The record · Transcript
Council Session — 2025-09-25
Transcript from the session's official auto-captions (14,363 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
The Portland City Council's Labor and Workforce Development Committee met Thursday, September 25, 2025, at 12 p.m., with roll call showing most members present and one member's absence noted due to a family death. After a statement of conduct was read, the committee heard a presentation on Future Ready Oregon and workforce development, with speakers representing Greater Portland Inc., the Oregon Workforce Partnership, and the Urban League of Portland. Topics covered included the structure of traded-sector industries, regional economic development strategy, funding sources for job training programs, success stories from training participants, upcoming funding gaps following expiration of state allocations, federal funding's role in workforce programs, recent industry layoffs, and discussion of housing production, modular construction, and workforce training connections. Questions and comments from committee members addressed program outcomes, funding levels, and potential legislative advocacy. The committee then took up a resolution concerning a citywide disparity study on contracting and workforce equity, with a motivation statement read into the record and testimony offered by the Council President. Discussion covered timelines, cost estimates, and funding history for the study. Amendments to the resolution's deadline language were proposed and voted on, and the committee subsequently voted to refer the resolution to full Council; outcomes of all votes are recorded in the vote ledger. The meeting adjourned with the next session scheduled for October 9, 2025.
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.
0 Oh, no.
1 Ready to go when you are. Good afternoon. I call the meeting of the labor and workforce development committee to order. It is Thursday, September 25th at 12 p.m. Diana, will you please call the roll? Novick here.
2 Dunfee here.
3 Smith. Canal here. Green.
4 Here. And just for the record, counselor Smith had to travel for a family. A death in the family. So we offer her condolences. She wanted to be here today. And that's why she's not here. Craig, will you please read the statement of conduct?
5 Welcome to the meeting of the labor and workforce development committee. To testify before this committee in person or virtually. You must sign up in advance on the committee agenda at wwe. Agenda. Labor and workforce development committee. Or by calling 311. Information on engaging with the committee can be found at this link. Registration for virtual testimony closes one hour prior to the meeting. In-person testifiers must sign up before the agenda item is heard. If public testimony will be taken on an item, individuals may testify for three minutes unless the chair states otherwise, your microphone will be muted when your time is over. The chair preserves order. Disruptive conduct such as shouting. Refusing to conclude your testimony when your time is up, or interrupting others testimony or committee deliberations will not be allowed. If you cause a disruption, a warning will be given. Further disruption will result in ejection from the meeting. Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass. Additionally, the committee may take a short recess and reconvene virtually. Your testimony should address the matter being considered when testifying. State your name for the record. If you are a lobbyist, identify the organization you represent. Virtual testifiers should unmute themselves when the clerk calls your name. Thank you.
6 Thank you so much, craig. Colleagues, members of the public. Today, the theme we continue the theme that councilor Smith is the chair of this committee, has prioritized around workforce development in our community, in particular, workforce development that centers equity. I applaud her leadership on this. That's also a priority of mine. So the theme of the committee presentation and conversation today will be on that. Those intertwined topics. We're going to begin today by hearing a presentation on future ready Oregon. We have some great speakers lined up. I think we have three speakers. So at this time, I would love if our speakers would approach the dais. And then when you when you get set up, go ahead and introduce yourselves for the record. And I think it councilor Smith's request, we would like monique to start the presentation.
7 Can I read the item first?
8 Oh, I'm so sorry. Yes, I got I got too excited. That's okay. Please read the item.
9 Thank you. Item one future ready Oregon and workforce development.
10 Thank you so much. Please introduce yourselves for the record.
11 Hi. Good afternoon. My name is monique claiborne, president and ceo of greater Portland, inc.
12 Good morning. My name is doug riggs. On behalf of Oregon workforce partnership.
13 My name is trent gay. I'm the workforce manager at the urban league of Portland.
14 Thank you so much. And you know, we've got about 50 minutes, but we can probably push this to an hour. So please, monique, if you would like to get us started. Thank you.
15 Is this the first slide? I don't think so.
16 First item?
17 No. There's a okay. Well, we'll get started here. Some slides are missing. So I just want to introduce myself and the organization greater Portland, inc. We are responsible for business recruitment for the Portland region, the city of Portland, five counties in Oregon and two counties in southwest Washington. We are the only public private partnership recruiting trade sector businesses to the region. This slide here now talks about what trade sector businesses are. Charter sector businesses are companies that are here, but their revenue comes from outside of the region. And that's an important distinction because it brings new dollars. It pumps new dollars into our economy as opposed to local business where the business is local. Here, the customers are local, the revenue is local. And so it's the same dollar circulating in the economy. Next slide. Thank you. So the work that we do is similar to other metropolitans. Other metropolitans have an economic development organization similar to gpi. And we are a member based organization. And so we provide no cost confidential services and assistance to prospective companies considering expanding their footprint and looking at the Portland region. So we are the single point of contact for project management, market visits, real estate data and research. A number of companies want to know what are wages, right? What is the labor shed? What's the drive time? Who do we work with to fund our pipeline needs when we expand your business here? And so we are a point of contact and provide access to a number of the assets here in the Portland region. So again, we're investor based, member based. We are made up of over 80 public private organizations, local and regional governments, law firms, finance, real estate, construction, higher ed workforce development agencies, as well as marketing media agencies. This slide here also identifies our higher ed members. We also have a higher ed consortium. So it's made up of pcc, mount hood community college, wsu Vancouver, u of osu and then the alliance. So the alliance is made up of private colleges and universities. So think of reed and so forth. So future ready Oregon and greater portland's advantages. We know what future ready is is to strengthen the Oregon economy. Our competitiveness, making jobs equitable within the workforce system which ultimately increased prosperity for all. And so while gpi doesn't run any of these programs, we market the results of future ready Oregon as it truly does strengthen our story as we tout the competitiveness of the Portland region for investment as well as job creation. So what are our trade sectors? They range from computing, electronics, semiconductors. Again, this is for the region. So again Beaverton and so forth outside the city of Portland, apparel and outdoor climate, tech design and media. Bioscience is emerging. Food and metals and machinery as well as software. And so these are our competitive industries within the region. We host countless inbound and outbound travel, and we're meeting with companies within these spaces. And so as it relates to future ready Oregon semiconductor chips act and fab expansions and r&d and healthcare and science, OHSU and biotech and health, employers and pharmaceuticals, considering the region and even technology software and how we can grow talent within those areas. I can tell you when companies come to the region, the number one question is labor and how much does labor cost. So future ready gives us a strong answer, saying Oregon is investing in the people who power our trade sectors in the region. As we're touting the competitiveness of all of our advantages here. So just want to put this in practice. What our partners do, I know andrew is is here. So pcc intel city of hillsboro work systems. They've started a or had a quick start semiconductor manufacturing training program. And this is something that we promote. And we say, hey, this is an example of a program that worked here. And when we are talking to other semiconductor industries that are either considering expanding in the region or entering into the market, we say, hey, this happened here with intel, with work systems, with our partners. We can do this for you too. And so here's another example with mount hood community college, microchip and onsemi and have worked with, again, our workforce development partners, our private sector industry, our local municipalities to say, hey, we can set up a training program for you as you're considering the needs. So in this particular case with pcc, intel, hillsboro and work systems, they it was located at pcc willow creek opportunity center. It was an intensive ten day entry level training program. Pcc partnered with 25 community based organizations to recruit program participants and advancing entry level opportunities for diverse workers, including women and people of color. The participants received 500 and training stipend, and everyone who completed the program qualified for entry level positions. And so this is a great business case of how we work with our partners, how we promote the work of our partners as we tout the competitiveness and hopefully secure sector company investment into the region. So I understand the work that you all are doing or in the work with councilor Smith, but I did want to bring your attention. Metro's regional workforce gap analysis is currently happening now, so metro is conducting a comprehensive regional workforce gap analysis to identify workforce strategies and training gaps across the Portland metro area. That includes workforce conditions, industry clusters, training and apprenticeships, pathways where there's capacity, where there's not, as well as the current equity impacts. There is an advisory committee and staff serves on that committee. So and so equity again, you said councilor Green, councilor Smith. That's core to this committee. And so truly workforce ready. Oregon ensures Portland isn't just have workers but we're really ready. There's a diverse and resilient workforce here. And so it helps gpi market the region. And knowing that again, Oregon invests in the people here. So we currently have a a campaign called Portland the land of more. And we received $3 million, nearly $3 million from the state legislature last year. And so as we promote the Portland region, digital ads, content all across the us, and then a couple of countries from south korea, japan, germany, canada, people see the talent that we have here and future ready. Oregon is is critical to promoting that. Thank you.
