includes dan's refrain of doing exit interviews, but also while they're still here, we do a good job of talking to a few business owners, but we don't talk to the smallest of our businesses and particularly the most marginalized community members who happen to be in business leadership. Yeah, like food cart owners, communities of color and all that. Okay. All right. Angelina, you had you had your hand up. Yeah. Jamie's comment actually made me think about decreasing domestic violence rates as a metric for measuring the economy, because we know that people have to stay in domestic violence relationships because they can't afford to live on their own. Dennis. I think that sense the pandemic, you know, as it relates to the economy and business, things have been tricky, right? As the world has changed. And one thing that I noticed in the pandemic is that there were a lot more neighborhood business hubs growing. I know, you know, we're all stuck at home, right? So people were going more to their coffee shop down the street than the one that's by their workplace because they're working from home, for example. And so I think that it's important that we diversify and create new economic centers beyond the downtown. Gateway is a perfect example of that. We're talking a lot about what that looks like, but I just received so many, you know, reports or whatever strategies, efforts from the city that center around downtown. And I just think that's the past. I don't think we're looking forward enough. And I think there's so many opportunities with the lloyd center, with gateway, where we can create more business hubs instead of relying on downtown being our only business engine. Okay. Very good. Sameer. And then Steve and Mitch reducing and ideally eliminating food deserts. We'll see. Who is it? Steve, Steve and Mitch and then Dan following up on. Oh sorry. Kind of following up on what Candace was saying. I was going to say increasing foot traffic both downtown and in our neighborhood business districts by both visitors to Portland and residents in Portland. Portland. All right, Mitch. And then, dave. Yeah, I think you should be able to kind of go to any park or any just sort of major center of pedestrian life and be able to get a hot dog whenever you want one. So just make it easier for that micro enterprise. You're way down there in the weeds. Well, but I also think it's a systems level kind of thing because we've we've got a culture of saying no to stuff that's like emerging and we need to get to a culture of yes, specifically to my policy idea, micro business, micro entrepreneurial ism. Okay, that that's alright, neither can I. When you can't spell it, you just abbreviate it and then you figure somebody will figure it out. Yeah. Increase a new businesses and track them for ten years. Correct. Track. Track track and then hotel vacancy rates. They're very we have the highest in the country. If any city. Okay. Anything else on economy? There's a few. Lower the percent of household income going to housing and child care combined. Okay. Say it again. Lowering the percent of household income going to housing and child care okay. So. Okay. Jamie Mitch, I want to get back to pre-pandemic attendance levels at live performance. Yes. So this isn't about hot dogs. I swear. It's developing a world class traded sector export industry of sustainable fibers. Manufactured wood products like cross-laminated timber to lower the production cost of housing, both in Portland and also elsewhere for world class production production complex like center of excellence for sustainable fiber industry for building materials. Okay. Sameer Candace. Yeah, so one is a strong waterfront economy. And I think more broadly, utilizing the natural features and really ensuring that those are are humming along and the businesses that that relate to those. I'm referring to the parks having having a hot dog carts at the down by the waterfront, of course, all good hot dogs. We it was coming this whole all the whole day has been building up to hot dogs. We finally got that. It's what the people paid to see. The other thing is, is tourism. Having having those big events that skip us, stop skipping us. And that's whether it's yeah that's conferences. It's taylor swift. Shout to taylor swift, come to come to Portland. That's that. Everybody uses taylor swift as an example. Beyonce two of course. Is this our official plea to taylor swift to come to this is this is definitely not official. Taylor, please come here. Taylor, if you're watching Candace, you had your hand up. Yeah. I would like. I mean, I don't know that we've said much yet about workforce development, so I'll add that in there. But particularly I think we need more pre apprenticeships. There's so there there's so many opportunities to kind of create these pipelines into the union, jobs that aren't just going straight to apprenticeships. It's something that I explored when I was at verde. We were working on a pre-apprenticeship for ductless heat pumps that would lead into the sheet metal workers union to do full hvac. So I'm just like, what are those baby steps? I think sometimes we get so caught up in, like, we got to do the big thing first. But there's actually lots of little small steps, including apprenticeships, to lead into those good paying union jobs. Okay. Yeah. Similarly, employment opportunities for people who are coming out of homelessness, if we agree that homelessness is economics, you it doesn't matter how cheap your rent is if you don't have a job. Can I add a terminology to that? Yeah, it's something that I've heard brandy westerman say and I've been using, which is called try and fail jobs, particularly for folks exiting homelessness, because if you've