The record · Transcript
Council Session — 2025-10-08
Transcript from the session's official auto-captions (32,862 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 convened its regular session on Wednesday, October 8, 2025, opening with a "pre-gavel" musical performance before roll call and adoption of the agenda. During public communication, several individuals addressed topics including immigration enforcement and sanctuary city policy, constitutional legitimacy and federal authority, vehicle registration enforcement, and concerns about the public testimony sign-up process; council members discussed forthcoming changes to that sign-up system. The council took up several second-reading ordinances related to transportation right-of-way acquisitions, property surplus and vacation near Northeast 33rd Drive, decorative lighting in pedestrian plazas, transportation fee schedule amendments, and a flood safety benefit fee charge; votes occurred on each, with outcomes recorded in the vote ledger. An ordinance authorizing eminent domain rights for a Northeast Shaver sidewalk project was amended to add an emergency clause and voted on, with figures for project funding stated inconsistently among speakers. A first-reading ordinance updating city code references to state building codes was discussed at length, including a floor amendment regarding recreational vehicle provisions, with testimony from a member of the public; a vote occurred on the amendment. Extensive discussion and public testimony, largely from small business owners describing crime, vandalism, and safety concerns, preceded consideration of a resolution establishing a storefront support program, which was amended multiple times before a vote occurred. The council also voted to suspend rules to add an emergency executive session to the agenda.
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.
0 Good morning, everybody. Before we begin our meeting, councilor Novick has asked for a pre gavel. As you may remember, councilors have the opportunity twice a year to request a moment before we start our meeting for a conversation or presentation for up to five minutes of whatever they choose. So I am going to turn this over to councilor Novick for a brief minute.
1 Thank you, madam president. A couple of months ago, the so-called department of homeland security put out a video to the tune of a certain popular song and cnn that had to point out to them that they must have had no idea who wrote the song or what it was about. The song was written by one of the leading anti-fascists of his day. A song a songwriter who wrote songs supporting migrant workers like deportee and pastures of plenty, a song who was for everything this administration's against and against everything this administration is for. So I wanted to take a moment. Oh, and when the songwriters family was informed of this video, once they got done laughing and they said, well, we're just going to have to sing the song and take it back. So to honor the guthrie family and to put forth the vision of community and togetherness that woody guthrie espoused in this song, as opposed to the vision of division and hatred. Current administration. Propounds I thought that I'd sing it and no pressure, but if anybody wants to sing it with me, feel free. This land is your land. This land is my land. From california to the new york island. From the redwood forest to the gulf stream waters. This land was made for you and me. As I was walking that ribbon of highway I saw above me that endless skyway I saw below me. That golden valley. This land was made for you and me. This land is your land. This land is my land. From california to the new york island. From the redwood forest to the gulf stream waters. This land was made for you and me. I've roamed and rambled. And I followed my footsteps to the sparkling sands of her diamond deserts. And all around me a voice was sounding. This land was made for you and me. When the sun came shining. And I was strolling. And the wheat fields waving. And the dust clouds rolling. As the fog was lifting a voice was chanting. This land was made for you and me. This land is your land. This land is my land. From california to the new york island. From the redwood forest to the gulf stream. Water. This land was made for you and me.
2 Woody guthrie, by the way, lived in what is now district one, for.
3 That is true. That is true. Thank you for pointing that out.
4 Councilor and councilor Novick. Thank you for starting us off this morning. I will now call us into today's city council meeting. It is 937 on Wednesday, October 8th. Keelan, could you please call the roll?
5 Good morning. Clerk here.
6 Green. Here.
7 Zimmerman. Avalos.
8 Present.
9 Dunphy. Smith. Here. Canale.
Procedural episode · turns 10–18
Parliamentary activity detected in this stretch (see the markers above). An editor-reviewed analysis has not been published for this episode yet.
10 Here.
11 Ryan. Here. Koyama Lane. Maria. Here.
12 Novick here.
13 Pirtle-guiney here.
14 Thank you. Colleagues, the first item on our agenda is approval of the agenda. There have not been any requested changes. Oh. I'm sorry. Could you please read our rules of order and decorum?
15 Yes, I'd be happy to. Welcome to the Portland city council. To testify before council in person or virtually. You must sign up in advance on the council agenda at ww Portland. Council agenda. Information on engaging with council can be found on the council clerk's webpage. Individuals may testify for three minutes unless the presiding officer states otherwise. Your microphone may be muted when your time is over. The presiding officer preserves order. Disruptive conduct such as shouting. Refusing to conclude your testimony when your time is up, interrupting others testimony or council deliberations will not be allowed. If you cause a disruption, a warning will be given. Further disruption will result in ejection from the meeting. Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass. Additionally, council may take a short recess and reconvene virtually. Your testimony should address the matter being considered when testifying. State your name for the record. Your address is not necessary. If you are a lobbyist, identify the organization you represent. Virtual testifiers should unmute themselves when the council clerk calls your name. Thank you.
16 Thank you lauren.
17 I think all that singing threw me off this morning. Colleagues, the first item on our agenda is agenda approval. There have not been any requested changes to the agenda. Are there any requested changes from the dais? See? Okay, councilor Smith.
18 Madam president, there is a disparity study vote. It's on the second to last. Can we do a time certain at 12:00?
19 Are you requesting that we not do it before 12:00? Or that we do it beginning right at 12:00?
20 Not before 12:00.
21 So we can switch?
22 If we. Let's leave the agenda as is. And if we get to 12:00 and we get to that item of the agenda and we're not there yet. Councilor Ryan, I hear you offering to switch the order for your two items. Does that work?
23 Yeah.
24 Thank you.
25 Okay. Perfect. Colleagues, if there are no other requests, do I have unanimous consent to adopt the agenda? Okay, great. Thank you. The next item on the agenda is public communication. Keelan, could you please call up our first guest?
26 First up, we have catherine jimenez.
27 Welcome. Thank you for being here this morning.
28 Good morning council. Thank you for having me. And thank you. Councilor Novick. My name is catherine jimenez. I would like to preface this commentary with the fact I originally submitted my inquiry back in January, after mayor wilson affirmed the city's sanctuary status. I had initial concerns about the haphazard declaration of how these ordinances would work to protect the most vulnerable among us, given there were no clear, actionable planning or public safety initiatives readily available. Fast forward ten months, and clearly the city was not prepared for the overreach that was to come. Let me be clear. I come to you today not only as a Multnomah county taxpayer, but a born and raised Oregonian who has lived along the I-5 corridor my entire life. Like many children who grew up along this interstate, I was cautioned on the prevalence of human trafficking and various tactics kidnapers use to target victims. One of the most disconcerting schemes we were warned about entails these assailants impersonating law enforcement agents. Since January, with the gross increase in federal funding for dhs, there have been dozens of cases across the country of civilians impersonating ice agents, attacking women and immigrants, or plain clothed ice agents impersonating local law enforcement to conduct unconstitutional arrests in sanctuary cities, including those proposed to intimidate civilians on the street corner. I have yet to see any forms of credible identification on persons claiming to be a part of ice or doe dhs. One recommendation I could offer is to follow suit with california's recent law banning agents from wearing masks while on duty. We need to know who is in our community so that they can be held liable for the atrocities they are committing against unarmed, peaceful community members. Those of us who live on the south waterfront can affirm that over the summer, one city block has in fact been ravaged by unidentifiable, masked, militarized individuals since as early as may. I can assure you, the only threat residents have been facing have been the constant barrage of pepper bullets, tear gas and noxious chemical agents that are being deployed against unarmed civilians. If the city was burning, it would be due to the perverse use of munitions being deployed in the neighborhood, often catching fire along the dry grass brushes where, thankfully, anti ice protesters are vigilant and able to help extinguish the flames before they spread. This happened multiple times over the fire season this summer. While I can appreciate this council finally taking action, it shouldn't have taken an entire summer of chemical munitions waged on civilians. 25 illegal detainments in which reports of physical abuse and sexual misconduct while in ice custody, or a school closure due to the high volume of live munitions faculty were finding scattered amongst the playground to prompt an official city response. We, the residents, don't need ice out of Portland in 1960s 30 days. That gives those unidentifiable volatile agents in their equally manic supporters the time to further pollute, incite violence or abuse our neighbors. We need that corrupted influence out of our city. Now, with the reprieve granted by the us district court over the weekend, I urge this council to really think about the new ordinance, ordinances you plan to implement and how they will work in conjunction with other public safety offices to ensure the civil rights of your constituents are protected. When tyranny becomes law, resistance becomes duty. I hope that this council can take that duty seriously. Thank you very much.
29 Thank you very much for being here today.
30 Next up we have herman.
31 Welcome. Thank you. And we do have your written comments posted online as well.
32 Oh great. Thank you. So my name is herman. Thank you for having me today. As I put forth in the letter that I sent, my ask is simple. The path behind me and the path ahead of me is very complex with this piece of property, but I am hoping that if the council is willing to vote to have this piece of property removed from the foreclosure listing and put back with the city, that I can make progress with this property and and move it forward. I don't know if the council has questions for me given my comments. I tried to keep them brief in the letter, but as you can see, there's a lot of history with this piece of property in Portland. So I guess I don't know if it's appropriate to ask if you guys have any questions of me or what I might be able to do to help convince you to vote to remove it from foreclosure, I did. I have spoken with the foreclosure department over the last couple of years, starting with February 24th. Unfortunately, they haven't been willing to bring it to the council because I am not able to give them a very detailed, specific timeline about how and when, and I can do all of the things with this property. And the reason being is the complications going through all of the environmental permitting. I don't know how long that will take. The estimate I was given was 3 to 6 months. Doing the actual work has to be certain times of year, so there's just a lot of variables here. In addition to me being able to fund the project. So. I guess I will open it up to questions. If you have questions for me.
33 Thank you. And colleagues. I don't know if you were able to read the letter that miss herman submitted, but this is about a property that went through the foreclosure process in February of 2024. So under the previous council.
34 Oh I'm sorry. No.
35 No, that's okay. I'm not, I'm not. I just happened to be at you when I was looking around, okay.
36 And if you didn't have a chance to read it, ultimately. What happened? My father got sick in October of 23. He passed in 24th February. Sorry.
37 Take your time. It's okay.
38 The council voted February 14th of 24 and he passed on the 23rd. So I didn't have an opportunity to work with the city ahead of the foreclosure to avoid that foreclosure. So I'm asking the council to give me that opportunity back and help move this property forward.
39 Thank you. I don't know, sitting before you today where this is in the process with the city, because that vote has already happened. But we can certainly ask some questions about where it is in the process. Mr. Jordan, I don't know if you have any updates you can share with us on this property.
40 I don't at this time, madam president, but I'll engage with jonas and revenue to see where it is in the status and what can be done.
41 It has gone through the foreclosure process several times without a bid on the property. From my understanding, it will just continue to go up for auction every couple months, again leaving me a kind of an inability to do anything with it. Because any time or money that I spend trying to do something with the property could just be yanked out from under. If it actually gets sold in foreclosure. My understanding from the foreclosure department is the only way to kind of remove it from that group and put it back with the city and allow me to work with the city, would be to have the city council vote to remove it from foreclosure. So I appreciate the follow up, and I am on the books again next month. So if we if it doesn't end up on the agenda, I will see you next month and hope if you have any questions ahead of that, I'd be happy to answer.
42 Thank you so much for being here today.
43 Thank you.
44 Next up we have lyra anderson.
45 Welcome. Thank you for joining us.
46 Thank you for having me here. My name is lyra anderson, and I will be speaking on constitutional legitimacy. So legitimacy regardless of system of governance, is one of the most important foundations as it displays a bond of trust between the governed and the governing, defined simply as the conformity to the law or rules. In order for a government to be considered as legitimate. It therefore stands to reason that the government must be beholden to the rules and laws it sets down, for if even they aren't beholden to their own laws, why should those they govern be beholden to their authority? In our case, the federal government is beholden to the constitution of the united states of America. And with this current administration alone, I'm afraid to say that if I were given ample time, I would be listing every single violation for perhaps, maybe a few days that have been going on since the beginning. The last time I was here, however, I had spoken about the illegal abductions by the immigration and customs enforcement agents taking people off of the street, holding them indefinitely, or deporting them without trial, without representation, and regardless of immigration status, including 10% being American citizens and around 77.1% without a criminal record. The fifth amendment states very clearly that each and every person, so long as they are within the borders of the united states, are obligated to be given a fair trial, to be given fair legal representation, and to be judged by a jury of their peers, to which not a single person taken in by ice has ever been given. A situation that we now realize has gotten much worse after the closure of the alligator alcatraz camp, with between 800 to 1800 detainees having been reported as missing and all data on them having been erased, leaving the rest of us wondering where these people are, why they were incarcerated, and figure out how we can bring them home and return them to their families. But to this administration, with what the constitution says, does not matter to them. In fact, the partizan control over congress, the white house and the supreme court has actually emboldened their illegal actions, including a recent raid in chicago with 37 apartment residents, including children, some without clothes, being abducted and arrested without warrant for such a raid on October 3rd. For our situation in Portland, I have read the letter of our adjutant general, alan grunwald, urging his troops to follow their oath and act with professionalism. While I have heard that a federal judge has blocked the Oregon national guard's deployment in Portland, I do agree with his message. They should follow their oath, and I wish to remind him in all military members that their oath is to the constitution, not to the president. And while the president is the commander in chief, it is only when he is not in conflict with the very constitution that instills legitimacy and authority to the administration's governance. Without that, the president nor his administration has any authority or power to speak up when he abducts his people without trial or warrant when he makes war on American cities and the American people and the American people. He has no authority. So I urge uphold your oath to the constitution and ignore whatever orders the president has that violates the rights that the constitution instills.
47 Thank you.
48 Thank you very much. We appreciate your message.
49 Next up we have robert jennings.
50 Good morning. Last name jennings. First name is robert.
51 For being here.
52 I want to speak on the amount of vehicles in the city of Portland that do not have current registration, which for the most part means they don't have valid insurance. I've been to multiple departments here in the city, as well as the county, and if anybody drives on the city of Portland in the area, still notice many vehicles without current tags or they have the. The reflective plates. So you can't get the the plate numbers when going through a camera light. In here I have 23 pictures of license plates that I collected over a two week period. And of these, there's four of them dating back to 2021 that don't have registration. And. Here in the city of Portland. I had, I had I had put in a question of like, are vehicles allowed to be pulled over in the city of Portland by police strictly on tags alone, being unregistered? And I got an answer of no. In Portland, Oregon, police are not supposed to pull you over for simply having expired tags on your vehicle, though they can cite until you for parking with expired tags. I'd really like to see the Portland police bureau take a look at that policy. I've tried a couple times to speak with different representatives, and I keep getting well. That's something you'll have to take up with city council, and I'd just like to know why it is that a vehicle can be towed with PBOT, which I understand controls the parking. But if a vehicle is on the road with no current registration, I've been hit twice. And one of the reactions when I got out and asked the gentleman for insurance, he said sorry bro, don't have insurance and the vehicle was out of registration for three years. I'm not sure which which of the councilmen and councilwomen control any of the Portland police bureau. Department of trying to enforce this, because if a person comes downtown, they're driving. If they don't park, they're doing whatever a public garage. There's no way to to enforce the idea of no registration. And it's losing revenue for the city and it's losing revenue for the state. So I'd just like to voice my standing on that and multiple pictures so that it is not something that I am making up on my own, that there is photographic proof. And I do know PBOT in 2024 hired more officers. It's just moving vehicles. It's a whole different story than. Just parked cars. Thank you very much.
53 Thank you for sharing those concerns. At this point, council doesn't directly oversee the police bureau like the old commission did, but we do communicate with the mayor regularly about things like this. So we appreciate you being here.