18 Thank you so much.
19 Hello there. I'm trent gay once again from the urban league of Portland. So I'd like to talk about how future ready has helped the urban league when I first started off. So when we talk about the short term trainings in the construction trades and early childhood education and peer support and peer peer wellness certifications, being able to have cdl driver's license with our participants, along with the manufacturing. When we look at these programs, we look at how we're able to take single mothers single fathers reentry program and be able to take them, get them into a short term training, and get them into the workforce so that they can be self-sufficient. And I think that this has really helped us in our community, because when you talk about how does this how does futureready or prosperity ten k really helped the community? Well, it helps the community in a lot of different ways. So if someone just comes out of jail and they're reentering society, society, excuse me, and we can help them get into a trade or get into a, a training that will help them get a job, that they can become self-sufficient and they don't have to worry about their background and they have a second chance, then it's a win win. Because when we talk about recidivism and we talk about those who, if they don't have anything new to do, then they go back to their old ways. And then we have crime and we continue to feed the jail instead of our community. And having more prosperity in a positive way. When I also think about how it has an effect on the community, we look at the single mother. So I have some success stories that I would like to talk about today, and one would be we had a person that spent 40 years in prison, went in when he was 16, and when he got out of prison, we got him a cdl driver's license, and now he makes more money than me. You know, I don't make that much, but I make enough. And so but he makes enough to have his own truck and to be able to do what he needs to do. After 40 years in prison, we have a single mother who we put through the trades program, and she now has purchased the home and she has three children. And when we talk about these success stories, these are just a couple of highlights, but we have plenty of cdl drivers licenses that we have from people coming out of prison, spending multiple years, ten plus. And we've been able to help them in society. We've been able to have our people go into the trades and when they're going into the trades. It has been phenomenal, especially with our pre-apprentice programs and the money going into the pre-apprentice programs. And we at the urban league of Portland, we have construction trades program, and we also are the only electrical pre-apprentice program in Oregon. And we're able to take those pre-apprentice graduates, and we've gotten them into ibew, we've gotten them into our light electrical lrt, and we've been able to get them into some of the other industries. Hvac is another big one for us. And so then when we come to the manufacturing, the same. We've been able to do so much where we didn't have the career pathways or the funding to help them be able to get the training that they need. So in saying that, I also want to go back to the early childhood education because I almost forgot it. But that early childhood education has been phenomenal for us at the urban league of Portland, and I'm pretty sure all throughout Portland, where we've been able to get the internships, get people into school, pcc, and to even have the talking point that I think it's 2030, that that job would be $90,000 a year, and where we could take some of our younger people and give them industry that they can go into. They don't have to go four years of school. They can get the two year certification that's paid for, and then we can help where we have a desert here in Oregon of being able to have child care and early childhood education. So I wanted to just say that that is the reason why we should have another round of this future ready money, so that we can help these people, that we are participants in, in our community, become self-sufficient, have self-esteem, be able to show their children that they can do some things that can take care of them, and they don't have a negative outcome, but a positive outcome on the community. So I encourage the committee to support the legislature. Request for another round of the future Oregon funding. That's it.
20 That's great. That's a good segue into some of the talking points that I've got. So I appreciate my two colleagues up here. I'm doug riggs again with the Oregon workforce partnership. We're the collaboration of nine local workforce boards spread around the state. The local workforce board system was established formally in 2015 by the state legislature, and the goal at the time was to try to take some of the training programs and the coordination of training programs out of the state bureaucracy in Salem, and align it more with local partners like we've just heard from our two colleagues here today. The futureready program itself was passed in 2023. It was one of tina kotex first initiatives, $192 million dollar workforce program in senate bill 1545. In. That was a multi month effort in the legislature. I was pretty involved in trying to get that bill passed. We were very excited about the bill. It allocated about five about 80% of the money still went to the state programs, so went mainly through the higher education coordinating committee. Heck, but about 20% of the money, $35 million went to local workforce boards directly. And we we stuck a provision in the bill to fast track that money. So unlike most state programs, which typically are allocated by the legislature, signed by the governor, and then go through a multi-month RFP process, we said, no, let's do that a little bit differently. Let's fast track the money. The money must be written in a check to the local workforce boards. Within 60 days of passage of the bill. Now, what that did is we had aligned the local workforce boards ahead of time to start planning with their local community partners. How do we make sure we get this money on the ground quickly? Because we know a month of delay or six months of delay, or two months of delay lead to inefficiencies? People needed help right then. So the checks went out the door. And on day 61, programs began in in local workforce board regions throughout this this state. And it was really exciting to see what happened. The challenge we're facing, the reason we're here today, and I think why councilor Smith wanted to bring this item up, is unfortunately, that was a two year allocation and the legislature decided not to fund a dime into this next biennium. So here we are three months into the next biennium and there's no additional money. Fortunately, there has been some carryover money that has continued to keep some of the programs alive. But if we do not get funding in the February legislative session, many of those really fantastic programs that were established. And just as a reminder, the local workforce boards don't do the training. We don't do the work. We rely on our partners to do that, work with the local workforce boards do is they help leverage. They help put money together from state, federal or local private sources. And they also ensure that we're not reinventing the wheel and they ensure that it's the local priorities. So we have a 13 or 15 member board. Those board members help ensure that we are helping local priorities so that money will run out. And and especially going into what appears to be a fairly concerning economic downturn. We've already lost 25,000 jobs in the state. We need to be able to repurpose and reskill those individuals and individuals who haven't been able to break into the workforce. You know, we talked about equity and diversity in the workforce. That's a key component of what our local workforce boards do. So just I'm going to ask and answer four quick questions here. The first is what. And I'll just outline some of the things that define that question. What what we do is, is we work with our partners on things like scholarships for training programs, customized training like the quick start program, which was a special program in the tech industry that's been very successful career coaching, paid mentorships and job training, essential support services, wraparound services for people going through the through the training and apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship. We mentioned the electrical pre-apprenticeship, which is really exciting. Some of our regions are doing medical assistant pre-apprenticeship nursing pre-apprenticeship. So there are depending on the region, there's some very exciting apprenticeships going on. So these are the types of programs that we engage in. The second question is why this and why these programs? Well, these programs work. It's we have proven success statewide just in the last two years, over 8600 Oregonians benefited from the that $35 million section of futurity, which is called prosperity 10,000. So over 2000 600,000 2600 people have enrolled in actual programs. We have a 94% completion rate in the programs, which is really remarkable. And we have a 78% employment rate among participants in the program. That's those are remarkable numbers. We set an average wage goal of $17 an hour in the bill, and so far we're at $22.80 on average. So that's a, you know, an excellent starting wage for someone who's trying to enter the system. Third question is what's the impact? And by this impact I don't mean the impact on the participants. I mean what's the impact for the state as a whole. You know, oftentimes the state invest money in something and you never find out, you know, did it work? How well did it work? Did it generate a return on the investment? We've got some excellent numbers just on that $35 million investment. We believe we've generated $20 million in new tax revenues. And we saved $128 million in social services costs because people were employed. They're paying taxes. They're able to take care of their kids on their own. So you combine those two, and we're talking about $140 million, or a little more than $140 million of net benefits to the state from a $35 million dollar investment. So if I'm a legislator and someone tells me, spend a dollar and you're going to save $3, that's the first program I jump to. I say, absolutely. And and that's just the economic benefit. We're not talking about the social benefit, the moral benefit of helping communities. So that's very exciting. And the last thing I'll say is, why is this so important right now? And I emphasize this a little bit. We got a late start in the last economic downturn. For those of you who are around in 2009 and ten and 11. That was a devastating mortgage crisis, real estate crisis in Oregon. And we had, you know, very high unemployment rate, pushing 9% in the state. And the state got off off to a late start in trying to link people with job training and employment skills training. We have an opportunity going into the 2026 session to jump start that process. We know what to do. We know how to do it. We know it generates more revenue than it than it costs going out the door. So being able to take advantage of federal funds, local investment, business investment, the tech industry is very interested in continuing to invest. And that's why from a timing perspective this is very important. So I hope that's helpful. You also have some background information in your packet. I think that you can go through, and I'd be happy to answer any questions on as well, but really appreciate the time, the interest of the city council and my colleagues here today.