been, you know, chronically homeless, dealing with all the millions of things that you do when you're homeless and you have to do a 9 to 5, even if it's like a fast food joint, if you miss a shift, you get fired, right? So there need to be more jobs, kind of like the glitter program. I think they do a good job of modeling this where they know that, like it's going to take some time, that maybe you're not going to be on time all the time, or maybe you're going to have some mishaps, but that doesn't mean that you're irredeemable and therefore get fired. So they're called try and fail jobs for that reason okay. All right. Last one. And then we got to move on to the next area. I'll give Elana and Tiffany a growing industrial employment sector. I might say a growing sustainable industrial employment sector. All right Tiffany stronger rights for domestic workers. Okay. All right. So I'm going to tear these off. Take them over to my friend. You want to just take pictures okay. There's three pages of them. We're gonna have a problem with tomato on this one. Well, you can you can cut them down. Okay. There's one. Okay. Got it. We got to keep it. You can probably send this off. I'm sorry I hit you there, okay? Core services. And delivery systems. What would make you look at this area 2 or 3 years from now and say that's success. We've made some success. Loretta. And then Jamie. Candice. My two. For the people in the back, I got to cover increased sidewalks with cip, miss priya, the sidewalk improvement and paving project. Jamie meeting national standards for permit issuance. Okay. It's me. Okay, we'll go Elana I was next. Next. Okay. After Jamie. Okay. I'll just put it as a big bucket. It's a lot of things, but community engagement, you know, it's it means a lot of things. But I think that's an important bucket around like delivery of services and then navigational delivery. Navigational improvement. Tell me what you mean by that. Hold on. What am I trying to say? Improve our navigational services. Is that how I'm trying to say. Yeah, it's like 3 in 1 and all those other things, but, like, just how people navigate the city, it's just too confusing, right? And that's a big frustration. People here, it's kind of also what I was saying earlier around like people don't know what resources should provide what things. And so then they get frustrated. So we just need more communication about what is available, what kinds of tools are at their disposal and helping people navigate those. And that that's part of community engagement too. Okay. Good. Thank you. Oh, Elana. No, I think we went along. We said we wanted parks under this bucket. So an improved registration system for recreational programing, increased swim lesson capacity so that every Portland kid who needs swim lessons can register for swim lessons and increased parks camp capacity so that there are more opportunities for affordable day camps for working families across our city. Okay, swim lessons three separate things from lessons availability. Is that what you're what you're saying? Increased swim lesson capacity and increased parks summer camp capacity. Got it. Okay, Sameer and Olivia, I want to build off of something that candice talked about, which is now the communication side that that basically that we're in alignment with our public because we've conveyed expectations of what constitutes a core service so that people know, you know, what they can expect realistically and what can't be. And I think this also relates to steve's earlier point about which roads we can afford to maintain versus not. I have one more after that. Okay. Community centers being available, open more of them as well. But places for people to go. Such a good thing that somebody else touched earlier about third space. This is one of those, Mitch. And we'll go back to Olivia, I think. I think that if I think if we were to provide like clearinghouse services that like right now, developers need to rely upon on their own, like architectural services, design services for anyone who wants to either open up a preschool for all facility or, you know, wants to do that residential infill project, and they can just choose from a menu of different plans that are approved. Just investing upfront in that as a central service could go a long way. Yeah, I just put improved development services process. Perfect. Let's do that. I think Olivia and then Dan and then back to jane. I think transportation is in here, right? Is that right? So I want to increase infrastructure will increase the percentage of streets that are in good condition. I think you want to wait. Let's say okay, okay. I don't want to lose it. But let's see. Jamie, I think we're to you. Well, I'm thinking I don't think mine might be infrastructure. I was going to say specifically safe, clean, affordable, delicious water delivery. Is it infrastructure or is it core service? Because that's where we're at. Let's we have a we'll save it for infrastructure. We'll talk about the lake later. Angelina. And then Dan, I was going to say I don't know. And maybe this is also infrastructure but reasonable rates for our different public utilities. Alright Dan, I've been ignoring you but now I'm to you. It's okay. Revive and support our neighborhood associations and the neighborhood business associations as well. Neighbor I'm going to put them both because we're going to run out of room. Oh, I've I've brought the dots. Yes. Make sure people know which services are actually county services. They can blame them for myself. Yeah I'm going to put that under communication. Yeah. Okay. Anything. Now let me ask this question and don't take this in the wrong way. But you know, we talked a lot in the interviews and some