54 Next up we have adi Smith joining us online. Adi you're muted.
55 Welcome adi. Go ahead and unmute and get started when you're ready.
56 Adi are you able to unmute.
57 Hello. Can you guys hear me.
58 We can hear you now.
59 Can you see me? Where's my picture? Hang on. Oh lord. Alright guys, can you hear me? Can you see me?
60 We can now. Yes, both of those.
61 I apologize. I am going to be 15 seconds over. So I'm sorry. And it's going to sound dispirited and mean. But I've been waiting, so I'm sorry in advance. Okay. Hello. My name is adi Smith. Today is October 8th, 2025. I'm speaking before the Portland city council. I signed up to speak in July of 2025 for the next city council meeting. It is October. This needs to change. I've said this before. If it doesn't change and voters have to continue to wait three months to speak to city council, we will vote you out. This is intentional. It should not take three months to speak. Anyone signing up should be able to speak each week. I will be pivoting several times during this address. First, where did the three quarters of $1 billion go that was supposed to be used to fight homelessness in Portland? How much of that was used to help with rental assistance to keep people in their homes in Portland and Multnomah county? Where is the budget? I would like to review the variance report. I'd like someone, oh my god. I'm so sorry, y'all. I'm so sorry. I'd like to review the variance report. I'd like someone to email this information to me. Second, there is a reason governor kotek is saying that we don't need trump to send troops to Oregon. It's because the democrat led state legislature and the governors are doing the same thing to black and brown people that these troops would do in silence. Black, biden and obama deported just as many people as trump. Black people represent 1.7% of oregon's population, but 9% incarceration rate. This doesn't mean we're guilty of anything. This is systemic and structural racism. The democrats like their racism and hateful, deceptive silence like a wolf in sheep's clothing. They like to attack you when you're not watching. Then they use their police and courts to make you disappear. But they don't like trump's loud, vulgar racism. It's not classy and dignified. Third, governor kotek has appointed racist judges to the bench, like michael riedel and elizabeth lemoine. Riedel grants motions when defendants haven't been served at all, never mind, quote unquote, proper service for court. I mean, not serve for court at all. Lemoine grants motions when defendants don't have an attorney present at hearings and trials. Former governor kitzhaber appointed judge ricardo menchaca, and like nick fuentes, he is a vicious, disgusting, lying, untrustworthy, violating, vile, white assimilating, racist. Kate brown appointed judge Eric boucher, who is so racist and white supremacist that Washington county is being sued because he and the deputies in his courtroom discriminate against the black attorneys that come in there to represent their clients. The democrats endorsed sheriff caprice massey. This white woman is married to a black man, and I can only assume that she is not racist at home. But when she leaves that door, she turns into caroline levitt and stephen miller. Judge and judge mark peterson are judges in Multnomah county circuit court. They are violating housing laws. People facing eviction are being discriminated against, and their rights under the law are being violated by these judges. I'm almost done. They both need to be voted out of office. Democrat governors are appointing these racist to office and their targets are black and brown people. The Oregon state legislature, with ben bowman, julie fahey and others is a failure. Black people are not considered at all in any of their legislation. Almost done. I will let trump burn this country down. He's well on his way. I will not vote for democrats who support Israel. Full stop. I will not support democrats who refuse to write legislation that stops violence against black people. Fourth and final. For now, sergeants towing is stealing cars that belong to black and brown people. They are targeting our neighborhoods, sergeants.
62 Told me. Thank you. Addy.
63 Shut down.
64 Thank you very much. Thank you very much for sharing all of those concerns with us. We appreciate hearing from you.
65 That completes communications.
66 Thank you. Keelan. A lot to follow up on. Councilor Smith, did you have a comment at this time?
67 Yes, madam president, what is the process for for being able to get on our public docket? I'm trying to. Understand understand what the previous.
68 I'm going to let keelan answer that. And I'll say first, I know that because we moved from weekly to twice a month meetings, when we switched to the new form of government, there was a bit of a backlog because the public had previously had twice as many opportunities for public communication, because it occurs at every meeting. By moving back to weekly meetings, one of the benefits, I hope, is that we won't have the same backlog that we have had for members of the public who are hoping to take advantage of those public communication slots, but I want to let keelan speak to the sign up process, because I believe that our clerk's office has also made some adjustments in the sign up process to help ease the tension there.
69 As well.
70 Thank you, madam president.
71 Yeah. Thank you, council president. Thank you, counselor Smith, for that question. We are in the process of making a change to how folks sign up for communication. So instead of reserving in advance starting, we're looking to start this in December, people will be able to sign up for a communication when the agenda is published on Friday. So they'll be able to sign up on Friday for the following week's meeting. There will still only be five spots available, so it'll be first come, first serve.
72 Okay, so.
73 It's five.
74 Spots.
75 Five spots, and then folks can only provide a communication once every month.
76 Okay. And if they want to speak on a particular agenda item, are they prohibited from speaking on a particular agenda item?
77 No.
78 Okay. So I just wanted to let the public know and to address what addie Smith was talking about. We are no relation, but I wanted to make sure that people know the process and what that looks like.
79 Yeah. And we will be updating all of our communications on our website. We'll be sending out a notification to our email distribution list so that people understand the the different way that will be available for them to sign up.
80 Excellent, excellent.
81 Thank you, thank you.
82 Thank you for asking that question, counselor. I know this is a process that has been an I would call it an inadvertent issue raised by some of the changes in moving to this new form of government, and I hope we're getting back on track for members of the public. Keelan, thank you for the update for everybody.
83 Thank you.
84 Colleagues. The next item on our agenda is the committee referral list. The only item currently on the committee referral list since last week is accepting the bull run treatment project 2025 annual report, which has been referred to the transportation and infrastructure committee. I will note that I am expecting to see a number of other things over the next couple of days, so we will likely have a longer list next week. Keelan that moves us to our regular agenda. Could you please call the first item on our regular agenda? Item number four.
85 Authorize the bureau of transportation to acquire certain temporary rights necessary for construction of northeast 122nd avenue. Safety and access. Beach street wasco street project through the exercise of the city's eminent domain authority.
86 Thank you, keelan and colleagues. This is a second reading, so if there is not any discussion, we will move to a vote. Seeing no one in the queue keelan could you please call the roll?
87 Clerk?
88 Hi, Green. Hi.
89 Zimmerman.
90 Hi, Avalos.
91 Hi, Smith. Hi.
92 I Ryan.
93 Hi, Koyama Lane.
94 She had to step out.
95 Sorry.
96 Morillo.
97 Hi, Novick.
98 Hi, pirtle-guiney.
99 Hi.
100 The ordinance passes with ten votes.
101 Thank you. And I'll note, we had a number of first readings, last meeting. So we have a number of second readings to whip through this meeting. Keelan, could you please call the next item on our agenda?
102 Item five declare property and an unnamed road off northeast 33rd drive as surplus, and authorized the bureau of transportation to dispose of the property by sale to marine, llc.
103 Thank you colleagues. This is another second reading of a nonemergency ordinance. Seeing no discussion in the queue. Keelan, could you please call the roll?
104 Clerk a.
105 Green?
106 Hi.
107 Zimmerman.
108 Avalos I. Smith I canal.
109 Hi, Ryan. Hi.
110 Morillo.
111 Hi.
112 Novick.
113 Hi, pirtle-guiney.
114 Hi.
115 The ordinance passes with ten votes.
116 Thank you. Could you please read our next agenda item?
117 Item six. Vacate a portion of an unnamed road near the intersection of northeast 33rd drive and northeast marine drive. Subject to certain conditions and reservations.
118 Colleagues.
119 This is a second reading of a non emergency ordinance. Seeing no one in the queue for discussion. Keelan could you please call the roll?
120 Clerk? Hi, Green.
121 Hi, Zimmerman.
122 Avalos.
123 Smith I know. Hi,
124 Ryan,
125 Hi,
126 Maria. I Novick. I pirtle-guiney. I the ordinance passes with ten votes.
127 You. Hi. Could you please read agenda item seven for us?
128 Authorize exception to title 17 underground wiring districts. Code to allow for the placement of decorative lighting across Portland bureau of transportation. Designated pedestrian plazas and the skidmore old town historic district and the new chinatown japantown historic district.
129 And colleagues. This is the first of two ordinances that were part of that package on changes to our city plaza program. We voted on resolution last week, and we have the two ordinances today. This is a second reading of a nonemergency ordinance. Seeing no one in the queue for discussion, keelan, could you please call the roll?
130 Clerk. Hi, Green. Hi, Zimmerman. Avalos I. Smith I.
131 Know, hi, Ryan.
132 I. Morillo I.
133 Novick. Hi pirtle-guiney.
134 Hi.
135 The ordinance passes with ten votes.
136 Thank you.
137 And keelan. Could you please call agenda item eight?
138 Amend transportation fee schedule for fy 20 2526 to reflect changes in the plaza use permit program.
139 Thank you. Colleagues. Seeing no one in the queue for discussion. This is another second reading of a nonemergency ordinance. So keelan, could you please call the roll?
140 Clerk? Hi, hi, Zimmerman. Avalos I. Smith I I.
141 Ryan. Hi Morillo. I Novick. Hi pirtle-guiney.
142 Hi.
143 The ordinance passes with ten votes.
144 Thank you.
145 Could you please call agenda item nine?
146 Establish a charge to fund city payment of the flood safety benefit fee to the urban flood safety and water quality district.
147 Thank you. Colleagues. This is another second reading of a nonemergency ordinance. Seeing no one in the queue for discussion. Keelan, could you please call the roll.
148 Mark Green?
149 Zimmerman.
150 Avalos I Smith. I know I I. Morillo I Novick I. Pirtle-guiney I.
151 The ordinance passes with ten votes.
152 Could you keelan please call agenda item ten.
153 Authorize bureau of transportation to acquire certain temporary rights necessary for construction of the northeast shaver sidewalk 102nd to 115th avenue project through the exercise of the city's eminent domain authority.
154 Thank you, keelan and colleagues. I am in the queue for discussion. I got a request on this item from the. Public works service area to add an emergency clause today so that they can begin work on this project immediately. A nonemergency ordinance generally takes 30 days to go into effect, and our bureaus are hoping to begin this work this month and not have to wait 30 days for this ordinance to go into effect. You will see posted online a proposed amendment pirtle-guiney one, which would add a section two to the ordinance to say the council declares that an emergency exists in order that the northeast shaver sidewalk project may occur without delay. Therefore, this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage by council. I'd like to move this amendment and would request a second.
155 I think that was councilor Ryan. Thank you, councilor Ryan. Councilor Smith, do you have discussion on this amendment?
156 Yes. Madam president, I need to find out what is the cost of this project and is this being paid for with PCEF dollars?
157 Oh, mr. Jordan, I don't know that we have anybody here today since this is a second reading. Do you know the answer to that question?
158 I don't think we have anybody from the public works service area.
159 Councilor do you need the answer to that question before you vote? Because we could delay.
160 This voting today, are we?
161 This is the second reading. So we are voting today.
162 Madam president, I think somebody might be able to comment on the project.
163 Okay.
164 Perfect. Please come up. Go ahead and introduce yourself for the record.
165 Marty maloney I'm a PBOT right of way acquisition supervisor. I'm not the project manager, but I do know I believe this is safe routes to school money from ODOT grants. And that's why we're trying to get going as quick as possible just because that funding.
166 Perfect.
167 Thank you.
168 Thank you so much for jumping in on that one. We appreciate it. Councilor Smith. Anything further?
169 No, thank.
170 You.
171 Councilor Zimmerman.
172 Yeah. The presentation has 2 million from ODOT. Fixing our streets is 1.5 safe sidewalks to schools 1.4. Total 4.9.
173 Thank you very much for pulling that out of the presentation. Colleagues. Is there any other discussion to the resolution or to the amendment? Okay. Seeing none keelan could you please call the roll on the amendment? Pirtle-guiney one to the underlying ordinance?
174 Clerk by Green. Hi, Zimmerman. Hi, Avalos. Hi, Smith. Hi.
175 No, no. Ryan.
176 Hi. Morillo. Hi, Novick.
177 Hi, pirtle-guiney.
178 Aye.
179 The amendment is approved with nine yes votes and one no vote.
180 Thank you. Keelan colleagues, is there any other discussion to the now amended ordinance? Okay. And because this added an emergency clause, we are able to pass the ordinance, although it was just amended. So keelan, could you please call the roll on the now amended ordinance.
181 Clerk a Green, a Zimmerman? Hi, Avalos. Hi,
182 Smith.
183 I no I Ryan I Morillo I.
184 Novick I.
185 Pirtle-guiney I.
186 The ordinance as amended passes with ten yes votes.
187 Thank you.
188 Keelan. Could you please read our next agenda item.
189 Item 11 amend city code to adopt state of Oregon building codes by reference.
190 Thank you. Colleagues, this is a first reading. We have a committee staff summary from christopher haire, who I believe is filling in for a colleague today.
191 Yes. Good morning, madam president. Councilors. For the record, christopher haire, council policy analyst and sharing the committee staff summary on behalf of claire adams, who is staff to the homelessness and housing committee, the ordinance before you document number 2025 374 was heard in the homelessness and housing committee on September 23rd. It was referred to council with a recommendation to pass the ordinance. Amends for city code chapters related to the administration of state building codes by replacing date specific references that require periodic updates, with references to the corresponding Oregon revised statutes and Oregon administrative rules. These changes allow for continuous alignment between city code and corresponding state building codes. The relevant chapters, as amended in exhibits a through d, include. Title 24 building regulations. Title 25 plumbing regulations. Title 26 electrical regulations and title 27 heating and venting regulations. The full impact statements on this item includes information on financial and budgetary impacts and analysis, economic and real estate development impacts and community impacts and community involvement. No verbal testimony was submitted on the item prior to committee action. Two people submitted written testimony prior to committee action, and one person submitted written testimony prior to council agenda posting. General themes included ensuring that adopted references to state statutes and administrative rules are clear, consistent, and stand up over time. General concerns regarding enforcement of city rules for landlords regarding property maintenance and building code compliance. This concludes the committee staff summary. Thank you.
192 Thank you so much, christopher. Councilor Avalos, do you have anything to add to that?
193 Yeah. Thank you. This came to the committee where it was reviewed and approved. I'm pleased to support it. These amendments are a straightforward but important step. They bring our city code into alignment with state law by referencing the Oregon building codes directly, rather than listing year specific additions. That change eliminates unnecessary procedural steps, ensures Portland remains in compliance with state requirements, and it simplifies the work for staff and council alike. So that is my comment. Thank you.
194 Thank you. Councilor councilor Kanal. Do you have any technical questions? Is that why you're in the queue here? Questions about the committee report?
195 I don't have questions about the committee report. I would like to ask something before we do testimony though.
196 Okay.
197 Go right ahead.
198 Councilor Dunphy is not present right now. So I wanted to just formally introduce his amendment, which is attached down at the bottom and yield the floor to his staffers when it's appropriate to explain that.
199 Thank you. Let's see if councilor Smith has any questions for mister hair. And if so, do that and then we'll invite up councilor Dunphy staff. Does that work, counselor?
200 Yes. Thank you. Thank you, madam president. Quick question. Have other jurisdictions around the state done the same thing to comply with the state codes? Or are we the first?
201 That's an excellent question, councilor Smith. I might defer to bureau staff to answer that question.
202 Sure.
203 Welcome. Thanks for being here to take this one. Go ahead and introduce yourself. For the.
204 Record.
205 Jody lawson with Portland permitting development. Yes, actually a lot of them have already done this, and they actually did it quite a while ago. We were one of we're not the only one who's still referencing the specific year, but there's lots of other groups around Oregon that already don't do that. They go straight to the owners and says.