21 I want to thank the three of you for taking the time to to give us this primer and kind of open up a conversation. I and again, thank councilor Smith for her leadership on this issue. I will say, and I think I've said this before, you're not going to get anything past her when it comes to the state legislative agenda. She's always watching. So I have some comfort in that. I do have some questions, but I'll I'll start. I'll defer to my colleagues to begin. Councilor dunfee, why don't you get us started?
22 Thank you. Yeah. I'm not sure who may be able to answer this. And maybe none of you could. You know, you mentioned that there have been significant layoffs in Oregon in the last few months here. And I know in the new, you know, in the press, we've been hearing about intel doing a pretty significant number of layoffs. Do we know if any of the trainees from these programs were included in those intel layoffs? Like, were we setting people up for success? And then the market has shifted. Have we rug pulled them? Do we know?
23 Councilor? I, I don't know that we can find that out. I do know that there are other companies that are expanding. For instance, lam research is adding 4 to 600 jobs. And I know that many of the folks who've been training for these tech jobs might be eligible for those types of jobs, but that that is one opportunity for a program like prosperity. And the coordination we have with our local community partners is to be able to connect folks who might be laid off from one part of the industry to another set of openings, but that's an excellent question. I can get back to you on that.
24 I'd love to know, and I'd love to know I don't I know that there are some some rapid changes in the tech industry right now that are happening globally, and I'm just I'm interested to also know if if these training programs are nimble enough to respond to that. I'm hearing horror stories from people who went and got a computer science degrees and are now staring down an ai reality where probably those jobs won't exist anymore. Are we being intentional about the future jobs that we're going to need in the coming decades? I also had one, one, one, and it's not really a question, just sort of, I guess more of a broad statement. But when finding folks for these programs, when finding people who might be well positioned to to get into a training program to find a career, do we have do you all have or is there an existing relationship between high schools or even homeless service providers where folks you know are needing a path forward towards a career with dignity? Is that a a an intentional effort that is happening across the region?
25 I would have to say that it is because especially when you talk about homeless, I guess the first contract that I worked on through wsi was a home for everyone, so we had a partnership with tpi, and that partnership sent all the homeless people and we were there. Career coach. So we started working with them on getting them into trainings and helping them become self-sufficient. We also have a partnership with Portland public schools today with the urban league, and so we work in the high schools, and then we are moving towards their careers. So we have this huge career fair, and we start working together to start getting jobs for them and internships for them. And you'll find that through work systems, we have the internships where we have 150 hours for the young people, and then they get $17 an hour. They have 12 weeks to complete the program. But these are some of the programs that we're using to execute what you're asking.
26 Great. You know, I that's fantastic to hear. Urban league is doing great work all across our region and so many different ways right now. I would I would urge you all to look at relationships with schools outside of ps two, though out in east Portland, in my area of town, you know, we have we have 40% of all the kids in the city live east of I-205, 50% of all the people of color in the city live east of I-205. And we got they're not they're not. Ps you know, parkrose david douglas centennial. They they have kids who have real significant needs and, and a need for a pathway towards a career with dignity. And so. Support everything you're doing and hope you can keep going further. Thank you all for this presentation. That's all my questions.
27 Councilor. If I could just jump in really quickly. I think that you make a really good point about the need to link with high schools, and it even begins before high schools. I was at a training discussion here a few weeks ago in the tech workforce sector, and one of the things they talked about is you really need to start letting middle school seventh and eighth graders know that the path for tech exists for them, and that with a 5 or 6 week course, you can get out and get a job making 50 or $60,000. So there are there are apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship opportunities, especially pre-apprenticeship for the high schools. I know you mentioned some and rosemary anderson oic has some great coordination with the trades, the.
28 Cooking program and the trades program.
29 Yeah, so there are lots of opportunities. And that is something that that's a real opportunity. If you if you wait until if you someone was a senior in high school it may be too late. So getting that seed planted early on is very important.
30 And I'm glad that you mentioned that, because we've been looking at the steam program and we started looking at the issues that we have with someone that would start later on trying to go into the semiconductor steam program. They don't have the skills that they need in math or some of the other areas that are really needed to be successful. And so as we started thinking about it, we started we found two things. We found that maybe we probably should start in probably the third grade up. And then the other issue is, is the parents. The parents don't have the capability to do some of the math and some of the work that is needed to help their students. So it's almost like you need to work with the students, and you need to have something for the parents so that it can move concurrently together and they can continue in the growth of the tech industry. So that's been one of the things that we've pinpointed and starting a program that we're working on at the urban league of Portland.
31 Thanks for those questions. Councilor councilor Kanal. You've got the floor.
32 Thank you, chair Green, I appreciate the presentation. I wanted to ask a little bit. It's it's the sixth slide around the program you're talking about with the quick start, the training that was with pcc, intel, all that just I have three total questions. First is just is that entirely paid for out of the state dollars that we were we've been discussing or are there other funding sources?
33 For andrew. Do you.
34 It's a combination of state federal and some local dollars as well.
35 Okay. Thanks. My questions are primarily around the federal side. Actually. Just wanted to understand what's because I've heard some allusion to it, but not necessarily. The exact numbers. So how how big of a partner is the federal government in the work that we've been discussing today?
36 Again, we we don't oversee the program. We just promote it.
37 So yeah.
38 Is it.
39 Please and just introduce yourself for the record, when you start.
40 You got up here.
41 I was hoping to.
42 Avoid this. Thank you. I'm andrew mcgoff I'm the executive director of work systems, which is the Portland metro workforce development board.