even this morning. It is I'm going to call it the excellence in good board governance. A part of this. It. Okay. I'm going to write it in I'm coming to you Elana. All right. Yes. I'm not sure how we want to capture this one. So I'm going to ask my colleagues to maybe help. But when you talked about excellence in governance, I have also been thinking about where excellence in service provision broadly requires commitment to our workforce. And when our workforce believes that this is the best possible place to work, we can retain the best possible employees who can then offer the most excellent services. And so I'm not sure if it's in this category or if it's somewhere else, but I think somewhere we have to note that if we want to provide the best possible services, we need to have a commitment through stability, through. Meeting the needs of our workforce as well. And I don't know how we want to capture that, but I think it needs to be up here. So so I hear a lot of city councils will say it this way recruit and retain high quality employees. Sure be the best possible city to work for so that we can recruit and retain high quality employees. There's not enough room to put all of that in mentimeter, but but if we're doing stickers, no, I don't want to use stickers. Okay, be the best. Place to work. So. And you're exactly right. I mean, you know, you know that saying it's not the x's and o's, it's the jimmy and joe's, you know, and that's so true. The city manager in my city where I live, he has a great saying. He says, if you hire the right person, they'll do a thousand good things you could never predict. And if you hire the wrong person, they'll do a thousand bad things you can't prevent. And we've all been there, right? So you're exactly right. Okay. What else in core services, Dan? Make our council chambers more welcoming and safe for those in descent. All right. All right. I'm bringing them to you, hillary. She's probably keeping up with me now. Last one. Then we vote. I like your face. I got faith in hillary. She's the best. All right, infrastructure. And I know there's more to that word, but I'm just writing it up here. This way. All right. A couple of you wrote things down. We're going to start with you, Olivia, and then Jamie. Then we'll get you. Okay. I would say that we need to increase the percentage of local streets and arterials that are in good condition. We need to reduce the number of potholes that falls under that streets. And what else did you say? And arterials the local streets and arterials in good condition. We need to reduce the number of potholes. We need to increase the resources for transportation infrastructure. All right Jamie, you had one. It was a safe clean. Oh yes. Affordable delicious drinking water. I was like, wait, where are you going? We love Portland water. Water in every tap and out of every toilet. It's good. It's very good. All right. What else under infrastructure matters to you. Sameer. And then Elana. I'm not sure. Actually come back to you. I'm not sure if this fault belongs in the last one. Okay. Yeah. Elana. Retain our level of open space, which means that we will need to increase our level of public open space as our buildings get denser. Okay? Retain an increased level of open space. Is that it? Let's see your hands up. I'm just going to go around the table here. Steve. Raise 45 to $50 million a year in order to keep our major streets in their current mediocre condition. That's pretty much what we got there. No, mine is a much more modest goal. Not improve the in good condition, maintain in their current mediocre condition. We gotta find right that find 45 million. Yes to keep streets mediocre. I've never heard of more put on a bumper sticker goal. All right. Dan. Yeah. Increased tree canopy, especially in east Portland. And then complete the merger. The one the one water merger between water and sewer. Which most portlanders thinks already happens once they get one bill. Yeah. Water merger. Can I just say it that way? Sure. Okay. Let's see. Do you have one? Angelina? Yeah, I was going to say harden a bike and pedestrian areas and this is going to be a really big one. But addressing fuel storage along the Willamette. If it's shorter, you could just put c.e.hubb. Okay. Mitch, let me turn the page here. Okay. Go ahead. Yeah. Just for the the record, put a check mark next to c.e.hubb. But I know you know that. Yeah. I would also say this council should adopt a legislative agenda that champions for local, transit oriented and surface street dollars and not as much for mega projects that I would personally call boondoggles for local surface streets and transit. Okay, and fewer multibillion dollar boondoggles. That's good. That that'll capture. Yeah, I'm going to I'm going to every person had their hand up. I'm just coming around the bend I got a bunch. So I'll leave the boondoggles till later. But because I, I would love to have a hierarchy of plans so we everybody knows what governs what right now. There's always a plan that we passed 40 years ago that nobody remembers. That comes out only when the conversation is 80% of the way over. And it's like, oh, but does that deal with this plan or does it comply with this plan? I'd love to improve our hard transit infrastructure, by which I mean light rail. Okay, so you can't backslide on light rail. Like you can backslide on a bus route. And finally, emergency routes, specifically out of the north Portland peninsula. What do we need to do with it? We got no bridges that are going to hold up to a major earthquake. Out of the neighborhoods on the peninsula. Okay, shout out to donna cohen. And travis nelson. Loretta, you have one. Okay. Olivia. Okay. For Sameer, I think a rowboat in every