206 Okay, okay, perfect. I was just trying to figure out where we were in the queue and what it looked like around the state. Thank you.
207 Counselor. Anything further? Okay. Colleagues, councilor Canal, I believe, has formally moved councilor Dunphy's amendment. And because an amendment motion often comes with an explanation of the amendment, before we take a second, I'd like to invite up councilor Dunphy staff to give us an overview of what we have before us. Are they in the room?
208 They were.
209 Coming before.
210 Why don't we, while we wait.
211 I'll just second it for a point of get to the discussion second.
212 Okay.
213 I think before we discuss the amendment so that we can hear the reason for the amendment, let's take public testimony first. That will give his staff a oh, we've got it. Perfect. We would love to hear about the amendment before us.
214 Yes. Thank you so much. So this amendment.
215 Can you introduce yourself?
216 Oh, sorry. For the record, madeline west councilor Dunphy's chief of staff, this amendment is in response to our well-known colleague terry harris, who comes frequently, who is a code expert and likes us to, as code changes come up, align code with best practices around streamlining. He identified some specific issues in this code that weren't as smooth or as applicable to law as they could be, including removing rv language, because in 2019, rvs were taken out of the jurisdiction of permitting and placed into ODOT. So we don't need to be responding to outdated code changes or state level, sorry, state level changes. And did terry do his testimony on this yet?
217 We have not yet heard public testimony. No. We're hearing the explanation of the amendment first, and then we'll move to public testimony.
218 All right. So yeah, it was in response to terry. We worked with rp and they were like, they were actually really appreciative of the testimony that terry brought to committee and went through with ppd. They went through with a with a fine tooth comb. In response to his notes, and responded as they could to streamline the language, make it more clear for the public, and to remove the language that wasn't applicable. So that's the kind of context in general. And if terry is here to testify, I'm sure he can share more.
219 Perfect. Thank you so much for that overview. I believe we have a motion from councilor Kanal, a second from councilor Zimmerman. Councilors, I would like to hear our public testimony before we move into a discussion. But if anybody has questions for madeline while she's here, let's get those in. Councilor Zimmerman, are you in the queue to ask madeline a question?
220 I have lots of questions. So it's actually not for madeline. It's more about our permitting staff in terms of why these changes were not. I'm not. I've seconded it. I'm unlikely to support this, but I'm trying to get myself there. I'd like to know why they were not already included. These amendments look particularly technical, and to take them up. In consideration kind of from the from the dais is leaving me wanting for the reason here. I'm not that was not conveyed yet. So I'm looking for our permitting staff to comment.
221 Perfect.
222 I believe we have somebody coming up right now to answer that.
223 Jody. Orson. So the question is, why were these amendments not included the first time? We added the ors and the was one of the concerns was that the references in the in the Oregon statutes and administrative rules would change, and that we would be in the same spot we are right now where we'd have to come back and start keep changing title. So we took them down as slim as we felt like we could, which was just to the was. So we took out all of the ors references in terms of the recreational vehicle part. Honestly, we just didn't see that that wasn't the focus of what we were trying to do with the ordinance. So we incorporated that sort of work project with this one because it was already in front of you all.
224 Okay. And. For councilor Dunphy staff, you referenced a member of the public quite a lot as an expert. So you're making that assumption. But I don't know what that means in this respect for a member of the public as an expert on permit and development code, is that what you're asserting here? Because you're asking a lot of faith in this. But but yeah.
225 No.
226 I understand why this came because I sit on that committee and I don't think these were ever brought to me. So I'm.
227 Was brought to us when it came to homeless and housing. The testimony was given that day in written form. There wasn't time to make such a technical adjustment on the dais. So after that conversation, we reached out to ppe and went through a process where we worked collaboratively to incorporate those recommendations and to analyze whether those recommendations were accurate to code. Terry harris is a member of gtac.
228 He that has nothing to do with permitting development, though, right?
229 Right. But he is code expert and and an attorney who, like, dives deep into the weeds of this and compares city and state code frequently. If he is here today, he said he would be here to testify. I'm sure he can tell you a little bit more about his history and expertise before you vote on the amendment, if that's possible. Yeah. Anything else?
230 Well.
231 Just one other piece. These changes do not affect the codes that Portland development is implementing or regulating. It is only the way that we're pointing to those. So that's not it's almost more of a title language type of game of streamlining. And you can continue streamlining and streamlining and streamlining. This is where we proposed a certain level of detail. And the recommendation was to go even slimmer. We're not against that. It goes along with what we were originally trying to do. So we took it down to as slim as we thought that we were comfortable with. And again, the reason it's kind of not a Portland development specialty is because the codes themselves are not changing.
232 And councilor Dunphy's overall perspective is, if, you know, code changes are coming to this body, we might as well slim them down, make them as clear and understandable as possible as we take those bites at the apple. Although I'm sure there could be a much larger project in terms of unifying code across the body. We just don't have those resources at this time.
233 Thanks. I find that part of this conversation far more compelling. I think that citing an individual member's take on something put me in a strange position interpreting this, and that was too heavily weighted in your introduction of this amendment. And so I think it sounds to me like this amendment could have been introduced as a bureau amendment just as much as it was introduced as a councilor Dunphy amendment.
234 My understanding is we're not allowed to put in amendments.
235 That's okay. Yeah, okay, I understand that.
236 But we are in support of it.
237 Okay. Thank you for that I appreciate it. No other questions.
238 Councilor Green. Thank you, councilor Zimmermann. Councilor Green, are your questions ones that you'd like answered by the folks who are up at the table right now. Okay. Go right ahead.
239 So I just want to make sure I've I've got the kind of the process clear. So what I'm, what I'm hearing is there was a there was a code change brought by the bureau that we need to align. We need to fix this sort of we just have like dynamic referencing basically. And then because this was in committee and we had the public there to engage with this and think about it, we had a member of the community who says, you know what, I've got an idea. I've got some expertise in this and some experience. Reached out to a councilor on the committee, said, hey, would you carry an amendment? Then there was an interplay between the bureau to say, actually, this makes some sense. And then it comes back as an amendment to council is that that's how the process went.
240 Correct.
241 That's, I think, colleagues, how we envisioned the new form of government to work in the legislative process. So that's kind of what I'm seeing with this. I just want to clarify that. Thanks.
242 Thank you.
243 Thank you. Councilor councilor Canal are your questions for this group before we hear public testimony?
244 Yeah, my question is for madeline. Thank you so much for being here. So what it sounds like to me, and I'm just going to pick the first of these references to to use as an example here. And this is within the 24.9020 says regulation under this chapter covers all installation or alterations of manufactured dwellings and accessory structures. And then in between those two, it currently has recreational park trailers and other recreational vehicles. And this amendment would remove that text. So my understanding is that effectively we're saying the chapter doesn't actually regulate that because the the state law no longer regulates that since 2019. And so we're effectively harmonizing our text to align with accurately describing the state law. Is that correct?
245 Correct.
246 Okay. Thank you.
247 Thank you councilor. That's exactly the portion I had questions on as well. Councilor Zimmerman, are you back in the queue? Go right ahead.
248 All right. So help me out here a little bit. So if, if a. I'm looking at 24.90 .020 scope on this recreational vehicle piece, I want to make sure I'm understanding. We're specifically talking about the trailer or the vehicle, not the park in which they exist.
249 Correct. We still yeah.
250 We still have permitting and development scope and control within your bureau as it relates to manufactured home parks, rv parks, if they existed in the city of Portland, et-cetera, but not the actual vehicle themselves. We've placed the vehicle itself into the transportation bureau's authority.
251 That's correct. We do the parking spots and then those vehicles, alteration and construction of those recreational vehicles is outside of the scope for us.
252 Okay. Okay. Thanks.
253 Thank you. Councilor, I actually do have a question for the bureau. Every public body has a different style book for how we write our code. And I'm trying to understand if this cleanup. Keeps us consistent and in line with our style book, or if this cleanup is perhaps more streamlined, perhaps a direction some people would like us to go. But inconsistent with how we normally write our codes and with what our style books at the city would say.
254 My interpretation of that is because our code has been written by so many people over so much time, that it's incredibly consistent across permitting code. But I would go to the body.
255 Maybe I'll look to lauren on this as our attorney here for this meeting. It generally read a public entity has a style book. Our attorneys have a way that they draft things when we as councilors bring things forward. I'm still getting used to the city's style book. It's not what I'm used to. And I've had a few moments where I've read things and said, well, this doesn't make sense. I don't like how it's written, but at the end of the day, I want our code to be consistent. So I have set aside my own style to defer to the city's style book, and I would like to understand if these are changes made in line with our style book, or if these are changes that are in line with what somebody else thinks is a best practice, but that move us away from what we currently consistently do.
256 So our office has historically taken the position that when we're referring to state law, we need to then update based on update the code to reflect state law. So it would be kind of this ongoing process. And I think generally that's still is our position. I think the legal advice on this one is a little different, because the city is bound to apply the state building code, and so we don't need to come back and readopt, if that makes sense. So if the zoning code is referring to state law and state law might evolve, we have to always come back and update that state law. This might be a little different. So it's not really a style issue so much as whether or not this is a mandate under state law, and we have to implement it regardless of whether or not we've come back to update our code. Does that make sense?
257 Feels like it is in line with our style guides. This does work, and where it's creating inconsistencies, that's justifiable. The main effect of this, it sounds like, is that in future years, we won't have the discussion in committee about what the changes were at the legislature that we then need to update, take some work off our plates. Makes things move more smoothly. On the other hand, perhaps we miss that opportunity to say. By the way, here's the updates the state made. We need to be in line with those. Is that accurate?
258 I think that that's an accurate summary.
259 Okay. Thank you.
260 Yeah.
261 Go right ahead.
262 The piece that we are taking out is the year and the administrative rules we're pointing to only have in them the year, the effective date and the mandatory date. So there's not other content in there that would be part of the discussion in a normal like what we just did with the energy code, where we changed that 2020 to 25.
263 Got it. Thank you very much.
264 And also, to be clear, our staff didn't make any of these changes. This was all in collaboration with staff and they are the only ones who redlined or touched this in this amendment. So it wasn't our staff coming in and having our own interpretation of style. It was in collaboration with the department and their interpretation of their own style.
265 Thank you. Yeah.
266 Councilor Zimmerman, did you have another comment?
267 Thanks. I appreciate the ease and clarity in making it easier. So help me out a little bit. In subparagraph 020, we're keeping the term accessory structures in the paragraph, and then in subparagraph 030 we're getting rid of the term accessory structures. And then in subparagraph 070 we are keeping in the term accessory structures. And so.
268 I need to be able to look.
269 At it of course. So I'd like to know if that was intentional or a scrivener's error. Because clarity of accessory structures being in this or not in this is probably important. And I can't tell yet from this document.
270 We'll give you a minute to.
271 Pull that up.
272 Scope, scope and then adoption of codes and regulations. And then in permit application. Those are the three major sections of this where the red line does or does not include accessory structures. And it doesn't for me doesn't look consistent. And I'm wondering if it's just because in the middle it is because of ors 455170 or if it's something different.
273 I was just able to look at the scope question and the part that remains there is the part recreational vehicle park. So it's still the parks like the park themselves, ppd, ppd still has.
274 I'm talking about specifically. It's just two words accessory structures.
275 Sorry.
276 It remains in there in the scope paragraph. It does not remain in there in subparagraph 300 or excuse me, 030c if you go down to that red line, you've removed the word accessory structures. And then further down in the 070b excuse me a not a just the opening. I think you've got, you've kept it.
277 Okay. So I can I can I can.
278 Is more detailed than I. Expected to get to this morning. But here.
279 We go.
280 Sure. So in the first one we've left it in because we are still looking at accessory structures to manufacture dwellings. So we want to leave in that piece of the accessory structures. Then in the next section where we've struck it, it's still a couple of pieces earlier in c. So it says. For maintenance and alteration of manufactured dwellings and accessory structures. So that accessory structures has stayed in like the first sentence of c, that paragraph c breaks it up into each of the different scope items. So it's got manufactured dwellings and accessory structures as the first item. Then development and maintenance of parks, manufactured dwelling parks. And then it has development and maintenance of recreational parks, picnics and organized camps. But what we took out was the maintenance and alterations of the park trailers and recreational vehicles and accessory structures just to those.
281 Can you articulate a bit of the reason around that? Because I thought we were dealing with the parks.
282 We still have the parks.
283 Yeah.
284 And if there was an accessory structure that was large enough to. So over 200ft■s to trigger the regular residential building code, we would use that. But part of how this all came up is over 918525 was removed because that 2019 legislation said that bcd could not have any admin rules for the construction or alteration of recreational vehicles or park model recreational vehicle vehicles, so that we would have nothing to point to in terms of what the requirements are. Even if we left that piece in.
285 Okay. Thanks for that clarity. I appreciate helping with their okay. I think that's it.
286 Councilor Kanal did you have additional comments there?
287 Yeah, just to put a finer point on it where it says it earlier in the paragraph, it references ors 446250 and 446253, which do still include accessory structures in the ors itself. The reference makes sense. And then down below where it's removed, it talks about ors 455170, which I don't know about old versions, but the current version does not reference accessory dwellings in any way. So when it says we can't say as authorized in x, if x doesn't authorize it. So just that's the the particular reference part of it. And it's in, it's in actually six places in there. And it's only removed in this one place because that's I believe where the 2019 change occurred. Thanks.
288 Thank you councilor. I'm not seeing anybody else in the queue for questions. So let's invite up our members of the public who are here to testify. And then if there is additional discussion, we'll call you both back up. Keelan, could you please call up our testifiers.
289 Terry harris.
290 Mr. Harris, welcome. I'm sorry we didn't get you up sooner. I wanted to make sure we had those technical pieces answered. But please go ahead and introduce yourself and let us know what we're looking at.
291 Okay?
292 I'm terry harris, I'm over in hillsdale, and as always, thank you for this opportunity to provide comments. I support the goal of this legislation, namely to provide clarity to make code maintenance easier and more efficient, deep appreciation to councilor Dunphy and his team for acknowledging my written comments. I was unable to make the housing committee meeting and following up on the concerns. This is stuff that's really in the weeds and as you are now well aware of, so I appreciate his efforts and I strongly supported the amendment. Okay, so I'm not a code expert or practitioner as members of the. Governance committee knows I'm a non Oregon retired attorney cursed with an interest in good government and also cursed with a compulsive need to read the stuff. So also, as councilman Ryan knows, almost exactly a year ago I was testifying before the old city council as city code came up to the council for realignment. With the new form of government, I found myself reading and then skimming, and then largely not reading or skimming thousands of edits on thousands of pages of city code presented to the council for approval. And so trust me when I say there are lots of problems like this one scattered throughout the city code right now. So let me just zero in here. This incorporation by reference problem is a problem elsewhere in the code, and it's something that I'm sensitive to. It's trickier than it seems as you're now aware of. And these kinds of code repairs are necessary throughout the code. Title 14 is filled with them. My favorite was found in title 19, the harbors, where it specified a specific code coast guard document on navigation that has been superseded since 2014 is a totally different document. Not only that, that document changed last year. It's impossible to keep up with these incorporations by references. So anyway, the general idea here, these code changes are only as good as the stability of the reference. The state administrative code is dealing with it now. City legislation that you're going to hopefully pass will make a more stable reference. Adding the term, as amended from time to time might be some good practice on other things. You give me another minute and I'll finish up here. Adopting by reference is only as good as the accuracy of the reference. So when I was going through this reading it, the there were two typos that didn't line up with the with the state code. So that's what triggered the rest of my view here.