43 Thanks for being here.
44 Serving the city, Multnomah and Washington county. So everything is braided. Funding. Nowadays, federal dollars make up. We have about 57 different funding streams that run through work systems. Federal dollars make up about 60% of that portfolio. So they they are the foundational underpinnings of our workforce development efforts, don't get me wrong, but but you can't run these kinds of programs on federal dollars alone. So the expertise I think that we bring to the table is, how do we take all these other dollars and sort of mesh them together with these diminishing federal dollars and actually deliver programs that work for the communities we want to serve? So it's a complicated endeavor. Federal dollars are really important. There was about a 15% reduction in the federal the primary federal allocation that comes to us last year. So this cut to future ready Oregon, it's not really a cut. It's just a sunsetting. So we will not have any future future ready dollars as of June 30th of next year. So that will have that plus a 15% reduction in federal dollars. That's going to have a devastating impact on a number of programs that we're currently administering.
45 Thanks. So the last question I had and I have a brief comment, we've seen the federal government announce a new charge of $100,000 for h-1b visas. We have some rumor or speculation that that might apply to future worker visas in general that are designed to. These are programs that are designed to bring in workers that do jobs that Americans allegedly can't or won't do. Right. And so that is a funding source that I was curious if there's been any speculation on if any of that would be earmarked or otherwise directed that you had heard towards the types of training and retraining programs that we've been talking about today. Yeah.
46 So council. Yes, in the past there they have used h-1b and other visa fees to then fund employment training programs to improve the skills of American workers so that you would reduce the dependance on those h-1b visas. Exactly. So those were under different administrations. I think maybe more forward thinking administrations thought of things like that, because I would agree. I think we need to think differently about our visa programs and how we use some of those resources to better skill up American workers, if, in fact, they are not capable or available doing the work. I mean, I think the reality is, though, it's just a mathematical issue, right? There's I think if you're a highly, highly skilled native American worker, you you're employed. But we need more of them. And we just, you know, there are countries that have billions of people and we have 300 million. So it's a mathematical issue. But hopefully that will be part of the administration's strategy moving forward. But we have not seen any evidence that that's the direction they're pointing. You know, it was news to everyone, I think, when it came out that suddenly you're going to pay $100,000 for this visa. And the response from companies that rely on them was pretty, pretty telling about how little they knew about the program. And so hopefully we'll go that direction. In the past that has happened. But I don't know now. And councilor Dunphy, I just wanted to respond to your question. The layoff at intel, the most recent one is, frankly, the largest single. I've been doing this work for like 30 years. It's the largest single company layoff I've ever experienced in those 30 years. Yesterday we had a job fair. We had 1700 workers come to that job fair, more than 50 employers. We sold out on the employer side with 2000 job openings. So we'll you know, the jury's out about like how many of those folks reconnected. But when you looked at when you looked at the occupations that were impacted by this layoff, about 350 of the 3000 or so were technical technician positions. The remainder were all over the map, most of which were engineer level positions. So massive sort of, you know, difference between an entry level technician and a, you know, master degree engineer. So it ran the gambit. I, I frankly was surprised that there were so few technicians that were let go. So I'm hopeful that not a lot of our participants or former participants were part of that cohort, but we don't know yet how many of them were. We remain confident that this model, the quick start model, which is was frankly designed by the employers. Right. It's to mo'nique's point. You need to sit with the employers and really understand what do you need in an entry level technician. And then if we scale to that, our expectation is they wind up and get a job. And that actually happened through this program. So we've seen other employers, doug mentioned lam microchip in east county on semiconductor. All of them have. We're doing a partnership with mount hood community college to replicate that. And microchip is using that. So it's spreading. So fingers crossed that it you know folks are still going to get employed. But we're also demonstrating new ways of delivering training that is more just in time is more focused on those, you know, industry defined, occupational specific skills that help people compete once they get on the job. And then the other thing that we've seen, too, that's really encouraging is that we articulated that entry level training with the post-secondary training that was available through pcc and also now mount hood. And so now the employers are paying for that next level training, which is exactly what you want to see, right? It's like where's that public sector investment start and stop. And I think we've sort of demonstrated a sweet spot with this investment. And so we're hopeful that, you know, it's a little bumpy area right now. But I think as things calm down, we're hopeful that it's going to continue.
47 Thanks. And so I'll mention in response to your comment about the mathematical equation, that's exactly why I asked about the h-1b cost, because fundamentally we're not cities, obviously not in a position, but the state as well, to to fund these things at the level that they they may need, and certainly not in the absolute forever term. So I also appreciate that last note here. I'll note that intel gave its ceo nearly $8 million severance package last year, so it's obviously disappointing to see them prioritize that over their workers. But I, I also know that I'm grateful to hear about the program that that you mentioned in terms of the I forgot the exact name of it, but the the quick start program. So thanks. And I'll just close by saying I too have been working in the the state legislative agenda space. And so I look forward to working with councilor Smith and trying to support this work as we go into the short session and excited to to hear from all of you as part of that. Thanks.
48 Thank you, councilor, for those excellent comments. Questions. Councilor Novick.
49 Hi, I was just curious. I was surprised to see food and beverage listed among the traded sectors. I mean, I think that restaurants mostly cater to local folks, although obviously there's some tourists. Is that like, you know, brewing beer for export or to what extent is how is food and beverage traded sector? How is that counted.
50 Food manufacturing okay.
51 Yeah.
52 So what are some examples.
53 So so are you familiar with osu's food innovation lab on nato parkway?
54 Oh yes actually.
55 And so there are just a number of products that are developed that are exported, quite frankly. And then just during the pandemic, we saw a burst in frozen storage needed. And so that's exploded in terms of where you're located and making sure you're getting consumers to consumer goods to product, sorry, consumer products to the public okay.
56 So it is exports. Thank you.
57 Is that it? Okay. I'm going to take the privilege of the mic now. So you know, listening to the presentation I had a number of questions emerge. The first was I think probably for you monique. But anyone can answer. So as I understand, greater portland's kind of mission is are you really trying to sort of steer and shape an economic development strategy or be responsive to what you think? I guess how intentional is is the kind of like forward looking work there.
58 So we do not shape strategy. We're not involved in policy. We are salesmen. And so whatever the dynamic is on the ground, we have to sell the region. If the we're in a healthy economy, we sell the region. If we're in a recession, we sell the economy. The idea is to bring quality jobs to the region. And so our job is primarily touting the competitiveness of the region for investment in jobs.
59 I appreciate that I'm going to do some salesmanship then. And I don't know if you can sell this or not, but, you know, one of the things I'm thinking about, I mean, we've got some big challenges right now. You know, no one wants to say the word, the two words doom loop together. But, you know, we could be there. And if we don't kind of think about the best use of our resources. And the biggest issue I see is a scarcity of housing that's affordable. So when we have this workforce that maybe moves here at an earlier stage in their life, they leave the county because they can no longer afford to go to that next stage in life, you know, build that house or buy that house to, to raise a family in. And so if we're going to build the housing that we need at the pace at which we require, you know, tens of thousands of units over the next few years, we're going to have to figure out how to lower our costs. Right. And so one of the things that I've been thinking about is, do we can we envision cultivating a local industrial complex around manufactured sort of clt, kind of sustainable wood products, outputs that are both, I think could both be traded sector goods, but then also intermediate goods for further down in the supply chain for local housing production. So, you know, this idea is if you can lower the cost of production locally, that also is the same as as like foregone imports in that regard. So kind of has the same net impact on our local economy as is an increase in exports. Right. And this is just sort of a conversation that I've been having with some, you know, people around me, but in my mind went to vienna recently to study their social housing program. And they're using these, these sorts of techniques over there to lower the cost of production because they're also facing the same cost pressures any municipalities facing. So I just wonder if that type of industry has come up in any of y'all's conversations or thinking about strategy. And I welcome the question, I guess, to anyone up here.