garage. But I was going to say replace 100 year old water pipes, but I think it's really expedite asset management finance plan. That's really our number one plan. Hierarchy. Thank you okay. Tiffany increasing bike mode share. So that's the percentage of people commuting on bikes to school to work. And then that goes hand in hand with also decreasing car traffic on our greenways. If you want people to be biking more they also need to feel safer. Yeah. Was there candice. Equity and anti-displacement policies to determine our infrastructure resources. And more public restrooms. Okay, go back to your first one, equity and anti-displacement policies. And you had an explanation for them. Yeah. I'm sorry candice, go back to the one equity and anti-displacement policies and you had a reason for it. Yeah, I was just saying, like, to determine how we deploy our our infrastructure resources. Right. Very good. Mitch. Anything. I mean, Jamie, anything you want to add? Elana. I want to add to samir's comment about escape routes, if you're willing, because I had written down, ensure every neighborhood has safe egress in a disaster. And I think it's more than just the official emergency escape routes. But can everybody in every neighborhood get out? And then when you said improve light rail, was that expand infrastructure, or was that just improved the infrastructure that we have? It's expanding, but it's it's it's in it's expanding on the rail side, but it's improving on the overall transit side. I think that we should look at bus routes that are likeliest to get cut, but are high ridership and make them rail so that the state can't screw us. I had written down more max lines, so I'm wondering if that's okay. That's what you have there. Perfect. Purple line st. Johns to the airport I'm in. Okay. All right. Dan revenue. Yeah. Allow us to spend our sdc fees on deferred maintenance. Yes, yes. Oh my god, you guys agreed with me. Geez. Sdc funds. On deferred maintenance. Okay, so let me just say real quick because we take a a stand up breaks, we can make a shift. Okay? Sameer. Okay. So reducing our utility rates to averages, the regional averages. Yeah we have I think we put it under related. Okay. Exploring a public electrical utility. And building the lid over I-5 and getting the interstate bridge replacement done, which our multi-trillion dollar projects, but not boondoggles, but only that not ten mile widening project. No, no ten mile widening project. Yeah. So say for me more briefly, I-5 cat, I-5 cap and I-5 bridge. Sameer while you're on it, we could improve the look when you drive into Oregon. The contrast between welcomed Oregon and welcome to Washington is quite a contrast. The waterfront. Yeah, Dan, I've suggested we go out there and just do some planting and cleaning the three of us. I'll invite the state rep to come. Okay. Real quick. I hate the neighborhood association. Something. We're going to take a quick five minute break and we're going to finish on time. We're going to vote and you'll see it. But I want to remind you, we won't lose any of your ideas. So, you know, some of you had ideas that are not going to make it in the top five. Okay. Because this is noisy, but we're still gathering. It'll be a part of the report. So they'll be ranked. So even if it's not the top five, doesn't mean that idea is going to be lost. But your your colleagues are speaking saying these are the priorities. And then, you know, we will at a at a point we'll, we'll work with you because obviously you've got committees that have some, some work to do with some of this. So, you know, this is not the end of the journey. That's what I'm trying to say. So this is the start of the journey. And some of these ideas are going to evolve and get better and get get some more traction. And some of them will maybe fall by the wayside because you think it's not as big of a priority as we thought, okay, let's take five minutes and we'll come back and have your voting fingers ready. Good work guys, very good work. Okay. That's so the the one that is probably the one that went on to it. There's 24 under economy. And so that may be we may have to do sticky else we do two separate ones. And then try to combine the top 12 and then have them rank those, which is going to take some time. So it might be better to just do dots on that. Okay. So let me finish this one. Off. And the other one is. On Elana. But that's okay. We've got a little bit of oh there she is right behind me. Ta da. Okay. So we actually we've got this populated in the system. It's going to pop up in your phone if you go back out to the qr code. It's actually not just voting. You get to rank them. So you'll slide them around in your phone and tell them which one's number one. So you get to vote on all of them in rank priority, and then it'll populate where you ranked them. Okay. Cool. Yeah. Sorry y'all. Y'all had a lot of things. Yeah. Is there a limit on that. Every single one of them. You get to rank and you should be able to slide them. Yeah. Up or down. Yes. Yep. And I had to abbreviate a couple of them. So I apologize if it didn't capture every single word. But we have those written on the flipchart. So when we give you the report it'll be in there. You can, but you don't have to read all of them. Yeah. So you should slide them into the order in which you think they are priority. So if there's one that you think should be a priority, can we put it on the list or not leave it at the bottom. Just push it to the bottom. Yeah I think you have to slide them okay. We'll see when we do this okay. Yeah. Oh so I guess you don't have to. But then does it let you. Oh then. Yeah you can do that. Oh yeah. We can move it out of the ranking. So. Yes. Yeah. And