293 And mr. Harris, I do need to ask you to wrap up so that I can be consistent amongst all testifiers. I'm sorry.
294 Right.
295 So anyway, to sum up, code hygiene and maintenance is a huge, boring chore, but it's necessary. The very rushed, top to bottom overhaul last year only made it more obvious. The city needs to weigh, needs to find a way to do this methodically and accurately, without taking away from the important things you guys need to be doing. But it's your responsibility. You're in charge of the code.
296 Very much.
297 That completes testimony.
298 Okay.
299 Colleagues, we have an amendment with a second open on the table. Is there further discussion to the amendment? Okay. Seeing none keelan, could you please call the roll on the amendment?
300 All right. Clark.
301 Hi, Green. Hi, Zimmerman.
302 Avalos.
303 Hi.
304 Smith. Canal.
305 Hi, Ryan. Hi.
306 Koyama Lane.
307 Hi.
308 Oops. Sorry. I just lost my. Maria.
309 Hi, Novick. Hi, pirtle-guiney. Hi.
310 The amendment is approved.
311 Thank you.
312 Colleagues, is there any discussion to the under lying ordinance? And I will note this is a first reading. So we are not voting today but we have the opportunity for discussion. Councilor canal.
313 Thank you. Yeah, I fully agree with the the general sentiment behind this ordinance and, and the idea that we should be cleaning it up. I think the exact level of specificity and light to heavy touch where on that spectrum this lies is actually also correct. I think we've seen last fall where there was a larger scale changes to the code that often ended up with some unintended consequences that had to be undone previously. Not coincidentally, councilor Dunphy's office found a portion of code that related to fair wages for contractors that had sort of been the bathwater that was thrown out with the baby, and we got that back in earlier this year. So I think finding the, the, the, the right level of how to trim and adjust code is good. And I think this is a really good example of collaboration as well between the bureau and, and a counselor's office on the amendment side, but with the bureau alone on the original. So thank you so much. I'll be very happy to support this next week or next meeting.
314 Thank you. Counselor. Counselor. Avalos.
315 Yeah, just one quick comment to say that per the conversation, it sounds like with our new form of government, the executive branch, the enterprise, we should I would appreciate seeing from the mayor's office an effort to unify the bureaus and the codes, make sure we have good nomenclature and naming conventions. It just feels like it's going to keep coming up and is a good opportunity right now to start finding these, to start creating the systems and structure for what they look like, to unify them. So I just wanted to add that comment, and I'll follow up with the mayor's office about that thought.
316 Thank you counselor. Colleagues, seeing no other discussion, this will move to a second reading. I'll note that this will likely not come on second reading next week. Next week is our evening meeting. We are going to have a very full agenda with things that I expect will have a fair amount of public testimony, so I'll be moving second readings likely to the week after that today. Keelan could you please call? You know what we are holding? Counselor Smith asked us to hold on the next agenda item if she wasn't back yet. So we are going to, per her request, switch the order on agenda items 12 and 13. Counselor Ryan, that works for your folks, correct?
317 Yeah. Let's do it.
318 Okay. Keelan, could you call agenda item 13.
319 Require city administrator to develop a plan that establishes a storefront support program.
320 Thank you. And I believe we have chris here as well, in a place of of a different colleague to give us our committee staff summary. Go right ahead, mr. Chair.
321 You're back.
322 Thank you, madam president. Councilors, for the record again, christopher hair, council policy analyst ensuring the committee staff summary on behalf of craig cook, who is staff to the arts and economy committee, the resolution before you documents number 2025 370 was heard in the arts and economy committee on September 23rd, where it was referred to council with the recommendation to be adopted. The resolution requires the city administrator to support submit a report to council that outlines a plan for creation of a storefront support program. The resolution requires specific elements to be included in the report, including identification of staff and financial resources needed, articulation of standardized data collection methods to collect, track, and report data regarding vacant storefronts and the reasons businesses close and or leave Portland. Identification of coordinated response systems and processes to ensure crime, vandalism, and chronic nuisances. Issued reports made by local businesses. Receive a coordinated city response, development of processes, practices and standards to ensure coordination, clear lines of responsibility, transparent process and systems for communication with businesses impacted by crime, vandalism and chronic nuisance issues. Inclusion of appropriate stakeholder and bureau level technical expertise to support cross-disciplinary planning, collaboration and oversight. Inclusion of options and opportunities for funding the storefront support program. Inclusion of a proposal for monitoring, communicating and updating council and other stakeholders, and recommendations for how and when to convene city prosper Portland and community stakeholders to operationalize the plan elements. The report must be submitted to council no later than January 31st, 2026. The resolution also requires the city administrator and chief financial officer to develop a proposed strategy for resourcing and funding the storefront support program, to be incorporated in the fy 20 2627 budget development process. The full impact statement on this item includes information on financial and budgetary impacts, economic and real estate development impacts and community impacts, and community involvement. 11 individuals provided verbal testimony and seven people submitted written testimony prior to committee action. General themes included small business owners sense of a lack of support from the city, importance of identifying what city and council means by storefront support. Need for the restore grant program to be made permanent. Negative impacts from empty storefronts on neighborhood business districts. Difficulty of doing business in Portland due to taxes, graffiti, retail theft, and threats to security and safety of employees. Unsustainable costs for small businesses to provide their own security. Need for more police resources. To make the security and safety of small businesses a priority shift from in-person economic activity to online resulting from pandemic. Negative impact of parking and transportation policies on small businesses downtown safety issues causing small businesses to relocate or close altercations and drug use in and around small businesses, and need for the city to listen to small businesses on their needs and how policies will impact them. And that concludes the committee. Staff summary. Thank you.
323 Thank you, christopher councilor Green. I believe you chaired this committee. Is there anything you'd like to add?
324 Co-chairs I co-chair I presided over the meeting. There was robust conversation around this. We spent, I think, a good almost what, 70 minutes talking about this. We heard from the community. This was a unanimous. Support base in the committee to say, you know, we think that it is urgent to have the city present us with a plan on how to best support our storefronts. And so, yeah, we were all grateful for the councilor for bringing it forward.
325 Councilor Green councilor Ryan, this is your this is your resolution. Would you like to share anything with us about it?
326 I'd like the opportunity.
327 To to frame it further. Thank you. Co-chair Green. Thank you, madam president. And thank you, chris. Good to see you. Good morning. As promised, I'm back with part two of supporting our most cherished and most vulnerable businesses in our city, our storefronts, those that hug the public right of way and as such, are the first responders to our public. And with today's action, we can prove that this council is united. Let me repeat that this council is united to prioritize our storefronts. We showed that support for them when we passed part one in the budget. By insisting the mayor and prosper Portland continue to provide resources for repairs to windows and doors from our repair grants, legislation that received unanimous, unanimous support. Today I return with full support from the arts and economy committee. It has been universally supported because it's common sense policy. This resolution will have real positive impact for our public facing storefront merchants. Going back a few years ago. Bear with me. As a commissioner, my team would constantly hear from storefronts about the challenges they faced post pandemic. I took those stories we heard to the mayor, my council, colleagues, to the affected bureaus, and other issues and crisis would demand our focus and responses to businesses was isolated, not strategic nor systemic in practice. Since elected as a councilor in January, my focus in this community facing elected public servant role has been to go out and listen more in the neighborhoods that I represent in north and northeast Portland, from saint john's to northeast broadway, cully to canton, and I'll add from beaumont village to mississippi. You name a neighborhood in district two, north and northeast. And I heard some of the same stories on every street as I did when I was listening to stories downtown, or old town or pearl or eastside or Hawthorne. There's a deep pain from these voices who have who have demonstrated commitment to our city. And many of them are not making any profit while spending time and money on security, safety and livability issues. Many small businesses are having an increasingly difficult time staying afloat just from the higher cost of employees, supplies and products. Many of the businesses talk about how they are 1 or 2 months before they would have to close up their shop. The feedback goes something like this. It seems like the only time I hear from the city is to nudge me on a new fee regulation. The city is asking for more money from me as I'm receiving less services from them. I love this city. I'm an original Portland liberal and it pains me to complain about conditions. We need help as the conditions on the street are sadly not improving and we are a target. I don't want to quit, but the reality is I just can't survive much longer. To put a fine point on it, the city economist has shared that our business license taxes coming in more than 12 million below last year's forecast. Repairs for vandalism and crime are costly and often not insured. The streets and sidewalks are littered with trash and human waste. These are all reports from everybody across town. There is visible drug use and dealing and individuals and mental health crisis and active addiction on our streets persist. Frankly, we haven't figured out how to manage the humanitarian crisis on our streets, and we need to intellectually be honest that our neighborhoods and businesses are negatively, negatively impacted as well. We can and should acknowledge the differing needs of all in our community. At the same time. I want the legislation brought forward today to say to our local businesses, our storefronts, we hear you. In fact, the entire council is listening to you. You, the innovative, creative, full of grit storefront owners you represent the hopes and optimism of the city. You are renters, your owners, your parents, your singles. I've heard many who represent every political angle you can imagine. And yes, I've heard from many who didn't vote for me. And that doesn't matter. Because to me, these are all of our constituents. We know we need the city to be a partner. As you face challenges keeping the businesses afloat while facing greater headwinds, we have shared responsibilities to ensure Portland is a city in which businesses can not only survive, but grow and thrive. The resolution does three concrete things to help our local businesses. It will track vacant storefronts and businesses across the city, mapping them so we identify if real time concentrations of vacant spaces which are targets for crime. It will gather data from business owners who leave the city or close their business, which is useful data to us as city councilors and the mayor and the administration. This will inform smarter strategic decisions to retain businesses. Last but not least, this resolution looks to formalize and streamline the service model between our city bureaus who work on crime and livability issues. This includes police PBOT Portland institutions, prosper Portland, and others. We need to build structure and systems, clarify, shared and intersecting responsibilities. I vision this team to also include hand-picked storefront owners from each district, and I'll be adding an amendment to that point when we go further. So today we're here to talk about the fundamentals and impactful ways that this council can help our local storefronts. We need to act with urgency and intention. I look forward to supporting our city administrator's office as they develop the plans to align city services for improved responsiveness, to issue face our the issues facing our business community, and the creation of data resources that will inform council's decisions making issues that are impacting our storefronts. Portland. We have a revenue problem. We must stop the for lease signs growing across our city, and we as a city must show up. I'm delighted we have many storefront owners who have been wanting to testify. I just want to say how big it is for many of them to peel away from their storefront offices to come down here, and I want to make sure that we welcome them. And thank you in advance for your passionate love for your city. Thanks.
328 Thank you, councilor Colleagues, if we do have a number of people signed up, I believe over a dozen to testify. If there are comments or technical questions that you'd like answered before we hear public testimony, we'll take those. Now, I do want to make sure we get to that public testimony before we get into a full, robust discussion so that we can hear from members of the public. Councilor Morillo, would you like to speak now or later?
329 Now I just have a few questions on this. Thank you, councilor Ryan, for bringing this forward. As I'm sure you recall, during the budget season and as you announced, you had unanimous support on your amendment to support small businesses. And as a socialist that believes in using government funding to support people. You know, I love doing that for businesses, too. I do have a question on this resolution. As far as is there an implicit cost to for staffing or anything to look into this? And can you explain a little bit how this is different than what pmo is already doing?
330 Yes. Thank you. We have a plan that will come back from mike jordan and his team at the end of January. At this moment, I do think like some of our best solutions have been is where we have people in place, but we could think differently and we could break down some silos and respond in a in a better way. And so I think there will be some innovation in how michael jordan and his team will set up the bureaus that were mentioned, and also really partnering with prosper Portland. As you know, they've been building a small business office. I think this gives them a roadmap on how they could be actively engaged with the city in something that's really relevant and current problem and challenge, and so I look forward to that. Do I think that there could be resources once the plan is figured out? Absolutely. And but I want to hear what they can come up with as they are in charge of their budgets at the moment. And I look forward to some adaptive thinking. And you said this is what pmo. Yes, but pmo can't do it alone. Who would you say? This is responsibly the responsibility of?
331 I was just asking how this is different. You know, some of what's written here is about people going and addressing concerns that small businesses have, which sounds all good and well, I just thought that was something that pmo maybe already does since they address different neighborhood concerns. So I was just curious what what is specifically being asked of that's different than what we already have.
332 I like that question because I've heard people say that. I've heard that say is what the police are supposed to do. Is this what Portland solutions supposed to do? Is that this is what the new small business is supposed to do, office and prosper. So after hearing all that, I thought, can you all get together? Like, can we heard these cats and figure out what your plan is and how you guys work together and not do this in in the process? So.
333 Gotcha. Okay. So what I'm hearing is this is sort of a plan to create a plan.
334 I had to push back quickly on that. It is a plan. It's a strategic plan. It's trying to bust the silos that currently exist to actually do some systemic change on how we respond to our storefronts. So I feel like plan to plan made it sound like a bad idea. So that's why I got defensive right away.
335 I didn't put any judgment on it, but I, I appreciate that. Thanks.
336 You're welcome.
337 Thank you. Councilor councilor Kanal did you have questions for before we hear from the public?
338 Yeah, I have a.
339 Question and a quick note. The quick note is I did post three potential amendments, which I haven't moved yet. I'm going to discuss them after testimony. But I did want to daylight that in case any testifiers wanted to note anything on that. My question was about the number one in the second category of be it further resolved, which is just the date. And I wanted to ask councilor Ryan if you could just speak to why that specific date.
340 Why the specific date of January 30th? Because I want to make sure that this is urgent. And when we put a date that I felt like it was as quick as a date as we could get, as soon as date as possible by managing expectations of something really complex and necessary. I thought when I talked to, I did have conversations with city administrator jordan about this, and I thought that if I put a later date, it would get too close into the budget challenges, and I wanted to make sure that we had some clarity going into that. That was daylighted to all of us before we got into the details of the 2627 budget. Thanks.
341 You're welcome.
342 Thank you. Councilor councilor Novick, do you have questions for this time?
343 Yes. Thank you, madam president. Councilor Ryan, I appreciate the fact that in you've got certain language which says that the city and prosper don't have the current ability, system or resources to do things you'd like to do. And part of the plan is identifying options and opportunities for funding the storefront support program if the plan identifies cost to the program. But I was just wondering if you're saying that some of the things that are listed here, like identification of coordinated response systems and processes to ensure crime, vandalism, etc. Receive coordinated city response and development of internal processes, practices and customer service standards across the city to ensure coordination. Et cetera. Et cetera. Do those things not cost any money? I just trying to figure out the extent to which we're saying if anything costs money, we need to figure that out. And we're saying do things that might cost money themselves.
344 Yeah. Good question. Big picture civics lessons. So with this legislative body, our job is to signal to the operations, which is all controlled over by those two boxes and wanting them to focus on something. So this is, in my opinion, how we're supposed to move work in this new form of government. Do I think that each of those entities that you mentioned would have an answer to how they're responding is probably yes, but have they coordinated those responses?
345 But but the question I'm asking is, do you think you acknowledge in this document that there might not be the resources to do what you're asking to be done? I'm asking, how are you? Are you sure that the things that you're telling the administration to do in terms of planning don't cost any significant money?
346 I don't know yet. That's why we have a plan coming out on January 30th. Again, this is legislation asking for that. Them to tell me that I think that each of them would answer, that they do have a plan within their own bureau on how they respond collectively. It would be helpful if they were at the same table coordinating that response. And from there, I trust that they will come back with what the expense would be for resources to improve it.
347 But do you think that the things that you're instructing them to do as part of creating a plan have a cost? Particularly, I'm looking at items three and four of the resolved.
348 Do I think.
349 That the things that you're telling, as opposed to the things that the plan would cost, what would it cost to do the things you're telling them to do in pursuit of a plan?
350 I don't know until I hear from them what they're already doing. I think to say that there needs to be resources for this when some are already perhaps doing that. I don't we don't know yet. We're hearing that each one has their own practice, if you will, that does some of this. And so it will be important to hear what the delta would be from the resources they currently have and how working more efficiently and more creatively together as a team, what that gap would be in resources.