60 Yeah. Councilor, I'd be happy to take that on. I actually worked on a couple bills in the last session. Related to that, I point you to to two efforts and and they're kind of related. One was house bill 3145, which is a bill introduced by representative pam marsh from southern Oregon. It was a bill that was sponsored by sector, which is an organization based in the Portland area, but has worked has been working with organizations around the state, and it was focused on modular and manufactured housing as really an opportunity. I mean, the the cost of housing has gotten so out of control that you're exactly right. There's no next place for people to move. And so if people aren't moving up from this size housing, then there's no place for the people who don't have that housing to move into. So it it's kind of a cascading effect. So house bill 3145 sets aside up to $50 million from the lift program for modular and manufactured housing in particular, and the Oregon housing and community services is working on a rule making right now that was combined with the goal. And that's why a lot of the lumber industry was interested in engineered lumber. So can you combine the technology that osu and the industry has been working on from an engineered lumber perspective into these quickly built modular type housing, housing structures to really begin to address the the cost and and the speed and the availability of housing. And so that's that's one issue. And the other thing I'd point out is if you go around the state, you run into a number of our local workforce boards that have construction apprenticeships or construction apprenticeships. So we mentioned, you know, getting kids involved in the high school level, getting kids interested in the trades in, in from the carpentry standpoint or the construction or the operating engineer standpoint is really critical. And all three of these areas kind of fit together nicely. So it's not an immediate solution, but it's, I think, a part of the solution that that begins to address what you're talking about.
61 One thing I would like to say is that we just had a training in modular homes, where we put our participants through a pre-apprentice learning how to do that. So we are building up a workforce in order to build the modular homes now where they're going to sit, that's a different story. But at least we're we're preparing for the future to be able to manufacture the homes, put them together, learn all the pieces to that. And not only that, we had some of our participants hired on permanent with the company. And so when you talk about that, it is in the works because we talk about the bill, but now it's it's being put into the training because you have to have the workers. And we find that a lot of times we have the bill, but you don't have anybody to do the work. So now we're training up the work. So I think that's how it works with our programs, being able to get our people trained and ready for the future work, and then seeing the programs at work.
62 I appreciate that. And, you know, a big piece of the public sector's role in all this, because this is an infant industry in some sense, is being willing to being willing to stand ready as an anchor purchaser for the output of some of these industries. So that way you in some sense, you de-risk that industry, which can allow you to scale faster. And so when we think about the dollars that we spend in our community on housing, you know, supports, I guess I'm having this conversation publicly, maybe not necessarily to, to tell you guys what to do, but to sort of daylight this idea that we need to really be thinking about providing a source of demand for the outputs of not only that industry, but also it supports that ongoing expectation that there's a job pipeline. Right? Because if you don't have the production demand, you don't have the job demand. So it's this integrated supply chain concept is is kind of what I'm thinking.
63 Do you know the port of portland's mass timber grant? Yeah. So there's a lot of we're doing a lot of work with a lot of the existing pre-apprenticeship programs to get them comfortable with working with those new materials. And I it might be worth trying to make a connection there. I'd be happy to connect you with the folks that were because they have a training facility. I don't know whether it's t-6 or one of the one of the space, one of their terminals out there that we're actually training people in. I'd be happy to make that connection, because I think it aligns perfectly with what you're saying.
64 I appreciate that, and I recently did a tour of the port and they had mentioned that. And so I'd love to kind of connect these pieces together. Okay. All right. Let's continue talking about that. Colleagues. We're going to have to figure out how to lower the cost of production housing. Oh before I move on from from modular or prefab, I just I think the prefab of my day when I was a kid looks a lot different than it does today. This is not, you know, bringing in a house on wheels. That's a low quality housing. This is this is, you know, a good house assembled off site and pieces that is then attached to a poured foundation with plumbing, with all of the amenities and infrastructure, amenities that you would expect from a from a piece of housing that's built by stick and frame on site. And so I think part of the stigma that needs to be overcome is this idea that, well, why would we do modular housing for the next generation of people? Don't they also deserve stick framed housing? And I'll just note that sears, sears, roebuck used to all these beautiful craftsmen were also prefab. So I'll leave you with that. And then I guess I do have a question. Can you say more about the prosperity 10,000? I'm not super familiar with this program. I'd like to know more.
65 Sure. So it was a component of future ready Oregon, and that was the component that came directly to work systems. As one of the nine workforce boards across the state. So is we received about $10 million under that program. And there was a couple sort of areas of focus. One is to create navigation between some state agencies and community based organizations to better facilitate connections there. So there was money set aside for that. But the bulk of the dollars that we used was really to really augment and complement existing programs that we had, like programs that are run by the urban league, central city concern, erco, poi, a number of, you know, community based organizations across the region. So I'll give you an example of the way pten came out. Pten worked, so when it was passed, it was sort of post pandemic stuff was, you know, there was a lot of people that were idled and we needed to sort of reengage them, get the economy moving. And so imagine back then you would go to a pre-apprenticeship program and, you know, even though it's a short term, it's a 12 week program. It's designed to quickly connect you with labor market. There was it was prohibitively expensive for us to pay you a stipend or a wage while you were engaged in that program. And so what it meant was people were going to take lower wage jobs because they needed the money. So they're going to go to a grocery store. They're going to go somewhere and forego training. So with the with the infusion of pten dollars, we were able to offer a stipend for people who were engaged in training that we knew would prepare them for a better job, like our region's pre-apprenticeship programs. So we would pay someone a stipend. And people were able then to participate in that training to be successful in the training. We also, you know, supplemented things like childcare, like rental assistance and sort of weaved all those dollars together, which allowed people to participate in the program. So to date, we and and so and the idea was we knew it was shorter term money. So we didn't want to go out and create a whole bunch of new programs that we couldn't sustain over the long haul. We wanted to invest in proven programs across the region and improve in partners. Right. So and I think in hindsight, that that was a really good, smart decision because here we are. But to date, we've we've enrolled about doug's got the can you hand me the it's in your packet. But locally we've enrolled 3100 people in those programs. I'm sorry. That's our enrollment goal is 3100. To date, we've got 2373 people haven't been engaged in the program. That's about 75% of our goal. We've achieved all, you know, all the performance outcomes. It's just a tremendous program. And at the end of the day, about 3000 local residents will be trained as a result of that program in place in the jobs. And it did allow us to really focus on individuals who needed the services the most, which was a priority for, I think, our community and our board. So yeah, it's a great program, but it's going away and that's part of the upcoming ask in the short legislative session is for additional dollars so we can continue those good programs.
66 I really appreciate that background. It's going to make it easier for me to make the case with ogr to to prioritize this type of work. In our short session, I want to turn it back to councilor Kanal, who's back in the queue for. For more follow up questions? Comments?
67 Thank you. I'm gonna say it, doctor Green on this every time you you start going on. I think it's, it's it's an education for for everybody. I wanted to ask you know you mentioned. This kind of sparked a thought in me what your line of questioning was. Councilor Green, along with the slide around, you know, sort of explaining trade versus local sector. Because there's the third part of it that's not exactly captured here, which is the dollars that are leaving the community. Right. So we talked about the dollars coming in with Portland based trade sector companies. We talked about local sector. And so I guess if we were a country, what's our trade surplus deficit situation is really the question I'm asking the first of two here. And so because that's a I think a lead in into some of what we're talking about with the the conversation around prefab and all that, do you can you speak to that level of from the economic side of it?