then okay drive it out of the ranking if you've already put them in. So I had to do it on the fly. So I'm sorry I don't have all the instructions. On that. And then it should just auto populate every. Oh yeah. Yeah yeah yeah. Because. That it's like we have to get somebody else. Okay. Oh there they go. Yep. Okay. Yeah. You can tie it back in time. So. And then your chickens I don't know. If the stickers I'm going to have to use those. His is not working. Yeah. Have you cleared like gotten completely out of it. Cleared the whole program out and then started over. I think that's what I did. Yeah. By accident. Apparently not. You know, you want to solve. Your priorities. Okay. Please apologize for it. Orders it by how many people said it was one, two, three. So I'll get the back end report and it tells me who ranked one, two, three. And so I'll. I'll give that to you all. Yeah. Basically. Yeah. Did it work that time? I was going to hand you my phone. If it didn't see if that would work. Yes. It'll have all the data in the background. So if let's say everybody put something at number two which pushed it to number one will be able to tell. Yeah, it's I, I don't think it has any indication. I think it's just when I put the questions in. Nobody can you. But it has a whole back end that I'll share. It. Things are getting real. Getting loopy. It's getting loopy. Now. We were talking about sleeping obstructive. Yeah. We're giving you that. Open. Moved. I think if you heard today. It jumped for some reason to that side. Do you see that that was because you had the join code in the url at the top. Oh. So I was taking that off so that people online can't just join. Gotcha, gotcha. Oh but I see now I got you. So I'll go move that. That's it's okay. And you're still waiting for a couple more. Good. I think. Yeah. That's right. Okay. One more. One more. Oh there we go. Okay. So improve emergency response times 911 response times. Violence prevention, disaster mitigation solving crimes. So these are all in ranked order which I think will help inform when things come back potentially to you all for policy discussions. I have all the back end that'll tell you just how many people said you know which ones. But this gives us the the upfront look at which ones ranked the the most highly according to you all. Oh it doesn't, it's just the design. And I had to add so many lines. It just changed a bunch of colors. But I have all the systems smart enough to say this one got eight number ones. This one got four number ones. So we'll have more data for you to make sure that the representation of of their ranking is correct. Okay. Which one do we do next on. Got it. Yeah. Okay. Here's the next one. Housing and homelessness. It's not. You watch it play out like a game. Oh typos. Sorry about the typos. All right. Bed wrong. Right I'm sorry. The very first one. Exactly. Hey. Transit oriented. Coming up. Hey. Oh. Keelan it. Makes a lot. Oh, yeah. You should see us in the evening meeting. We've just invented a new unit. Bedrooms. Perfect. So we should have had council after dark as a primary. Item to good governance. I consider that the epitome. We all know where this whole time sleeping crap. Seriously, I thought. Cocktail. Oh. One more. Oh, okay. Okay. Increase in housing units in bedrooms. Decrease in those falling into homelessness, but also connection connecting to services, prevention services, potentially transit oriented development. Stabilize affordable housing market. Reduce permit issuance time. Increase the number who can afford homes located near, reduce eviction cases and and so on. Okay. Now of course some of these are interrelated. So it's not expected that just because we we take up number one first that we would not consider number whatever if it if it's part of the equation. And so all of that will come back as it makes sense. Because again on the fly we were, you know, kind of just trying to get general understanding of where you stood. So, okay, housing and homelessness, the next one, before we go back to the old fashioned way of doing business. Core services and delivery systems, give us those. Real time. Small groups of things. That time. Sometimes it's just like this. Usually the body has a large. Component. So state law in texas makes you open it at the beginning and allow someone to give us an email workshop, because. They are here. Oh, we're so close. So close. Is that okay? Excellence in governance number one. Yay, y'all. That means that that conversation can can start moving forward. How do we how do we be the best we can be in this system that we're we're building as we go registration system for parks and rec programs? I think that was registration. Was that right? Okay. He he abbreviated it on I might have missed it. Reasonable utility rates development services process, customer experience, sidewalk coverage, community engagement and down the list okay. All right. So we've got our rankings on those and this system. And now we're going to do the old fashioned way on the other two that had like 24 things each and wouldn't fit in this system. But we'll bring all of that back to you in in a concerted report. Yes. All right. So I had to put them behind you. You can see there's three for economy and then there's three for infrastructure. So you're going to get your own sheet of dots. You have to turn this into me and candice. If more than eight dots are missing, we got a scandal. Because you can only vote. You can only vote for things. I'm just telling you. All right, so here's the numbers. Look at the screen so you can see the numbers. I was just teasing okay. Your number one. Your number one priority is the orange. So when you look at you say that's my number one priority. Put