351 Okay, I think I might have a question for the city administrator. Actually, before that, I just wanted to note that the whereas about the tax burden, although I'm not disputing the accuracy of what you're saying, I feel I would feel weird voting for something that includes that language. If we're not planning to cut somebody's taxes. I tell.
352 You, I think what I am accustomed to with resolutions, this is an ordinance, is a resolution is to plainly speak the problem. And so for me, after listening to all of them complain about the extra tax burden, I couldn't help but add that in. And it is statewide, and I could. I need to find data that just says Portland. So if that's a friendly amendment, I'll I'll welcome it.
353 Well, I'm actually not sure what my amendment would be, but.
354 You sounded like you didn't feel comfortable with the specific language about the state taxes. Is that true? I've heard that from one of.
355 Well, it says that that they found that local taxes on businesses increased by 82%. So we're going to focus on that. I just feel funny saying that when we don't have any plan to cut those local taxes.
356 It's a problem. So again, in the problem, the problem statement, which is what motivates one to do a resolution to ask the the operations of the city to focus, I felt it would be untrue to not list that.
357 I would ask the city administrator and tell me if it's an unfair question. Do you think reading this document that complying with what the document specifically says the administration should do would itself have costs as opposed to the cost of implementing the plan once it's drawn up?
358 Thank you. Counselor, can I stipulate that that's an unfair question? No. I'm kidding there. I don't think there's any question that developing the plan that is laid out within the resolution will take city resources to do so. We will be in a discussion of breaking some certain folks loose, to be able to work together to try and fulfill the plan that that the resolution is attempting to get us to do by January the 31st. I totally understand and quite frankly, agree with the motivation of choosing the date in that if we can fulfill the intent of the resolution, there would be something for council to consider in the context of a future budget, where I think everyone is well aware that there will be very difficult trade offs to be talking about. This is one choice that council could consider with the background of the plan that's envisioned by the resolution, but it will take resources to do it. Yes.
359 Thank you.
360 Councilor Novick. Is that all you have?
361 That that is.
362 Okay, councilor Avalos.
363 You want to wait till after the testimony?
364 Okay.
365 Counselor Green.
366 I have just a very quick clarification question. I'm going to hold my response to the discussion until after the testimony. In fairness, councilor Ryan, I thought I heard you say that you're going to bring another amendment to put a hand-picked group together. Did I hear you correctly?
367 Yeah, maybe. Maybe we should put them into the record so that people testifying can hear those. I'm waiting for staff to send out an email specifically about this, but basically mine would be under the be it resolved inclusion of storefront representatives from each Portland district to provide feedback and ensure equitable citywide access is included in program implementation recommendations. See, I do listen to you.
368 Okay. So I'll I'll look for that and we'll kind of think through that as we hear the testimony. Thank you.
369 Would it be fair for you to read in what you're considering as well? Okay.
370 Councilor Kanal is next in the queue, so why don't we hear from him?
371 Yeah.
372 Two quick notes. I think what councilor Novick was talking about might be covered in part in maybe not exactly the same way. In the first of the three amendments I'm going to talk about here. And secondly, I do think it's appropriate for us to have a conversation later on about it. I don't think we can allow the idea that asking the information, asking the administration for information might cost money. If that was the situation, we'd be doing everything through ordinance and adopting supplemental budgets for every ask for information. I think that's a little bit of a slippery slope. So just wanted to flag that the three amendments I'm putting forward, I'm going to go in reverse order here. One might also overlap with what councilor Ryan just said. I would add a new number one under the first there. Now, therefore, be it resolved. That says adds. So it leads in that the report will include but is not limited to and it would add definition of storefront business and criteria for businesses that would qualify for the storefront support program, including a plan for how support would be equitably distributed across Portland districts. The reason for this, in brief, is because although it references the businesses above, the closest thing I have to a definition of what is or is not included is actually something councilor Ryan said verbally at the beginning of this presentation, which is those that hug the public right of way. And I think it's just I would love to have an understanding of the scope. We have a lot of different types of businesses in the city, and just having that definition be something that I'm sure councilor Ryan would work with the administration on, so that that's written in whatever plan we have. The second proposed amendment is to the sixth whereas clause, which currently reads whereas decreased health and vitality of our business districts directly correlates to the city's declining overall economic health, reputation and identity, it would remove the word declining and replace the word decreased with the so that it would say, whereas the health and vitality of our business districts directly correlates to the city's overall economic health, reputation and identity, the purpose of that is to continue the idea of linking these two concepts, which I think is really important, and I'm grateful that councilor Ryan did do that without necessarily prejudging the outcome of that or indicating a negative confidence level in in that in those business districts. And then the third proposed amendment is to remove entirely the fourth whereas clause, for the exact reason that councilor Novick identified, which is we're talking about taxes, but we don't do anything about the taxes in the later portion of it. I understand that it is a contextual statement, and businesses are obviously dealing with taxes. That's part of the context in which business operates. Businesses are also dealing with several other things. Our council staff, council operations staff noted. I think 11 individuals gave verbal testimony and gave a lot of other things that are not referenced in here. If we're talking about, let's lay out the entire context of businesses situation. We would be talking about things like shift of in-person economic activity to online negative impact of parking and transportation policies, but because we're not doing anything about that, if we approve this resolution in the therefore be it resolved, I think that's the reason why those aren't referenced in the whereas similarly, I agree with councilor Novick, if we're not going to do something about the taxes, it doesn't necessarily relate. So those are the three amendments that I will likely be proposing. And if in a portion of them, I think a portion of them may be friendly, so I might break those up after the testimony. Thank you.
373 Thank you. Councilor. Counselor Smith, do you have any questions for before we hear from the public?
374 Yes.
375 Yes, I have a question on whether or not I should add an amendment to this before or after testimony is when.
376 If you have an amendment to propose, why don't you do so now so that members of the public who are testifying know everything that's on the table?
377 Thank you. And since my colleague councilor Kanal took out four, I have a provision for five in the provision of financial assistance. And let me give you the backdrop on this. I do have an e council for the last couple of weeks, a ordinance that's called the small business mediation and crime prevention ordinance. And I was thinking there's a way that we can merge these two. And what that provision would say under number five would be provide a provision for financial assistance for small business storefronts covering operating costs related to security upgrades, crime prevention, prevention measures, recouping financial losses due to theft, vandalism, drug activity, human trafficking, homelessness and resolving public safety incidents on adjacent properties adjacent to them. And where this came from, I had coffee with a cop, a monthly coffee with a cop. In the last month. We talked about this in my office, in my district office, and there is a lot of conversation going on behind the bottle drop, and there's a lot of drug activity. There's a lot of criminal activity, theft, vandalism of houses and businesses that are taking place. And there is no fund at the city of Portland to be able to remediate any of these things. Now, there there are funding sources at prosper Portland, but as we said before, there are no economic development funds that we have specifically dealing with this kind of issue. And I think adding a friendly amendment and identifying funding that we can attach to this is is a better opportunity to get this passed. If we identify funding. And I'm looking for that right now, and I have some proposals to come up during the town.
378 I want to just say thank you to my colleagues who have offered friendly amendments. I think it's important for those who testify to hear them, and I appreciate, councilor Smith, that you acknowledged we did pass the repair grants, which gets to some of what you're speaking to, and you're asking it to go further. So I did hear that. I want to acknowledge councilor Kanal and others who have added some friendly amendments before we get to the people who are here to testify.
379 Thank you.
380 You're welcome.
381 Thank you. Councilors. Councilor Morillo. Did you have something additional?
382 Yeah, I had two further questions. One question is the amendment that we passed during budget season. Was that not related to helping storefronts with some physical aspects, like if they had a broken window, the city helps to fund those repairs. Okay, so we do have funds that exist to help businesses right now, and I believe prosper Portland also has a grant program to help with some things like this. So there are repair grants and things that exist in the city. Correct.
383 We asked in our budget process, we put money back into that 100 k, I believe is where we landed. It was higher at one point.
384 Higher? Yeah. Okay.
385 Did it end at 150?
386 I believe we ended at 100,000 to refill the storefront.
387 Repair grant.
388 Which runs through prosper Portland. And as you noted, councilor is funding for various repairs or reimbursements after weather emergencies that small businesses in our city might need.
389 Okay, so I guess, you know, I just want to point out that we do have funds at the city of Portland to support small businesses. It sounds like, and I'm just putting that out there, as we're talking about the budget deficit that we're facing. And my constituents, who had a loss of any rental service assistance, who are ending up on our streets. So as we're balancing these priorities, I just want us to think about that, because I voted in favor of the amendment to support small businesses during the budget cycle, and there were other needs that were not addressed that many of our constituents are facing right now. And so if we can find a pot of money that I'm unaware of, then that's fantastic. I'm excited to learn about it. I wanted more clarity on your amendment to your proposal, councilor Ryan, about this small group of selected business owners that would advise the city on business matters. Would this be specifically small businesses and how would that be defined? And also, how is that different than what the Portland metro chamber already does for the city of Portland?
390 It's quite different. So I think what what matters is that we have their voice included in the development of this strategic plan that will offer better response times for storefronts. I think when you go around town and you meet the storefront owners, it's again, it's it's everybody. It's renters. It's it's it's people who own homes. It's it's people from every political category. And so I think it's important to have that style of person involved, those that are actually facing the sidewalk that have been dealing with the issues, not someone that's on the 10th floor of a building. It's quite different when you're experiencing that on the ground in our main streets and downtown.
391 Yeah, I agree, but I just I thought the Portland metro chamber, they convened businesses and then gave us feedback on things already.
392 Yeah. But you know, it's not a monolithic world out there. So what I've noticed when I go around to the storefronts, I don't know the percentage that are members of the chamber. I'm sure some are, but many are not. Many of them are closer to the the work of mobilizing within their own main streets. So st. Johns has a community, mississippi street has a community. And so that's what I experience. And so I wanted to make sure that that type of voice was at the table, as opposed to what I think is a more formalized group that you're mentioning.
393 And how will the voices be selected?
394 Well, that'll be fun. We will have to figure out how we will I will conduct we'll start with the committee in district three doesn't have anyone on the committee, and I'm aware of that. So you could probably help me with how we select somebody from district three with your two colleagues.
395 Okay.
396 The other folks are on the arts and economy committee, so it's a little bit easier for me to figure that out, how to move it forward.
397 Okay. Thanks for that.
398 I just want to ensure that they were at the table. Oh.
399 Thank you, councilor. Counselor Ryan, I think you'll have a lot more questions after the public testimony.
400 I'm just glad we're all engaged.
401 On this. Why don't we move to hearing from members of the public? Mr. Chair, thank you for being here today, for that introduction for us. Keelan, could you please call up our first set of folks who are here to testify today?
402 Yes. Thank you. First up, we have jonathan jawaid, followed by steven lin, steven cook, karen shearer and john blumenauer. Please go ahead and state your name for the record and begin.
403 My name is jonathan jawaid and I live here in Portland, Oregon. Thank you for hearing my testimony today. I'm here to speak in strong support of the storefront support program. I'm the co-founder of baseball. I'm a national baseball apparel brand with ten retail stores around the country. Several are in downtown locations of major cities like atlanta, san francisco, saint louis, and chicago. I've seen first hand how small business can revitalize neighborhoods, create jobs, and energize communities. I've also seen how COVID and the homeless crisis has made it extremely difficult to sustain those same businesses, especially in san francisco and here in Portland. Locally, I'm a partner in five Portland bars. Two wrongs cuties are in the pearl district, jackie's in the central east side, sugar hill and southeast on southeast belmont and hyde. A while in Multnomah village. Each of them have their own strengths and challenges, but all could use a little more focus and partnership from the city. At jackie's, for example, we have a homeless camp directly behind our building on ninth and sandy. Some customers no longer feel safe walking past the tents to enter. We've had to increase our monthly security budget just to maintain a welcoming environment. Last February, the weekend of the super bowl, someone from the homeless camp lit a large fire right outside our fence, causing thousands of dollars in damage and forcing emergency repairs before our biggest day of the year at cuties bar, which we opened less than two years ago on 14th and northwest flanders. We've experienced we've already experienced four break ins. Each one is costly and disruptive. If we report the damages to insurance, we risk losing coverage altogether. We've actually been dropped a few times from insurance carriers, so we just absorb the losses ourselves. We've asked. We've even asked Portland police to park a squad car. Outside of a few of our establishments around closing time, just to deter crime and noise and be good neighbors. Officers are stretched pretty thin and understandably focus elsewhere, but that leaves us again to pay for private security, cutting deeply into our small margins. The storefront support program gives me hope. It signals that our city government truly values small business that are the heartbeat of our Portland neighborhoods. Without targeted help, more storefronts will go dark. But if we invest in supporting and filling, those vacancies will create jobs, generate tax revenue, reduce crime, and bring new life to our commercial corridors. I urge you to vote yes on the storefront support program, portland's small businesses and the communities they anchor need your partnership. Thank you.
404 Thank you very much. Go right ahead.
405 Good morning. Councilors I'm steven lin. I'm the founder of under you for men retail stores. I live in district two. I'm a member of the clean and safe board. I'm also a member of bricks and mortar. I'm one of the very, very few members of Portland metro chamber in the small business category. There's not many of us, and I have several decades of retail experience in downtown Portland. Some of you may know that I'm in the process of closing our downtown Portland store, 6000 square foot store at park and Washington, but I didn't give up on downtown Portland. I've recommitted to downtown by opening a new store that's going to carry on the legacy and be owned and operated by my employees at 10th and morrison. I want to focus on really, the third section of the resolution and how important it is having a focus. Having a focus on data collection and being able to address where budgets go and where resources go is critically important. Businesses across the city are experiencing issues like the broken windows, the graffiti, the mental health crisis, especially with sud issues. These events and interactions for the most part go unreported because they're unreported. You don't see where the resources need to go. Just in the last week, I personally stopped multiple shoplifters. I recovered the goods. I've called psr Portland street response for a personal crisis, and I convinced a homeless person to move a tent twice. None of most of these things go unreported. There's no police reports for this stuff. You don't get to see where to direct your resources. There's no way to report a shoplifter that we stopped and recovered the product from. My staff runs out the door and grabs the stuff and we get it back. We don't get to report that even if it's a repeat person, we need that ability to report. And I think this resolution helps the city try to get the resources in place for a gis livability reporting system. That's the tool that small businesses need. We're frustrated. We can't report. I will not report a shoplifter even if we let them go out the door. It takes too much time. It's too difficult. I don't I'm not here to be the police force, but I could click on an app like they do in so many other cities. A gis livability reporting system is a tool that the city needs so that you can address the resources appropriately. Thank you.
406 Thank you very much.
407 Steven cook.
408 Hello. Can you hear me?
409 We can hear you.
410 Okay. Hi. Steven cook from vinyl resting place. My shop has been open for 28 years now. And I'm looking. If I don't have a successful holiday season, I'm going to relocate. I'm going to be one of those next doors to be gone from Portland. I mentioned this because it was mentioned about portland's reputation. I was voted one of the top three record stores and also uses a jeopardy clue. But meanwhile, just in the past year, in one year. When I need to point out, my shop is directly across from an elementary school, had two burglaries in a week, and me and another business owner had to chase down the guy ourselves because the police weren't going to come out. And eventually we waved down an officer and they made the rest. I've replaced a total of nine windows, three locks from attempted break ins. I've been spit on, been punched twice, once I resulting in a black eye. I had a man masturbating in my window. I've had a gun pulled on me twice. Once was last week. I had a knife pulled on me. And also I've had a customer tell me that the same person did it to them in a in a different time. I've been followed home twice. Once resulted in an attack where I had to fight the person off. I've had to cancel events due to people having mental mental breakdowns in front of my shop and scaring off people. I've witnessed drug deals, which I have on camera right in front of my shop. At this point, my credit cards are maxed, my loans are maxed, and I'm one of those businesses that where I haven't paid your taxes because I can't afford it. And as far as the grants, I've applied and was turned down because the invoices from the contractors didn't meet the requirements, which is something I can't control. I have nothing to do with the way they write an invoice. I'm the last thing I'll say is that the whole thing always comes up about, you know, whether it's an emergency or not. And I feel like when I'm found dead in my shop, then I'm going to be like, I told you so, these are emergencies. It's a ticking time bomb.