68 I actually I don't have that information, but I do have a director of data and research, and we could probably get that information and send it over to you if that's okay.
69 Great.
70 And early next week.
71 One way that and this is super oversimplified by by me here, but one way that that countries deal with a situation where there's at least either a sectoral or a global trade deficit is import replacement. And I think that's a little bit of another way of getting to some of the conversation. You're talking about councilor Green, where if we're, for example, paying a lot of money to to out of area companies for building materials, that creates another reason for us to be looking to try and bolster that particular sector here, in addition to all the normal reasons we would want to do that. And so I'm curious about if we've identified at least the particular types of even if we can't compare it to money coming in to money going out, if we've at least analyzed the level of sectors and industries where we're paying more money outward than as. Does that make sense? I'm not articulating this perfectly, but.
72 Yeah, it does make sense. I don't have that data on hand. I don't know if you all. Wouldn't that be? Do you have any.
73 Understand where maybe drifting a little bit into your other committee's work.
74 So yeah. So we do on the workforce side anyway, we do focus on targeted industry sectors. Now, I don't know that we calculate in money in and money out, although I think that's an extraordinary question. And it was part of my graduate work to like look at that in the city of chicago. How how quickly a dollar leaves a community and what the impact on that community is. So happy to talk about that in depth. But from a workforce perspective, you know, we look at everything from projected job growth, actual job growth and all that stuff. But increasingly our interest is in the quality of the jobs itself. And how can we build better pathways for people to achieve economic self-sufficiency, regardless of their family circumstances or their, you know, specific needs? So we've incorporated that into our analysis of selecting targeted industry sectors. Also, you know, what are the barriers to someone to enter that that industry? You know, we we do a lot of work with with individuals who have, you know, some brushes with the law in the past or have been disconnected from the labor market for a long period of time. We want to work with industries who are willing to overlook that and give that person a second chance to reenter and reengage in the labor market. And then what are the pathways available for that person? Because we, you know, look, it costs a lot of money. Councilor Green, to your point about the cost of housing and all that stuff. It's we live in an expensive place and there are very few jobs. It's scary, frankly. And I think I was here to talk about self-sufficiency wages. There are very few jobs, entry level jobs where it would allow, say, a single mom with a single kid, with a kid that required childcare, particularly to support herself in that child without some kind of subsidy, very, very few jobs. So I think our strategy has been okay. We have to acknowledge that. Right. So but the question is how do we build pathways so that that individual can move rapidly up, both in terms of wages, but then also in terms of other things like benefits, you know, additional training, all of those other things that actually build out a quality job. So we have incorporated those factors into our analysis of targeted industry sectors. And I'm happy to share that with you all because it is it's really important factor.
75 Yeah I appreciate that. And I think this what you mentioned relates to something that doug you mentioned too, about, you know, the amount of money we're putting in and how much are we getting back for. It is a really important piece. We know this in the context of infrastructure, largely because we know those jobs are going to be here. And that was, I think, the national conversation. It all applies to this as well. And keeping dollars moving here, whether one of the best ways to do that is by hiring people, right? Personnel costs tend to be more localized in this, and that's one of the many reasons I'm constantly bringing up the contract expenses of the city of Portland to to external contractors. And you've given so many threads to pull on that I'm struggling not to pull on them right now, but I know we're in probably three other committees workload if we do, but I think that broadly, this is something that councilor Green, you've talked about a lot that that we can be a part of, not only helping to reduce barriers as a public, as government, we don't have to just be in the business of reducing barriers to the private sector. We can also be in the business of actually advancing causes directly as the public sector. And I think the things that we can do are perhaps longer term, perhaps not as expensive as the immediate ask to the state, which I'm happy to to do that, of course, but just wanted to to kind of daylight that and I appreciate you mentioning that in the past and giving me the chance here today. Thanks.
76 Thank you for waxing philosophical on the economics of all this. I look forward to those that detailed data and when you do send it would really appreciate if you would do a courtesy send to me and councilor Ryan, because we're the co-chairs of the arts and economy committee as well, because that is a those are sort of a marriage of interests. It will would love to spend more time talking about input output modeling and regional economics. We don't have time for it. I will say. I really thank you all for your presentation today. I definitely feel some urgency to advocate for the really good roi investments that the state has made in programs like future Oregon. So thank you so much. And at this point, I think we're going to move on with the agenda.
77 Thank you.
78 Thank you. Diana, can you please call the next agenda item.
79 Research disparities in public contracting, workforce and employment in Portland and report back to city council.
80 Thank you so much. And colleagues, if you'll recall. I don't know if it was the last time we met as a committee or a few iterations ago, but councilor Smith had brought forward an action that sought to adopt previous disparity studies for the sake of. Making sure that we've prioritized our commitment to die. And, you know, not not continue to reproduce the sins of the past in the city by discussion. We said, we really rich debate on that. And we you know, councilor Smith decided to refer this back to her office, rework it and bring it back. So I'm just going to read before we get into discussion of it. I'm going to read a motivation that are in councilor Smith's words. I'm going to read it on behalf of councilor Smith. So these are her words. And then we will have public testimony before we talk. Okay. So bear with me here. So councilor Smith brought this resolution to our committee for one reason. The city must conduct disparity studies to support our efforts to fix problems in our contracting and procurement systems. The city should be fiscally responsible when awarding contracts. We should find the best contractor for the job that will provide us with the best work for the money. That requires analysis of the knowledge, skills, abilities and other qualifications of the contractors competing for projects. And in the end, the best contractor from that pool of competitive competitors should be awarded the project because they have all of the best qualifications and have otherwise demonstrated they are capable of doing the work. That also means that contractors denied those opportunities should be denied because they lacked the necessary qualifications, and not because because of some unrelated aspect like family connections to government staff, social status, or whether the owner is a woman or a person of color. That is another important reason behind disparity studies. Programs like future ready, Oregon and coep must be justified by disparity studies. When we discuss, quote unquote, disparities in government contracting and procurement, we are talking about mere mere differences in how we aren't talking about mere differences in how government contracts are awarded. Disparities arise when contracts are awarded based on factors other than the applicant's qualifications and ability to do the work. For example, a 2023 statewide disparity study here in Oregon, conducted by bbc research and consulting, found that about a third of all eligible contractors who were awarded to receive work from the state were owned by women or people of color. Yet only about 10% of state contracts were awarded to those women and minority owned businesses. That is a disparity disparity between availability to do the work and participation in doing the work. Based on availability, about one third of all state contracts should have been awarded to contractors owned by women and minorities. That would have been their fair share under a perfectly fair system, but they received far less than that. They only received they only received 10%. That's not fair. And the disparity raises suspicions about illegal discrimination. Taking place. In December 2004, the president's council of economic advisers issued a meta analysis of hundreds of federal and state disparity studies conducted all across the country from 1977 to 2019, so I believe that should read December 2024. For the record, not 2004. The report confirmed that racial disparities, and I quote, racial disparities in contracting dollars exist with minority owned firms, which receive a smaller share of contracting dollars than their representation among available firms, end quote. They also found that disparities have not improved significantly since the 1990s, and were larger in the years leading up to 2019 than in any period covered by the data. End quote discrimination on the basis of race, race, sex, ethnicity, religion, or other protected classes in government contracting is illegal under the civil rights act. So councilor Smith wrote in her prepared remarks that she still strives for the day when illegal discrimination against women, people of color, and anyone else in a protected class is no longer a concern. But until that day, disparity studies are an essential and necessary tool for ferreting out illegal discrimination in government contracting and procurement. This is why she brought this forward, this resolution and asks for your support. When we eventually vote on referring this resolution to the full council, councilor Smith wants to thank and recognize dc sarah morrisey and her team, especially sylvester donelson and haley blonsky. They helped her in drafting this resolution. I see haley out there, so thank you for that and I am grateful for their work. I think the collaboration between our two offices has produced a great resolution. So I should also say at this time, councilor Smith has asked me to call for co-sponsorship at the dais of this resolution because, as you might imagine, it's awkward to comply with your quorum rules if you're co-sponsoring something on the same committee. So does anyone on this committee. Would you like to co-sponsor smith's resolution? Yes. Okay. So all of us, that's all of us. Okay, great. That's all been publicly noticed in real time. That was that was easy. Okay. So at this point, I would love to hear any public comment or invited testimony before we work into debate.