an orange dot by it. Red. That's it. Dark. Yeah. I don't know why they didn't give us better colors. I probably I got the cheap ones. Yellow is your number two priority. The Green is your number three priority. And then the orange. Putrid orange. They're at the bottom. Tangerine. Yeah. Yeah. That's your fourth. And that's all you get to vote. You only get to choose four priorities for economy, for priorities for infrastructure. Now again, we won't lose any ideas. But you only get to vote on that way okay. Questions for me. You don't really have to turn them in. I trust you guys. You anonymous we can watch. Yeah, yeah, it is on camera. You should, you should remember that. You get you get eight total dots. But you gotta use that gives you two sheets. Nope. Here we go. All right. Read em and weep. Put the dots kind of by the bullet point, if you can. That'll help me. Remember what your numbers are. Right? Yeah. Maybe I should bring that over. This way. So if you forget the scoring, here's the the chart. Everybody know you get to use eight dots. Okay. Eight total. Yeah. You get to use eight total dots. For services. Well this one is. Yeah. Oh so we can take this one out I just got a lot easier for you. And remember you can use four dots on infrastructure, four dots on the economy. Well you could get somebody to trade them to you. Give me one of my. This is core services. And this one was a core services. I actually only got an infrastructure. But I think you've already put it up because they said yeah. Yeah those three are economy. I know, that's why I had to use dots. You always have to have a low tech plan. Oh what happened to that? No, it didn't crash. But there were so many of them we couldn't get it into Novick again. Good for us. So they were just list of all but but but I was like, I told him, raymond, we would take these and we would consolidate them, you know, but it's better to let them feel like they got up there. For city council last night. You know, you probably none of them had to do with core services. No. Not one. I just said. I gotcha. All right. So so we will do takeaways and we're done. Okay. Let me get it. Oh. Oh that of all people. Are you you can't take me seriously, Candace. I can't take it seriously. So, hillary, will you score it and tell them how it rates? I'll do the math. Yeah, I was going to say, you know, I'm not a math person. All right, turn them in. I gotta count you. Whoa. Look at what she used an extra one. Did you? Put that to. Did you share them? I, I don't know, I don't know, it's all right. What do you do? It's all right. She's an attorney, I trust her. I'll take your thing. Yeah. And the commission on that? Yeah. F4. Yeah, yeah. Oh, cool. What do you got? Some. Nothing. Nothing? Yeah. We'll probably go to dinner. Sometime. Five, 730. Okay. Not too bad. Yeah. I knew it would be like saying this kind of stuff where I'm, like, going early. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, that's like. That's like, you're on, you're on. You. I get it. I tortured you. Yeah. It's just having narrowed enough that I only felt like I was killing three babies. Oh. Now we're going to make you choose publicly which of your children would like to go. That's to me, fedora wearing dies at the around the room. Oh, yeah? Yeah. Oh. You think he was wearing, like, a desperate like that? Yeah. Yeah. So I don't know. So now we're like so so hillary remember you got to go in reverse order. Like how you give points to it. Yeah. Oh yeah I've made that mistake where I did. And they're like, what? Okay council we'll we're going to wrap it up here. After olivia's finished voting. Tiffany where's Tiffany. She may have stepped out. Oh okay. Yeah. There she comes. Alright. So while while hillary is tabulating them I want to say just a couple of words to you and we'll wrap this up and she'll come back and tell us where we are. So first of all, I, I want to tell you, I'm very proud of you, I really am. I mean that I work with lots of councils. Our company does, I don't know, 50 of these a year. And hillary and I do the majority of those. And you guys have done a lot of great work. And and there was a lot of people that said to us, some of them are around this table, we're not going to get anywhere. But you did. You did, and I'm proud of you and I. I'm not surprised. I came into the day after the interviews and I was like, yo, they're going to be just fine. And you have. And so I appreciate it. I know it's not easy and this is not by any means the hardest thing you have to do. You have a lot of hard things in front of you, I know that, but kudos to you for the hard work today. And what I'd like to to do is let you know. We'll create a report, we'll capture all of what's said. None of what you said will be lost. It'll get a report that we will send to you and and to raymond. And then, you know, you probably have some more slow conversations about each one of these priorities ahead of you, which will include your your subcommittees. But you've got a great you've made some great strides today. And so one of the things we like to do, just to kind of wrap things up, raymond, I want to let you say anything you want to say. We'll kind of wrap that up, but I want to let you share if you have a brief takeaway for the day, you don't have to and you can't be long. But if you want to share, hey, here's my takeaway or one of my takeaways from the day. We want to give you that chance. So anybody want to start? All right angelina, I feel like this was really helpful. And it did make me see that we have more aligned areas than I think we normally do. And I wish that we could do this without being filmed, because I think that we could have. I think because we're always kind of