411 Thank you very much for sharing that experience with us and helping us see what's happening at your place of business.
412 Karen cherry.
413 Good morning. I could say ditto to everything that steven just said in regards to my business. My name is karen ray, owner of stadium superette, member of stadium hood, and I am in district four. Yesterday I spoke at the homeless committee meeting and just soon after that I went to my store to work some and hello in doing am I still talking or no.
414 You are. Somebody was inadvertently off mute. But please go ahead.
415 Okay. Sorry, I witnessed a shoplifter in my store. Went to go get my item back, and he ended up assaulting me as he was leaving the store with my stolen item. I did call 911 and had to follow the man until police were able to catch up to us and arrest him. My arm now is injured. I have been icing it since last night and I have his arraignment today, which I will be speaking at. But this is just like it's seriously ongoing and I think that this, this resolution, this committee is going to be super helpful for us. But I also feel like that we need more resources to apprehend these criminals that are walking around on our street. And I know the judicial system is not your your guys's fault, but you have voices more important than our voices that potentially could be talking to the county and telling the county, and especially jvp, that she needs to step up her programs to help the community as well, because it's not all the city's fault. The county is responsible for these people, for the homeless, for the criminals, for the justice system. And we just we can't do it alone. You know, like, I, I'm not a police officer, but to hell with these people coming into my store thinking that they could steal or damage or whatever and get away with it because I won't let them get away with it. So and I, I, I'm going to say it again to councilor Ryan, I want to be involved in this program from the get go. I will volunteer all my time, as much time as I can to get this program up and running, but it just we need to save our businesses because it's just going to get worse and worse and worse. So thank you for listening.
416 Thank you very much for being here today, john.
417 John blumenauer, good morning. I'm pleased to speak today in strong support of the storefront support program. Thank you, councilor Ryan, for your leadership on this issue and for other councilors. I've had a chance to meet recently to listen to the challenges that small businesses are facing across our city. For those I haven't met, my name is john blumenauer and I own the joinery. For over 40 years, the joinery has created handcrafted furniture that's here for good. Here for good is a reference to the exceptional quality and lifetime warranty on our furniture, and it's also a reference to our business practices. We operate with a deep commitment to our employees, to community engagement and to environmental performance. And as a certified b corp since 2010, we walk the walk. We are a model of responsible business. I've made a deep commitment to Portland, locating our manufacturing facility in the underserved community of saint john's and activating long vacant retail storefronts in the heart of the city, investing hundreds of thousands of dollars in the in the process in property improvements, which has added tremendous value. But we have paid a heavy price for that commitment. Our business has been devastated by the epidemics of homelessness, drug abuse, mental illness and lawlessness, leading to a climate of fear that hurts our entire community. This has decimated our customer foot traffic, which is the lifeblood of our business. Over the most recent five year period from 2020 to 2024, our foot traffic has dropped by 84%, an astronomical number compared to the previous five year period. That's 65,000 fewer customer visits, and there is a straight line from a massive drop in foot traffic to a massive drop in revenue to a massive drop in employment. We've lost over 35% of our jobs compared to pre-covid levels, and our team that's still with us pays a heavy price. For the first time this year. I'm unable to give annual wage increases and our entire team of skilled woodworkers, which make up over half of our of our team, are on the Oregon work share program. With our hours reduced by up to 50%. And they stick with us. More than half of our employees have been with us for at least eight years, drawn by the purpose and meaning our work provides. They're here for more than a paycheck, but they need a paycheck. To the city's long term instability causes stress, uncertainty, and significant financial burden. And while they've suffered, new duties have been added to respond to the daily reality of working in Portland. They must deal with and report campers theft and vandalism, drug use, drug overdoses and drug deals, trespassing, threatening behavior from people brandishing weapons. They must manage the cleanup of drug paraphernalia, feces, urine and vomit, and repair damage caused by vandalism and graffiti. These are not the jobs they signed up for. They spent time addressing these challenges, which detracts from running our business, and it frightens customers away. Thank you for your time.
418 Thank you very much for being here.
419 Next up we have albert escobar, tanya hartnett, justin youngers, bianca youngers, and lijun thorson.
420 Thank you all for being here.
421 Albert is.
422 My father. Hey, george. George escobar, my father owns milo city cafe in the northeast. Broadway. Yeah, we just been dealing with a few incidents in the past couple of years. Homeless people breaking in, things like that, where it's been really difficult to stay, to stay open. And we're. Yeah, we're just asking for help. Yeah. The thing is, I would like to know if we get the law, it can be a little more tough because people break into my restaurant five times already, and I call the police department and police show up. And I asked to the officer and he told me he got the who's inside the restaurant is going to be to 24 to 72 hours, and they had to release. And he said, so he make a mess. I had to pay for my pocket because I insurance cost me more money to fix whatever they do in my business. And I'm not talking for myself. It's all broadway, every single restaurant, every single business. They have the same problem. And my question is why? The life can be a little more tough. They say have to be a man. Some amount of money to be called crime. And I think it's not fair for business. And I hear you have a thousand $100,000 to replace glasses, door or whatever vandalism that money. Can you see more for make focus on the on the law. We use the money for hospital police department better salary and they don't use the money for replacing whatever. They make a mess. And they say we need every single small business owner. We need help because a lot of people make in in, go in the restaurant, make a mess. And it is not fair. We need to survive about business. We want to Portland like I used to pray for. Safe and beautiful. Not anymore. And I know you can do it, guys. It's on your hands. You can do that better for every single one. And the only thing I can say. Thank you.
423 Thank you.
424 Good morning. Councilors. My name is tanya hartnett. I am the executive director of working waterfront coalition. Thank you, councilor Ryan, for putting this important issue to the forefront. I will be addressing the empty storefront point, which is a huge issue for almost all small business districts.
425 In.
426 Portland. In the over three years of working as district manager for venture Portland, I was able to see and hear firsthand the issues that empty storefronts have on the business districts. Every time there was staff meetings to discuss the challenges that a business district faced, the amount of empty storefronts was always at the top of the issue list, having an abundance of empty storefronts in a district due to the do the following. Without a business in a building, more nefarious activities like camping, drug use, and fires and doorways occur. With these activities, there is always trash and debris left behind, making the area and sidewalks look messy. With the attraction of the above said nefarious activities, this tends to lead to crime and vandalism to the nearby businesses. Empty storefronts usually have no lighting, making the area darker and unwelcoming, so people avoid the area, detracting from businesses that are there with less foot traffic and community. If there is crime, vandalism and an empty building, police response seems lower and when a potential business comes to the area to look at a space, they all they see all the above and it tends to detract them from wanting to set up shop there. And honestly, it feels that empty storefronts begets empty storefronts. If a larger space has a business move out, it feels like it's not too long before the rest of the businesses on that block leave. These are all just a few examples of how empty storefronts affect entire business districts. The way Portland is made up with the neighborhoods built around and depending upon the vitality of the business district they live in, it is vital that something is done to activate, filling the spaces for the economic safety and livability to all. Thank you.
427 I can.
428 Do it. Hi, I'm lynne thorsen. I'm president of the downtown neighborhood association, and I'm speaking on behalf of the dna. I'm very saddened by what I'm hearing. I live downtown, I walk downtown, I see these things. I don't experience them the same way these testifiers do. But I'm very saddened. The dna believes this resolution is an important step in revitalizing downtown and other commercial neighborhoods in Portland. In addition to all the whereases in this resolution, the storefront support program has the potential to create excitement and community in some of our forlorn areas. We appreciate that in number eight, be it resolved, you propose that community stakeholders are called upon to operationalize the plan elements. Thank you, councilor Ryan, for including the community. The downtown neighborhood association wants to be helpful and involved. I have an idea to share that I hope can be part of the mix. How about activating storefronts with performances, magicians, dancers, cooking demonstrations, and local musicians are some ideas that come to mind. And I might add, councilors Novick and Clark might agree to sing as they did earlier in this meeting. Remember all the funky jazz clubs and other clubs we used to have, like jazz brasserie momart, jimmy mac's and the candlelight room? We can bring back that same kind of accessibility to local music, since many of our local musicians have been priced out, providing a place to perform would be uplifting for everyone. A win win. Please consider this suggestion, and please keep in mind the dna wants to help and in the meantime, support the small venues that still are here like wilfs and kelly's olympian, just to name a couple. Thank you for listening.
429 Thank you very much.
430 Okay. Hi. Good morning. My name is justin youngers. I'd like to thank Dan Ryan for bringing this resolution to the table. My wife bianca and I opened banks bar on northeast alberta street in 2001. We've seen a lot of changes, but the security situation is worse now than it's ever been. Serious neighborhood issues, street parties, drinking and smoking on the street, booming music, drunken street racing, domestic violence, sexual assaults, arguing, flashing guns and sometimes shooting them. Harassing, intimidating, scaring off patrons, hospitalizing our patrons multiple times. And these troublemakers are not our customers, they are just people on the street. It's just a scene in the neighborhood on a Friday and Saturday night. My bartenders have been punched, spit on, robbed at gunpoint, called every name in the book trying to control the scene. It's scary for me and my staff because the helpers themselves are getting stabbed to death. There's an article in today's Willamette week about a fellow alberta street bar owner getting killed, talmadge ellis trying to help. Trying to help down at dawson park. So what we've had to do is hire lawyers, security consultants, doormen all to navigate the maze that city is right now to the tune of $10,000 a month alone. This these bills are not something that we had a year ago or two years ago. They're new. We need more police. We need more police. That's just true. Remember all the remember all the talk in recent years about how we can't expect one police officer to be an expert in not only law enforcement, but in mental health crises and social worker and social work for the homeless. We can't expect police officers to be drug counselors. Et cetera. Et cetera. Et cetera. Well, what is happening right now is that that stuff has just been outsourced to the small business owner, and we can't expect that of the city police, but we are sure as heck expecting every small business owner in this city. And I don't know where we're headed as a society when all these problems are forcing small businesses out. But wherever it is, I'm taking my taxes with me. I suppose that's obvious, but it matters when there's 2000 other liquor licenses in the city, and unless something actually changes here, the tidal wave of businesses leaving will continue until there are only those who can't leave. All the things we're doing, like spending that money. I want you to know that I can't do them permanently. It's just not worth it. Small businesses need help. I'm doing these things temporarily because I believe that the city will get his head screwed on straight. I want to be part of the rebirth of this city, and I'm doing them because I don't want to leave Portland worse off than when I found it. We need to make safety and security a priority. We had a brawl inside the bar recently. A group that terrorizes us came in. I didn't even serve them, and they came in and I showed the footage of an attempted murder to the police and got no response. So after that, I don't want to.
431 Hear that this is important, but we do need you to wrap up. I'm sorry.
432 I just want to know that the city cares. That's what this is about. Show us you care. Please. Thank you. Danny.
433 Thank you.
434 Good morning, city council members. My name is bianca youngers. My husband and I have banks on alberta. We've had it for 25 years. We've raised our three children here. We've built deep roots. We've poured everything we have into this city. And I'm here today because of the first time in a long time I feel a small ray of hope in councilman Dan Ryan. And his proposal gives me a reason to believe that change is still possible. So please, please consider this. We have to pass this program. And I have to be honest, I have never felt so unsafe in this city. A few months ago at our bar, there's a group of people that will descend. We have to shut down all the time. 45 people, two women in the. The group started breaking glass in our bar, stabbing each other. Our bartender called us. We pulled up the security cameras live. She was screaming. Blood splattered on the security cameras. The police came. No name was taken, no report, no accountability. And it's not an isolated incident. We've had people that have been 86. They come back with guns in hand, standing a foot off of our sidewalk for hours every single weekend. Every single weekend. Our staff is terrified. We've endured break ins, vandalism. We've been held up by gunpoint. Gunpoint. And it feels like no one is coming. What is going to happen? How is this acceptable? We need more trained police officers. We need them like a ton. We are small business owners. We are the heartbeat of Portland and we are hanging on by a thread. And at the same time, I am trying to grow my art business. Something that brings me joy and hope. I spent months trying to lease a studio downtown and and is unbelievably affordable, $0.75 a dollar a square foot. And every one said the same thing to me. I tried to bring other artists on. No, it's too dangerous. We're not going. We're not going to do it. And landlords were begging us to sign, and I finally took a space. And within weeks, all I see is the coffee shop leaving. Everybody's leaving. I'm like, where are you going? We're leaving Portland. We're out of here. And councilman Ryan has shown us that he's willing to ask, and I am begging for that same urgency and courage from all of you. This is an abstract. This is seriously life or death for our employees, for our customers, for my family. If my husband or one of our bartenders ends up killed, or a customer who is going to be accountable for this for the first time, we are seriously talking about leaving Portland, selling the building. We own a legacy we have hoped to pass to our children, but at this point, I don't even know if we could sell it. I mean, I nobody can sell commercial property right now. It's it's ridiculous. This is not politics. This is an emergency. We are out of time. We needed help yesterday. You have to pass this program. You have to stop giving us cards, giving us lip service, telling us that I'm sorry ice is here. We need help or we are going to die. Thank you.
435 Next up we have brian orndorf, tony birch, laura streib, charles froehlich, omar valencia.
436 Counselors. Dan Ryan, thank you so much for your leadership on this. I'm brian orndorf, live and work in district four, very heavily involved in retail in downtown Portland since 2008. In 2019, Portland had one of the lowest retail vacancies in the nation, just at two and a half 2.9%. Today, the figure has climbed to 8%, the highest vacancy rate of any submarket in the greater Portland area, per data from costar. The sharp rise in vacancies is driven by multiple challenges. Office occupancy is still just 59% of pre-pandemic levels. Tourism has not fully recovered. Ongoing safety concerns and open drug use continue to deter both visitors and potential tenants. We just heard from several people real life situations. While it's encouraging the downtown Portland clean and safe reported record post-pandemic foot traffic this summer, the number of office workers downtown remains significantly lower than pre-pandemic levels. From January through August, foot traffic downtown was just 70% of pre-pandemic levels. Fewer fewer office workers means fewer customers for downtown. Retailers and restaurants are all feeling the squeeze. If we want to revitalize portland's economy, we must start at street level. Welcome. Active and safe storefronts are essential to rebuilding community, restoring pride and creating vibrant public spaces. Portland needs a bold, coordinated strategic plan incentivize return to office even on a hybrid basis. Support small businesses and retail tenants with resources and flexibility. Invest in public safety, cleanliness and vibrancy. Downtown. We simply don't have enough police and the private sector. We are spending tons on private security and if it went away, it's the equivalent to losing almost 200 officers. Reimagine urban planning around the new reality of hybrid work. Create living wage jobs. We don't have a housing crisis in this city. We have a crisis of not having enough jobs to afford to live here. We have 25,000 vacant apartment units right now in Portland. This is not a temporary dip. We're facing potentially permanent structural shifts in our downtown economy. Without decisive action, we risk a smaller, less dynamic urban core. That's why I fully support this resolution to develop a storefront activation program. It's a critical first step in what must be a long term commitment effort to revitalize our urban core. There is not a thriving region in this country with a dead or dying downtown. Let's ensure Portland isn't the exception. Thank you for your time, leadership, and service. I'm ready and willing to assist however I can, creating real, lasting solutions to drive portland's economic comeback. Thank you.