81 Sounds good. We have two people signed up. First is terrance hayes, followed by council president pirtle-guiney.
82 Please go ahead. Terrance, is terrance online?
83 No, terrance is not online.
84 Let's let's go ahead and start with the council president because I see her out there. Twinning with natalie today. Almost. Please introduce yourself for the record.
85 Thank you colleagues. My name is Elana pirtle-guiney. I am a councilor from district two and your council president. Thank you for having me before your committee today. I appreciate it, and I'll flag that. This is my first time testifying before one of committees. I am here today to testify in favor of the disparity study resolution brought forward by councilor Smith. I want to thank councilor Smith for her strong leadership on this issue. Before I was elected to the Portland city council, I was a union organizer and advocate for workers and a policy advisor helping Oregonians achieve living wages. I've dedicated my career to ensuring that our systems work for working people, and I see my work on this council as a continuation of that mission. From these experiences, I know the importance of having a diverse, robust and professionally trained workforce, and I know that it takes an active effort to make sure that we spend our public dollars on projects that train those employees and ensure we have that workforce in our city. In light of the mayor's executive order, which ensures city programs are not in conflict with the requirements attached to our federal dollars, we have to explore strategic pathways to ensure the equitable development of our workforce. We know that we have communities that have historically not had access to great construction jobs and to opportunities supporting projects that support all of Portland. But we also don't know what we don't know. And disparity studies will give us more insight into existing inequities in our contracts and the government sponsored workforce agreements that we enter into. Critically, they give us the information that we all need to pass policies that center workers who aren't otherwise getting a chance to help our government do better. In 2022, the former city council approved an ordinance which authorized a disparity study, much like the one proposed in this resolution to evaluate demographic disparities in city contracting and in our workforce participation. But that study never happened because the funding wasn't available. I'm very worried that when we passed this resolution, the effort will again not be funded in light of the changes forced on us by an increasingly adversarial federal administration. We can't afford to let this flounder. My hope is that through this resolution, we can explore partnering with prosper Portland and other entities with similar contracting pools to help bring down the costs so that we can actually get this over the finish line. Disparity studies are a base level of what we should be doing to diversify our workforce. They inform the tangible work that must come after enacting policies that create pathways for good jobs that we know lift people out of poverty while doing work that supports our whole community. They are a step forward. And when we use what we learn from them to inform how we govern, we can further move the needle for our city and our state. I hope that you pass this resolution. Thank you.
86 Thank you for that testimony. Madam president. And I would like to acknowledge it feels different sitting over there than it does here. I would imagine.
87 I was watching that timer very closely. Thank you for the extra two seconds.
88 You bet. Do we have any other testimony?
89 No, there's no other. No one else has signed up.
90 Thank you. And do you know if councilor Smith has called in or anything like that?
91 She is not online.
92 Okay. That's okay colleagues, we'll move forward. So at this time, let's move into discussion on this item. Does anyone have any debate? Discussion? Councilor Novick.
93 I just have a question. It says that the fourth, be it resolved, says request that the city administrator submit a written report on the findings and recommendations of disparities to study upon completion and no later than March 1st, 2026. And I just wanted to know if the bureaus have weighed in on whether it's possible to complete a disparity study that quickly, let alone have a written report on it.
94 That's a great question. And I see haley making some movement. Why don't you please approach and introduce yourself for the record?
95 Absolutely. Hello, everyone. My name is haley blonsky. I'm a senior project manager for the city operations service area and also for the chief financial officers office. Unfortunately, d.c. Morrissey and our chief procurement officer are both out sick today. Something's going around. So, you know, lysol your tables. But I can answer this question. So the scope of work that is currently being developed indicates that they would need about ten months to conduct the study. So that's one month of planning, and I believe about 6 to 7 months of actual survey collection of data, a month of analysis, and then a hope to do a public presentation pending council's approval before officially remitting a report to the city of Portland. So we would actually be looking at about a 9 to 10 month lead time from the point of executing that scope of work, with the contractor, acknowledging that the procurement office is putting something in the fall technical adjustment ordinance, which is to come before council November 5th of this year. We would be looking at a start date sometime in December or early January, which would probably put us around September or October of next year, would be a better target date if I were to make a recommendation.
96 I appreciate that answer. Do you have any follow up questions?
97 I know that probably that I'm planning to suggest an amendment, but no.
98 I thought so, councilor Dunphy.
99 Similar. The resolution calls out a need to identify funding, and I agree with council president's concern about finding funding. Do we have a ballpark of what this would cost?
100 The fall technical adjustment request out of procurement will be for about $400,000. Looking at that. And that is with us splitting a contract with both TriMet and the county. So we're trying to partner to reduce our costs for the total contract. So that's that's what the ask of council would be acknowledging that the specific amount that the contractor is requesting would fall somewhere under, but close to that figure.
101 Okay. Thank you.
102 Thank you. Councilor Dunphy. Councilor Kanal.
103 Thank you everyone for this and for the information. I appreciate the concern that the the council president raised as well, because we have seen the impact of of unfunded mandates. I wish that this is something that we could have just done directly at the same time as it was allocating funding through the the fall technical adjustment. That's not the way it has worked between council and the administration so far. We are often in the position of, if we want to add anything, having to cut something that has been identified as the administration as a where the money goes before we ever even see it. So I think that justifies the need for this, this resolution. And, and also helps justify why I want to co-sponsor it. And I think that's that's worth raising as an issue in the long term. And maybe our finance committee can take that up. As we've learned in the comments from chair Smith and the the items in the whereases, we have multiple studies. We have the white house report showing the clear disparity that exists. We know that this exists for people of color. We know that this exists for women. We know that this exists for the LGBTQ community and more. We know that because we know that the problems that Portland faces are not distinct from those of the state. Nonetheless, we have to measure it locally, and we cannot fix what we do not measure. So while dc denies the disadvantages and discrimination that people face here, I think it's a really important step for us not to deny those truths. That business owners, workers and policymakers are all facing here. And so the need for a city disparity study is, is very clear to me and will also assist in us being data driven and us being fiscally responsible, fiscally responsible as a city and in the development of both bold and enforceable goals. We, I think, are looking not to achieve a different outcome in terms of a specific end goal for the percentages, but a way of promising our communities and our business community in particular, that everyone in Portland gets a fair shot and are not being discriminated against because of factors beyond what councilor Smith pointed out, which is the strength of their company and the strength of their application. That should that should raise the cream of the crop to the top. It hasn't in the past. We'll see exactly how when we get this study back, and I'm looking forward to reading it. I'm looking forward to learning what we don't currently know. And again, we can't fix what we do not measure. So I'm proud to to co-sponsor this.
104 And if I may, councilors, I'd be remiss not to clarify that the the disparity study that we would be conducting includes both contracts and workforce. The county and TriMet would just be undergoing a contract study. So that is why our our costing would look maybe just slightly higher than the other two people.