performing when we're up on the dais. It changes the dynamics a bit. But I think that here it was a little bit less that way. And so I think that's why we were able to have those better conversations. But honestly, I just I did really appreciate the exercise at the beginning, just getting to hear more personal things about each person. I appreciated getting to know more about you guys as people and it was very meaningful. So appreciate you. All right. Thank you. Somebody else all right, Steve, I've kind of been a question. Comment is nowhere near as painful as I thought it was going to be. The. A question for the council president when you said councilors assemble, was that a deliberate reference to the mighty morphin power rangers? Power rangers assemble. No, no, I'll make. When I make a power rangers reference, you will know. Okay. All right. Very good. Thank you. Steve. Anybody else take away Mitch? Yeah, I yeah, I just have to say, the irony is not lost on me that we, we, we had so many ideas around economy and infrastructure that we couldn't put it in the, the technology system, which and we're here for a prioritization exercise, which I think is kind of funny, but we know how to adapt. And I do think that I see some dots there that I can live with. And I again, like we don't always agree up here, but I really think that I'm serving with some of the smartest people in this city. Yeah, you are very smart council. Yes, indeed. Somebody else. Olivia I think this was very beneficial. I really enjoyed it actually, more than I thought I would, but I and I have to say that something I was thinking actually was demonstrated today that there are real generational differences here that we need to recognize in terms of our vocabulary and how we react to things, and we need to be sensitive to that. All of us do. So I really appreciate it. Great point. Thank you. Anybody else takeaways. Elana. We had a lot more hopes and dreams there than we have. Not just money for, but time for. And you know, I think there's going to be a lot left off the table. But I think that we had the opportunity today to also see not just a little more about each other personally, but a little more about some potential partnerships. When we look at what made the priority list and what didn't, and who else put their dots there? And you know, who else voted for those best hopes and worst fears at the beginning? There's some real opportunity for partnerships that we may not have seen before, that I hope we can follow up on as a body after today. Yeah, I think that's true. And, you know, I always say organizations become what you talk about and you will not accomplish 100% of what you talk about, but you'll accomplish exactly 0% of what you don't talk about. And to your point, there's more left on the table than what you can do. I, I know I mentioned this to you, we've worked with the city of frisco, suburb of texas, in dallas area for 15 years. They've done great, but I can't tell you how many council retreats I've done with them where they listed. We want a class, a office space, and we didn't get it. We want a fortune 100 company and they didn't get it. We want it. But it kept coming up, kept coming. And today they actually have more class a office space. They know what to do with post-pandemic, but they also have a number of fortune 100 companies. And so it may not all get done while you're on these seats, certainly, but it's likely to get done because you brought it up. All right, hillary, you got a report for us. Yes. Okay. And can we or do I need to bring them up? I'll bring them up front. If I don't take away. Okay. Tiffany. And then Sameer. I enjoyed just observing how you both facilitated to. I think you did a well in a lot of ways, and there was pretty tight facilitation, and I appreciated that there were you kind of mixed up and modeled different ways of engaging us and calling on us. That was, I think, helpful for me to see. I saw some of the the places where we got in the weeds, the terminology, wordsmithing, some of the divides that Olivia was bringing up, those stood out to me. I appreciate it in the beginning that we kind of started off and were rooted in. There was something that you said about, like, it's clear that we all really care about our constituents in our districts. And I think that felt good to start there. And then I could feel that in the room, too. And then I think whenever we get a little bit more human, I'm reminded that not only are we bringing our constituents in the room, but we're also bringing a lot of our own own lived experiences. And I could see that when people were starting to share. And I think that's always helpful. Beneficial. Yes. All right. Thank you. Sameer you had your hand up. Yeah. First, thanks to Dan for for pushing for this. I think there's some, some imperfections, but a lot of really good stuff here and I appreciate you pushing for it. I know Tiffany, you have as well in the past that community public safety, definitional conversation is one I've been hoping to have for a year. So thank you for giving space for that. And I think we, including you, both have the right people in the room today. So that is is a big part of my my feelings on this. I'm really excited about this. I'm, I'm thinking as I look at the people who've established committees here about how to how to take this and, and make it work in committees, as opposed to, I think you you everybody had the right causality on this. I was saying this first and then do it, but we have a committee structure that I think actually aligns pretty well with the priorities we set. So good job to you both. All right. Excited about that already. You had your hand up. Give hillary just a yes I thought this