437 Thank you very much.
438 Good morning.
439 My name.
440 Is charles froehlich. I own and run froehlich gallery on northwest davis street at the corner of northwest broadway in district four. And I live in district three. I opened my gallery in 1995, and this month is my 30th anniversary. Please vote on councilor Ryan's storefront support proposal. I support it wholeheartedly. I hope you will enact it with thorough and expedited urgency. My gallery is a commercial for profit business whose operating budget is entirely covered by art sales revenue, not grants. My business has always been located in downtown Portland. Every locally owned business has a strong, beneficial, beneficial economic impact on the region, and every loss of business is also significant. The losses are mounting and have been ignored for way too long. We are now at a tipping point. People can go anywhere to find a chain, restaurant or retail. Locally owned businesses used to be the main attraction for Portland, but these days they are a rarity. The climate to run a business in Portland has become increasingly difficult, especially during the past five years. Please ask the locally owned businesses what they need to help bring activity, vibrancy and commerce back and make it happen. I've got a long list of constructive ideas to share, so please keep me posted. Number one on the list is safety downtown. When storefronts prosper, they invest and reinvest in the community. City council can and must improve the business climate, or it will continue to decline. We must work together to support the local businesses. They are the backbone of our regional economy. Special request to the mayor, city council PBOT administrator. Please reduce the parking rates. The recent increases did the opposite of supporting downtown business and they discourage people from visiting. I'm grateful to have had my business here for 30 years, and I want to keep my business in Portland, but I'm seriously considering moving it out of Multnomah county. I live in district three and I want to continue living there, but it will be difficult if the city, county and state do not return to a balanced course of common sense policies that foster a healthy business environment. Thank you.
441 Thank you very much for sharing your story.
442 All right.
443 Hello council.
444 It's great to see you all today.
445 While I fully.
446 Support the intention behind this resolution.
447 To help.
448 Our.
449 Storefront business.
450 Businesses thrive, I'm concerned that we may be recreating systems that we have just built. The city just launched the office of small business within prosper. Portland at the start of this fiscal year. Its mission.
451 Is to serve as the central.
452 Entry point for small.
453 Businesses and.
454 Coordinate citywide support.
455 So I'm.
456 Asking, how are we going to.
457 Allocate these.
458 Resources and these new systems in a program? That sounds like.
459 Just what we.
460 Stood up. Taking.
461 Point three of the.
462 Resolution describes almost.
463 Exactly what we have.
464 Going through.
465 Chemo meetings.
466 Which happen every other week. These have been some of the most efficient.
467 And coordinated.
468 Safety systems that we have so far. We had our north Portland meeting just this Monday where we talked about crime, camping, graffiti and vandalism. Our team is very. Responsive and coordinating between. Pbot and all the different systems. We absolutely need more support here. Just this week, we've had a string of. Armed robberies on lombard for our local bars. Instead of duplicating our efforts between the different silos, let's work on strengthening and scale what is working. If prosper or the office of small business is missing capacity, then let's be clear about what is needed and resource them properly. I serve as the business association president for the saint john's boosters. You got to hear a couple.
469 Of our local.
470 Saint johns businesses today as well. We have about 20% of our storefronts are empty. We have entrepreneurs that are ready to activate these storefront businesses, but our current grant programs are very narrow in scope and do not fit the needs of businesses that want to be starting. The reality is, the rent is too high for these businesses, these storefronts that have been empty for up to five or more years. Our landlords are sitting vacant on these properties and reaping a benefit of a tax write off. Instead of activating our storefront spaces in saint john's, we are doing our best to hold on to the momentum we have. But our historic downtown is struggling, as you've already heard, and that ripples into our wider economy. We have our lovely saint john's bridge that everyone comes to see. We have a private university that people from all over the country want to send their children to. So we need to make our spaces safe so that we can invest and keep building different aspects of our economy. One example of wanting to start a business. The boosters have a concept ready to go a retail and information center, co-working event space and business incubator. Because we are not an llc or a 501 c3, we don't qualify for specific grants that have an extremely narrow focus. There's money there. There's just not people. There's not the space to activate it. These vacancies that we have are don't just represent a lost opportunity. They're depleting our community and taking away the eyes, energy and vibrancy that we have to make our business districts feel safe and alive. Another group in our neighborhood has been working with the city and prosper for months before being told they didn't qualify for loans or funding. We have ideas. What we're missing is our support. If we're developing another plan, it must include concrete changes of expanding who qualifies for business and clear quicker pathways. Thank you so much for your time.
471 Thank you very much for being here and for sharing that support and those concerns.
472 Go right ahead.
473 Good morning.
474 City council members.
475 And Ryan.
476 And my name is omar. I am the owner and operator.
477 Of postal annex here in northeast broadway.
478 In addition to my business responsibilities, I'm an active member of the northeast broadway business association, collaborating with fellow local storefront owners and just trying to maintain vibrancy and safety in the corridor. Many small businesses, business owners in Portland, including myself, have experienced a significant struggle in recent years, and we're confronted with mounting challenges such as increasing increasing operational costs, crime, vandalism, and the effects of ongoing construction and limited parking availability. These obstacles hinder our ability to effectively serve the community and threaten our survival as small businesses. When storefronts are forced to close, the impact is felt throughout the entire neighborhood, resulting in loss that expands beyond economics. In response to these challenges, I am a strong advocate for the proposal of storefront support program. This initiative would provide a comprehensive citywide system to monitor and address storefront vacancies, coordinate the actions of city bureaus in response to crime and vandalism, and support the program's longevity through dedicated staffing and funding. Crucial aspect of the program is its emphasis on fostering collaboration among prosper, Portland city bureaus, and community stakeholders, and approach that is urgently needed. As someone who serves hundreds of customers each week, I can attest that maintaining open and thriving storefronts goes beyond financial concerns, if directly or indirectly affects community safety, trust and pride. And empty storefront signifies more than a loss business. It represents a break in the social fabric of our neighborhoods. I respectfully urge the city council to pass this resolution and instruct the city administrator to establish the storefront support program. While portland's small business owners are resilient and hardworking, we cannot face these challenges alone. With the leadership and support of the council, we can stabilize our storefronts, safeguard local jobs, and ensure that portland's neighborhoods continue to be strong and vibrant. Thank you for your attention and for prioritizing the needs and voices of portland's small businesses and community.
479 Thank you very much. We appreciate hearing.
480 From you.
481 Tony birch is joining us online.
482 Hi.
483 My name is tony birch. I own a local chain of dispensaries with four locations in downtown, two in southeast, and several others outside of Portland. The amount of illegal and unsafe behavior we have to deal with on a daily basis at our Portland locations is unacceptable. I simply don't understand how the city has become numb to this. Idea of Portland is really isn't that bad. As a local business owner. With my time, I'm going to give a few examples of what apparently is really, really not that bad. Most recently, once the oasis day camp has opened on northwest broadway, that already rampant crime from the nearby teepee shelter has gone through the roof. Despite mayor wilson's assurance that shelters, quote, create safer neighborhoods. Several weeks ago, a homeless man came in. We asked him for his id, which is required by law. He then threw a fit, smashed a glass display case, and then once our staff got him to exit the store, he then threw a rock through a window, which we average over three broken windows per year per location of our downtown, of our Portland locations, always from homeless people, which we're discussing repair funds. A minute ago, before this, before public testament. And I want to point out that being that we're in the cannabis industry, we are not eligible for any of these repair funds. And window replacements range from $750 to $3000 per window at the same northwest broadway location earlier this year, a heavily drug affected man entered demanding a cigarette. When we asked him to leave. He then pulled a machete on our staff member. Police reports can confirm this incident. Do you think this behavior makes our staff and customers feel safe? Now? We must address the apparent normalization of public drug use. It is unacceptable that we as a city city are tolerant to open public drug use and open displays of severe intoxication. Walking down major streets like broadway or Burnside means encountering countless people engaged in this illegal behavior. This environment is directly, directly undermines any effort to encourage tourism or public confidence around walking around the city. And while we appreciate the efforts of clean and safe, this organization is often reduced to glorified whistle blowers. We have seen multiple times where personnel will walk right by illegal behavior or dangerous behavior repeatedly. Now, also, in a city that has some of the most egregious, egregiously high tax rates in the country, how is it that business owners have to pay extra for the clean and safe service, which this ultimately means? Cleanliness and safety is not an included public outcome from these insanely high taxes. Now, I will quickly rattle off a few other regular occurrences that are apparently not that bad. Never ending graffiti trash cans caught on fire, trash cans stolen. So many times we get charged for them by the garbage company, trash cans getting torn apart nearly every time we put them on the curb. Constant aggressive panhandling countless times. People defecating on our building or private property, never ending employee turnover from safety concerns, countless theft inside a building and outside our building. We average ten snatching grams per year per location, and a car driving through the front of our store as part of a break-in twice now. That said, do we truly believe the narrative of it really isn't that bad is an accurate statement? Thank you.
484 Thank you very much.
485 That completes testimony.
486 Okay.
487 Colleagues, we are going to take a ten minute recess before we come back and discuss the various amendments that we heard from our colleagues about and discuss the resolution. I want to make a quick announcement about the rest of the meeting before we go into a recess. Agenda item 12 is going to be carried over to a later meeting. There's nothing wrong with the agenda item. There is no work to do on it. It's not being sent back to committee. We just are running into a little bit of a scheduling crunch today. And councilor Smith, who brought that item forward, has graciously agreed to hold it to a later meeting. So if you are here to testify on that agenda item, I apologize. But we did want to make sure that you knew as early as possible that we are going to be holding that item over to a later meeting. We will have an announcement, I believe, after the break. I'm looking to see if I have something coming through, but I don't have it yet. Okay, we will have an announcement about some afternoon meetings after we come back from the recess. More to come there, but I am going to recess for ten minutes. We'll be back here at 1215 for further discussion on this resolution. Thank you. We have folks back. We are reconvening this afternoon's meeting. Before we move back to our agenda item, I want to announce that the city council will be meeting in an emergency executive session pursuant to ors 19266o2h, which allows council to meet in executive session to consult with legal counsel concerning the legal rights and duties of a public body with regard to current litigation. At 115, we do need to make a public announcement about that meeting because it is an emergency executive session. We don't need to give the usual allotted notice, but I will note that news media are invited. So, colleagues, we will be meeting upstairs at 115. And this is considered the official notice of that meeting. I believe our clerk is working to send out an official notice as well. With that, let's go back to agenda item 13. We just heard public testimony and we are now moving into conversation and debate. I know that there are a number of amendments that were alluded to before this, but none have been officially introduced. Councilor Avalos, you are first in the queue.
488 Okay. Thank you. I know we're all maybe a little distracted, but let's just zone back in on this bill. Thank you, councilor Ryan, I totally understand your purpose here. And I think, you know, as you might remember, this is exactly the reasoning that I put together for the unified housing strategy. We need to be breaking down these silos, pulling together our resources in a more effective way. I think some of the line of questioning that you were getting from our colleagues, I shared their concerns because when I developed the us, I worked really closely with the administrative staff to make sure that it was grounded in existing capacity and aligned with the work that they were already doing. So I'm hoping that you did the same, because before we assigned the city administrator and prospered another task. Of course, we want to understand who's actually going to take it on. I also want to acknowledge that I hear from east Portland businesses all the time about these same concerns, the things that we heard in the testimony today, challenges with safety, vandalism, vacancies and a lack of coordinated city response. But what I also hear over and over again is that when they ask for help, they're often met with silence or they're shuffled between bureaus. We had a meeting with the parkrose grocery outlet and businesses in parkrose to talk about this in particular, and what they continue to tell us is that they don't get answers, and they're also not eligible for a lot of the current incentives that we have, like the downtown business incentive, for example, is not eligible to east Portland businesses. So when I when we're calling for a citywide effort, I want to make sure that it's actually reaching the corridors that have been asking for support and not getting it. We hear a lot about activation and recovery, but the resources and attention, they stay west of 82nd. So as we're considering directing these staff time, potentially future funding, I want to make sure that we're honest about capacity coordination and equity. And I also want to know that this work is aligning with what's already underway with prosper Portland, the new small business office, because I don't want us to keep layering on incentives without structure or resources. So on that note, I do have a couple of quick questions. I think, first and foremost, you know, you're describing this again, as I said, as a citywide effort. What are some of those concrete steps that you're planning to do to ensure that we are not just doing a downtown focused recovery plan? I did see your proposed amendment. I think it starts to speak to that. But I want to hear an expansion on your plan.
489 Yeah. Thank you, councilor Avalos. Well, there is an and at the very beginning to downtown and the rest of the city, and then I want to make sure that we have inclusion at the table. That will help quite a bit. It's always been talked about for from me when we talked about it in the arts and economy as district and downtown. And I was I thought it was helpful today that over half the testimony wasn't downtown. It was storefront owners and main streets. I also want to say that I appreciate what you talked about in terms of we have professionals that are focusing on this, and similar to what you did with housing is it's kind of like a cat herding thing that needs to take place. And I have confidence that the system will actually start to be more efficient and in their response time. And so you don't know that until you bring them together. And so that has been a part of it, just like yours. I think it also is important for legislators to meet our current practices on the edges and help stimulate and inspire them to improve in this endeavor. So I look forward to what we will receive at the end of January. I think that will be a very lively round to responses from this council. I hope we all remember that this is getting the party started, and then we'll have a chance to give feedback after we receive the report. Councilor dunphy's on. Oh, actually we have two members of arts and economy. Sorry, both of you, councilor Smith and councilor Dunphy. So you have two colleagues on the committee that you can collaborate with to pick what you think would be your ideal storefront out in district one.
490 Thank you. Yeah, I understand what you're saying as it relates to this helps to bring people to the table, but I'll continue to enumerate. I would like to get clarity on how the like if prosper staff, the staff at any of bureau that this touches has actually been consulted and worked into the plan, because that's the work that we did for us.
491 That's been going on since the budget process back in may, and we'll continue to do that. And more importantly, city administrator will then bring them together.
492 So are you considering another question? Are you considering tying this to possibly a storefront vacancy tax proposal, or any other policy levers that actually incentivize landlords to fill space? This is something we experience a lot in east Portland. People sit on land. We have a ton of storefronts in east Portland that are empty, and there's no levers that we're using currently to force landlords to fill them. So what's your proposal on that?
493 Well.
494 It's your thoughts.
495 On that. It's not mine. It's ours. As a council. I think we keep bringing this up. And I think it's really important that it becomes a strand of what they could look at. I'll just give some personal experience with this lived experience. I found that when your landlord is local, it's a really dramatically different experience than if your landlord is not local. And I, I've experienced both sides of that. Most local landlords really do want to work with you to keep the lights on. They would much rather have revenue coming in. They have very attached to the investment of the city, but I think there is. I know there is a conversation that needs to be had, especially on commercial storefronts, about how we can look at those that are outside the market and maybe bring some sophistication to that. I trust that the smart people that will be at the table will help us noodle through that.
496 Thank you. I'll just end by saying, I really hope that an outcome of this process is that we are ensuring dollars are stretching more, because it's one thing to get lip service, which is what east Portland always gets, that they're going to have people there to represent them, but they don't see it in dollars. They are not. They are excluded from a lot of the different programs due to the way that the business corridors or business districts are constructed. So that is a huge priority for me, because at the end of the day, what small businesses need is infrastructure, money, helping them, you know, board up their or fix their windows. So I'd like that to be reflected in the final proposal.