105 So does that. Imply does that imply that the total cost is going to be less than 1.2 million? We're paying more than a third because we're doing two parts.
106 The total cost will not exceed among the three parties will not exceed $1 million. But our portion of those costs will be slightly higher because we have two, two different studies essentially that we're undergoing, whereas they're just doing the contracts piece.
107 Can I this is probably not a question you'll be able to answer here. And that's okay. But I'd love to see an estimate for some of the other programs we have of the ballpark of what a disparity study would cost, as well as any other potential partners for those ones, because we're obviously focusing here today in the contract and the procurement space workforce as well. And so but there's a lot of other programs that are at risk right now. So I want to make sure that we're getting that information ahead of of potential future conversations, whether in the fall tor or another context about what other disparity studies we might need to authorize, how much those costs, and if there's other governmental partners that might get in on it. And I can see some specific ones, I can speculate, but I, I want to give the real information, not speculate. So thanks.
108 Absolutely. Thank you.
109 Thank you, councilor, and thanks for the clarification on those. I just put myself in the queue, just to reiterate. We say this a lot in this building and out on the streets that, you know, budgets are moral documents. They are statement of your priorities. Resolutions are opportunities for council to express its priority as a whole to not only the public, but also the city administrator and the mayor. I think this is a really good vessel for sort of ensuring that we've got my caller's distracting me. It's all weird. We've got the right priorities as we go into the fall tor, and not just the fall tor, but the next budget and the next budget after that, because we are fighting against a federal government that does not share our values. And I think in moments like this, the correct approach is to lean harder into your values and fight than rather than sort of roll over and acquiesce to to a politics that doesn't represent who we are. So that's why I support this. But I would also entertain, at this point any amendments that folks might want to bring. Councilor Novick.
110 Thank you, mr. Chairman. I would suggest in item be resolved for simply deleting dash and no later than March 1st, 2026 dash and also placing a comma after completion. I think that the administration understands the importance of this based on what haley said. I have a difficulty like trying to come up with a new timeline that's realistic. It's important that the study be good enough and thorough enough to stand up to judicial scrutiny. So I would be inclined to sort of trust the administration. We can follow up on this and just delete the timeline altogether.
111 Second.
112 We have a we have a motion and a second. So the motion is to strike from the fourth. Now therefore be it resolved or I'm sorry, fourth item under. So item four under. Now therefore be it resolved we would strike the entire sort of clause in the middle.
113 And add a comma after completion.
114 And add a comma after completion. So does the clerk follow that? Do we need to send that in writing? Okay.
115 We would prefer it send in writing. Yes.
116 Thank you. Will you please send send them a brief email or a teams chat while we're while we're considering any discussion on this councilor Canal.
117 Can I just.
118 Add, I'm not sure if there's anyone here on the attorney side or someone who can answer this, but in 2022, as we were just reminded, we authorized our predecessor's authorized a disparity study. Is that authorization still in effect?
119 I can answer that. It is still in effect, the the what was authorized in 2022 was unfunded. And so because funding wasn't identified, that's why. So, yes, to be very brief, yes, it is still authorized. But it was the funding piece that that caused the delay.
120 So then I think it's appropriate for me to point out that in nine, eight months and 24 days since taking office, there hasn't yet been a proposal from the administration to put money towards this. So I, I am open to changing a deadline, but I would be voting no if there's no deadline on any amendment there. So I think it's important that we raise this. I agree with everything. Councilor Green said that this is a time to recommit to our values, and I think that's where the council is. And I think that with a strong deadline, the entire city would be to.
121 Respond.
122 Yeah, council, I apologize. I might have missed the beginning of what you said, because I was looking at the written version of the amendment, but it seems to me that the pressing need for a disparity study was kind of established when we went through the fire. The exercise that led to the executive order, which is not that long ago. So I think that I think that as of very recently, the administration has a heightened sense of the importance of this and the urgency of it.
123 I'm just going to give you the floor to go back and forth on this if you need it.
124 Yeah. I mean, we've had a spring technical adjustment and a budget process since we all got in office, and there hasn't been a proposal for to put money towards this. I know there have been conversations behind the scenes, and I think we've heard a lot of of support behind the scenes for it. I think that the public commitment to it has not been sufficient for it to happen. And so I am very comfortable if we are. I accept everything that haley said in terms of the the timeline, that would be ideal. I also understand why it wouldn't start until December. If November is when the technical adjustment ordinance is placed. So I would suggest a deadline ten months out from that, or I would even go as far as to say, given that it's as as late as formulation to change the date to even December 31st of next year. But I think it's appropriate for us to establish parameters through legislation, even resolutions that include a deadline for it. I was less than excited about some of the the text that's come out in the executive order. I think many of us were. I do not mean to say that to be critical of the mayor or his team, but it's not what I would have done. And so I think it's important for us to to establish it. And I want to make sure that there's a commitment to communities of color, to women, to LGBTQ, plus portlanders who, absent a deadline, might not believe it, even if our intentions are the best. Thanks.
125 Councilor Novick.
126 Haley, I'm going to ask you an unfair question and put you on the spot. So if you don't have an answer, just say so. But do you think that the executive would freak out if we replace March 1st with December 31st?
127 I do not believe that there would be a freak out. I will also say that procurement has submitted this funding request. So and I, I heard from cbo this morning, they did confirm that it is included in the fall tor, and ultimately that is a council vote to decide whether or not you you support that funding request. So the administrative side has done what is needed in order to line up the ask for those funds. And November will be council's opportunity to confirm whether or not they want to move that forward, but to both points, I don't think that there would be a freak out. I would ask maybe for a little bit of wiggle room because of the holidays and the end of the year, so maybe, you know, an end of October just to give, not knowing if we start in December or January, but knowing that it would be a priority for procurement to to move this forward. And, and I can say that on behalf of the operations office.
128 I think councilor Kanal was suggesting that the deadline would be December 31st of 2026. So that would that would fit.
129 I love that question for us.
130 Okay. So let's see. I withdraw my prior motion and move that. We simply replace March 1st with December 31st.
131 Second.
132 Okay. We have a motion to first of all, we have a withdrawal of the prior motion, a new motion to amend. Item bullet number four under the. Now therefore be it resolved, that just changes the date from March 1st, 2026 to December 31st, 2026. And we have a second from councilor Dunphy. Any further discussion? Seeing no further discussion. Diana, can you please call the roll?
133 Novick I.
134 Dunphy,
135 I. Canal I Green.
136 Hi with four eyes. The motion carries.
137 Thank you colleagues. Let's see here. What do I need to say next? Oh, right. We're going to move back to the main motion. Okay. So the motion on the floor. Then I would at this point I would consider I would entertain a motion to refer. My god.
138 I got.
139 It okay.
140 Please I moved to refer the resolution to the full council with a due pass recommendation.
141 Second councilor Kanal moves councilor Dunphy. Second, any further discussion? Is that a legacy hand? Councilor Kanal. Okay, okay. Diana, can you please call the roll.
142 Novick. Hi, Dunphy.
143 Hi.
144 Canal.
145 Thanks. Councilor Smith I Green.
146 Hi with a vote. Four eyes. The motion to refer carries.
147 Thank you so much, colleagues. I think that is the end of our agenda. Our next meeting. Let's see. Our next scheduled meeting for the labor workforce development committee is Thursday, October 9th at 12 p.m. And as far as I know, councilor Smith will be presiding at this time. I'm going to adjourn the meeting of the labor workforce development committee.