was very very helpful. It was great to hear people talk about some ideas that you don't normally hear them talk about, because we're not in everyone's committee. So it's it's really good. And I appreciate the the moderation of what you did. And it was it was very good to keep us in track. Thank you. Yes. All right. Dan, I thought it was great that we actually had some conflict. I think that that's necessary. It's Portland plays nice too much of the time, and we don't often feel safe enough to have dialog. That's not easy. And it wasn't lost on me that it was usually in the areas of public safety or in the areas of homelessness and housing, because it's painful and it's difficult, it's complicated. I also hope this was helpful to you, raymond. That was one of the main reasons I wanted to do it, because I thought it'd be helpful for the staff to understand what our thinking is as they go into budget planning. Yeah, yeah. For sure. Yes. I just hope we can kind of remember the things that were positive and helpful that came out of this, because I know raymond and I have talked about how in the future, it would be great if we could do one that is not televised too, and get I think we could get even more out of it. All right. Very good. We'll come to you, raymond, at share at the end. But, hillary, talk us through the scores, okay? This is gonna be easier because it's not split up. So increase the percentage of streets and arterials in good condition. Top, top of the the list. And then we had reducing potholes, increasing the level of open space. Then. Oh thank you. Oh yes I missed this one cei hubs. And then there's another one down here. Increase number of people biking to school and work safe clean drinking water and then some others. And so we'll we'll keep the scores and then put them in in order for you all next. And then this one I had to split it onto two things. So forgive me if I have to jump around here. A higher percentage of portlanders with living wage, being able to live in the city. This one. Storefronts coming back to downtown, lower incidence of childhood poverty. Let's see. This one was a diversify and create new economic hubs beyond downtown. Percent of a decrease, the percent of household income going to housing and child care. And then there was one other. This one had 13 so strong tourism conference, etc. And then employment opportunities for people coming out of homelessness would probably be the next one. So again, we'll make sure none of this is lost when we bring it back to you. Yeah. Thank you. And Dan, hillary and I are probably going to have some conflict after this. About my handwriting. Oh my gosh. We're going to have a talk. I should have been the scribe. Steve, you had your hand up. Hillary. I just wanted to note that I think you skipped over. Oh, did I miss the bottom? Which got a few dots. Which is more public restrooms? Yeah. Oh, yes, I did miss that one. Yeah. Alright. Well guys we really enjoyed it. Really appreciate it. You've been so good to work with. Hope we have a chance to do that in the future. But raymond, let me let you have final word and we'll be dismissed by the president. First of all I just want to say thank you to the council. These conversations are never easy. As you talk about what are the critical things that this city needs to be doing to be a city that we're all proud of, proud of the city that we live in today, but also proud of the city that we're building for towards the future. I appreciate everyone's engagement in this work, because this work that you're doing today will help shape the work that 7000 other employees will be doing and try to help move this city forward. This is a building block to where we're heading as an organization and as a community. And without this building block, everything else can't stand upon anything that we do. This is the first phase of us building towards a strategic plan. This is the first phase of us truly developing a north star for our organization and for our community. And you are the essence of that. You are the reason why we're heading in the direction that we're heading. And as I talked to people throughout the community and the organization, I always tell people we're at a pivotal point in our time as an organization, as a community, and where we'll go for the next 25 years will be dictated by this leadership group. This leadership group will have a tremendous impact on the quality of life for people. We can't even imagine businesses who haven't even started yet and and visitors who haven't even dreamed of coming to Portland yet. So I just want to say thank you not only for today, but the dedication that you're giving day in and day out to this organization, and the dedication and hard work you've given to the residents and citizens, citizens and businesses that you represent on a daily basis. Kudos to everyone in the room to get through it. I know it's not always easy, but we made it and we got a lot more hard work to go through, so I'm proud of you all. Thank you. Reward yourself. Take a donut to reward yourself for your good work. I need to really quickly thank opensignal, our folks at bts adam and running around making sure we're all doing thank you adam. Thanks to our security team. Thanks to hailey, thanks to dana richardson and the council ops team for paying for all this, y'all. We forced them to have to pay this, so thank you for that. Oh, and to the council clerks, thank you, keelan, for being here on a Saturday. I'm sorry rebecca. Oh my god, rebecca I'm sorry, I didn't see I saw the blond top of your head. And to all the staff who helped facilitate and all the decision makers who made decisions to make this happen. Thank you all. We are adjourned. Thank you. God.