497 Thank you.
498 And earlier I used the word 100 I met. It's 1 million that is in that fund that was mentioned earlier. Yeah.
499 Thank you, councilor Councilor canal.
500 Thank you, madam president. I'm going to formally make the first of the motions. Now to amend the document. I want to note that I am reading councilor Ryan's amendment and which I'm not moving it at this moment because it's his to move. But it does talk about inclusion of a storefront representative from each Portland district to provide feedback and ensure equitable citywide access is included in program implementation implementation recommendations. I had in one of my amendments.
501 Just read mine.
502 Yeah, that's I'm reading that for for context. For reference, I had a portion of this that referred to equitable citywide access that I am not going to put into this part, because I think councilor Ryan's will cover that. So I just want to note that. And so it's a little different than how I read it before. I'll update the clerk's office with the three words I think I'm changing here. So many things. It would add a new number one under the first. Now therefore, be it resolved that says one definition of quote storefront business, end quote and criteria for businesses that would qualify for the storefront support program, including a plan for how support would be distributed across Portland districts. And again, that's one word difference. It's just the word equitably for the clerk. And that's because I believe it will be in this other place where I think it's slightly more appropriate, just given the topical area. And I would ask if that would be considered friendly by councilor Ryan.
503 Can you read it one more time? Yours. I was merging them already.
504 Sure.
505 And we could merge them. But its definition of storefront business and criteria for businesses that would qualify for the storefront support program, including a plan for how support would be distributed across Portland districts.
506 I'm getting there with this being friendly, but I get to ask you a question. So I thought I was pretty clear that it's those that are facing like the public right of way. I'm also looking over to you, city administrator michael jordan. If maybe it would be really smart at one of the first meetings when all these smart people come together to spend time on getting clear on that definition. And if there's a different definition, that would be helpful. And so I'm trying not to be too micro on this because again, it's resolution asking for a plan. So based on this conversation, do you still like what you wrote.
507 Yeah.
508 Yes. And the reason is because I think in order to ensure that that conversation happens, what the purpose of this is to get a scope right. And I'll give a couple specific examples. The question is, is a is a fourth floor business treated the same way as a ground floor business? A business that might be business to business versus public facing. And I think most importantly an owner of of a building, a commercial building that's renting to a business. Is the owner also covered or is it just the business? These are the questions that are I know where your intention is because you said it. It's just not in the document. So my intention was just to say, can we get in the report basically a scoping definition. That was my intention behind this.
509 I think the word scope is important. And why this why I didn't put that as one of mine, is me getting a vulnerable right now to say that's a really good idea. I was implying it the whole time I was speaking and so. And yours could be different and let that begin, I do, I will tell you when I talk to the people that are above, it's a very different conversation than the people that are facing the public right of way. Very different conversation.
510 Yeah.
511 And so I.
512 In a time where we're trying to be efficient with our resources and we're trying to get to the heart of the matter of a problem that we need solutions for, I will stand on record to say that it's always been about those that are most vulnerable. Facing the public right of way.
513 Would it be helpful.
514 Instead to replace criteria for businesses that would qualify with an scope? So definition of storefront business and scope of the.
515 Storefronts language? That's more understandable.
516 Okay.
517 I will send a new version, but I'll just read it out loud now. Definition of storefront business and scope of the storefront support program, including a plan for how support will be distributed across Portland districts. Would that be considered friendly?
518 Yeah.
519 I see jordan. Doesn't that seem like a smart first meeting?
520 Go right ahead, claire.
521 Council direction is always welcome on scope. And I agree with you, councilor Ryan, that in a first, probably first few meetings, the scope of the work will be honed because to reach all Portland businesses is not a scope restriction. That really helps. So we'll have to do some discerning about what are the highest priority issues in the discussion, but I appreciate any clear direction from council colleagues.
522 Were just having a meeting, so I thought in real time we could have this kind of conversation, which would help us move forward. Now it's feeling friendlier. Yeah.
523 Just message it to councilor.
524 Canal just to clarify for our colleagues, you had submitted an amendment that touched three different parts of the resolution. Are you moving forward right now, just this portion?
525 Correct. Thank you for clarifying it. So does a adapted version of the third amendment in the same file, which is to create a new item one. Under the. Now therefore be it resolved.
526 Okay. And is there a second to this amendment. I'll offer a second. Okay. Colleagues, we are in discussion of the amendment that councilor Canal put forward, which it sounds like.
527 The scope amendment.
528 Scope amendment correct.
529 Is that okay? I'm calling it the scope amendment.
530 Great.
531 Okay. Councilor Green, are you in the queue to discuss this amendment? Councilor Morillo, are you in the queue to discuss this amendment? Councilor Smith, are you in the queue to discuss this amendment?
532 No.
533 Councilor Novick, are you in the queue to discuss this amendment? Councilor Clark, are you in the queue to discuss this amendment?
534 Could somebody please read the amendment again, please?
535 Yes, yes.
536 Definition of storefront business and scope of the storefront support program, including a plan for how support would be distributed across Portland districts. This would be a new number one under now therefore be it resolved. So it is a part of the report that would be provided back.
537 Colleagues, is there any other discussion on this amendment? Okay. Seeing none keelan could you please call the roll?
538 Clark a.
539 Green Zimmerman no.
540 Avalos I. Dunphy I. Smith I no, I.
541 That's me right I yeah.
542 No sorry my. Technology failed me again.
543 Ryan I.
544 All right Koyama Lane. I Morillo. I Novick. I pirtle-guiney. I the amendment is approved with 11 yes votes and one no vote.
545 Thank you.
546 Councilor Green. You are next in the queue.
547 Thank you. I will try to be brief because we have a lot to do and I. I'm eager to vote yes on the final resolution. Earlier in the discussion, councilor Novick raised the issue about the whereas clause of the tax piece. I also have some issues, but rather than spend a lot of time describing what those issues are, you had sort of suggested possibly a friendly amendment to pull that, whereas out, I think.
548 Don't you have one? Councilor Novick.
549 I actually suggested a new friendly amendment to sort of caveat the language there, which I was going to bring up.
550 Okay, I'll wait for that. I just wanted to say that's my only sticking point on this, because I am familiar with that report, and I just want to make sure it's as precise as possible. So I'll wait for what that discussion is.
551 So this is what we're doing, and I understand, councilor Novick, I've got to that point. Yeah.
552 Okay.
553 I'm yielding for right now.
554 Yeah.
555 And councilor, I was the one person in between you and councilor Novick, and I'm happy to move myself to later in the queue so that we can get to councilor Novick's amendment.
556 Okay. And I'm not sure I'm bringing this up at the right point based on this discussion with keelan. But what I was proposing as to that section is to say to just add language stating. And although there is no current plan to reduce taxes, the city should keep this fact in mind in its approach to issues relating to to its businesses. Because my concern is I don't want to make it sound like, you know, we're planning to cut taxes and to acknowledge that we're not. So I don't know if that will address councilor Green's concerns, but that's my proposal, which councilor Ryan has agreed to take his friendly. And although there is no current plan to reduce taxes, the city should keep this fact in mind in its approach to issues relating to his businesses.
557 Thank you. Councilor, is there a second?
558 Second?
559 Councilor Smith okay. Is there a discussion to this amendment? Councilor Clark, are you in the queue for discussion to this amendment? Councilor Smith, are you in the queue for discussion to this amendment? Councilor Kanal are you in the queue for discussion to this amendment?
560 Yes.
561 Go right ahead.
562 I fully understand and agree with councilor Novick's problem statement. I actually think this implies a path towards cutting taxes. More than not, adding the tax does personally keep this in mind. As sort of euphemistic in that regard is how I read it. But and I just I'll be transparent. I have another one of my amendments is just to remove this this whereas clause entirely. I know that that one is not friendly and I want to be super transparent about that. But I that's my, my thought is that this actually might compound the problem a little bit by signaling an intent that we haven't discussed in a resolution, whereas clause.
563 Point of information, can you just repeat it one more time?
564 I just go right ahead, councilor.
565 It would be to add to the end of the tax burden paragraph. And although there is no current plan to reduce taxes, the city should keep this fact in mind in its approach to issues relating to its businesses.
566 Thank you.
567 Councilor colleagues, I'm next in the queue to speak to this. I have concerns with this whereas clause broadly. I believe that the period of time that this report captured included the creation of the corporate activities tax, which is a has significant impact on a small number of businesses. And I don't want to diminish that impact on those businesses. But I find that suggesting this tax increase out of context, when it is a tax increase that did not hit most storefront businesses in that type of way, is difficult for me to include in this report. I think that there's a lot of context missing for this number generally, and I'm uncomfortable using this number to justify either further tax cuts or other work that we may do here. I'm interested to hear more about the potential removal, but I don't think I can support the amendment at hand.
568 Can I just say something? Because what doesn't feel friendly about this is that there's nothing that I was thinking about, that this was going to be a cut in taxes. What I was stating in a resolution, you state the problem, and I haven't met one small business owner or one storefront business that hasn't said that the addition of new taxes has been quite a burden. So I was just trying to lift it in the problem statement because I, I was trained. That's what you do when you put out a resolution. But I'm kind of surprised that it's poking people, that it's signaling like I'm trying to do some, I don't know, cutting of taxes in that problem statement, but I can tell that's how it landed. So I'm just sitting here confused on what why you have a problem with that fact.
569 Thank you counselor. I'm not sure.
570 If.
571 That was diagnosed it a bit more because it was going on the state level. So yeah.
572 And I want to be clear, my problem is is not around whether this leads to tax cuts or not. It is in using data that I think is out of context. And if.
573 And that's.
574 Fair, if we wanted to talk about the tax burden without the the value proposition that I know we've both talked about hearing from businesses, I'd be open to that. But the way that this is worded and the the time period that that report refers to is difficult for me to support. Councilor Green.
575 Yeah, I just wanted to clarify that. I think it's actually appropriate to lay out all of the pieces of information that have led to the context of why you're introducing something. So I hear you, councilor Ryan. My my suggestion here would be to say when I did review this report, it's table seven, where you get to the 82% and the 82% is mostly from the corporate net income tax. And so if we struck just local from that clause and say, just acknowledge that it has been an 82% in taxes and it's the volume of taxes, it's not the tax rate, it's just because that's a fact, then I would be comfortable with that. And that would allow me to be comfortable with councilor Novick amendment, because Novick amendment doesn't hang unless I demonstrate that we're because it's not precise, it's not local taxes that are driving 82%. It's actually the the full tax burden. So that's where I'm coming from.
576 This feels friendly.
577 Yeah okay. Are you amending.
578 I have to see it written out.
579 I don't know if it's appropriate in the procedures of order for me to offer that friendly amendment at this point, but that's that's my intention.
580 So councilor, we are in debate of councilor Novick's amendment. So if you are offering an a change to councilor Novick's amendment, it would be appropriate if you are offering a change to the underlying language, that would not be appropriate.
581 I would offer a change to councilor Novick's amendment to be expansive, just striking local in the broader whereas clause.
582 Councilor Novick how do you feel about that?
583 Friendly to you?
584 I'm fine with it, except that my proposed amendment just adds additional language. It doesn't address the previous language that I want to know if procedurally, something that addresses the existing language as opposed to adds to it actually fits with.
585 Your amendment, says the statute. The facts stand or something of that.
586 It just it just it just says and it adds an and clause at the very end of this, whereas so it doesn't affect the existing language in the whereas in this yours does.
587 Because we don't have an official parliamentarian in our body. I am going to look to our attorney here, linly as long as we are still amending the same whereas clause, can we amend the amendment to the whereas clause in our discussion of the initial underlying amendment.
588 I'm going to say that that you can, but I'm not 100% sure it would take me a minute to figure it out.
589 I think we're going to move forward and say that we can if councilor Novick is open to this, given that nod from our attorney, even if it was a little bit caveated.
590 Yes.
591 Okay. Can you please read the amendment as you are currently putting it forward with councilor Greene's change?
592 So with councilor Greene's changed the whole new whereas would read whereas the city's businesses are struggling under their tax burden, as reflected in October 2020 for Oregon state and local business taxes, analysis by Oregon business and industry found that taxes on businesses increased by 82% over four years, and although there is no current plan to reduce taxes, the city should keep this fact in mind in its approach to issues relating to its businesses.
593 Okay, that is the amendment now before us, I believe. But your second was councilor Smith, so let's make sure we still have a second there with this change.
594 Yes.
595 Still good. Okay, councilor Morillo, were you next in the queue?
596 Yep.
597 Go right ahead.
598 I just think this is too clunky, and I think I would prefer councilor Canals amendment to just remove it entirely.
599 Thank you, councilor Councilor Kanal.
600 Yeah.
601 I have no issue with councilor Greene's addition or change there. My. And just to clarify for councilor Ryan, my point was not that the original version of.
602 It would.
603 Imply anything but that the addition by councilor Novick would imply that. So it wasn't about the original text, or have a separate concern with that. So I will be voting no on this for the reason that councilor Morillo just said. I think it's gotten clunkier, and I do think that this addition of text implies we're going to do something that I we haven't debated, we haven't discussed doing on the amendment. I'll be voting. No, thanks.
604 Thank you. Councilor, councilor Novick.
605 Sorry, I would like to see him.
606 Okay. I am not seeing anybody else in the queue to discuss councilor Novick's amendment. Councilor Clark, you'd like a comment here. Go right ahead.
607 I think. Sure, it's gotten clunky and I'm not sure I like the Novick amendment, but I think it's really important that we actually highlight the fact that the taxes are high. That is a fact. And we've heard it over and over again. So I'm while I may vote against the Novick amendment, I want to retain the original Ryan language.
608 Thank you. Councilor.
609 Colleagues. Seeing no one else in the queue to discuss this amendment, keelan, could you please call the roll?
610 Clark. No.
611 On the amendment to clarify.
612 Green I.
613 Zimmerman.
614 No.
615 Avalos.
616 No. Dunphy I Smith. No.
617 Canal.
618 No.
619 Ryan. I Koyama Lane. I Morillo.
620 No.
621 Novick I.
622 Pirtle-guiney.
623 No.
624 The amendment fails with five yes votes and seven no votes.
625 Okay.
626 Councilor Clark, are you in the queue? Okay, I'll.
627 Yeah.
628 Councilor Ryan, are you about to get in the queue?
629 I keep forgetting I haven't read mine in.
630 Okay, councilor Ryan, go right ahead.
631 What number did I end up on? Five. How can I get on the bottom? And then you cut up to the top anyway. Is that in robert's rules?
632 Is that.
633 Is that in this book that you.
634 Got.
635 All.
636 The time?
637 Shout out to scott.
638 All right. We're having some fun here. I'm adding in under be it resolved. I don't really care what the number is. Inclusion of a storefront representative from each Portland district to provide feedback to ensure equitable citywide access is included in program implementation recommendations.
639 Second.
640 Councilor Ryan, do you want to speak to the amendment any further or should we move to discussion?
641 I think people have heard enough on this in many conversations earlier. So in sake of time, no.
642 Councilor Morillo do you have discussion to this amendment?
643 No.
644 Okay. Seeing no discussion on this amendment. Keelan can you please call the roll on councilor Ryan's amendment?
645 May I confirm that it was councilor Kanal who seconded?
646 Thank you. Yes.
647 I'm sorry, I should have repeated that.
648 Thanks. Okay. Clerk.
649 I Green Zimmerman. No, I. Dunphy. I. Smith I no. Ryan I. Koyama Lane I. Morillo I.
650 Novick I.
651 Pirtle-guiney I.
652 The amendment is approved with 11 votes and one no vote.
653 Thank you. Councilor Morillo. Are you in the queue for discussion?
654 Yeah, I guess I just wanted to talk a little bit about some of the testimony that we heard that I think was important. I believe you're still sitting here. And someone brought up that there was a stabbing or something at their establishment, and that police arrived and then did not take, did not write a report or anything. And I would love if you would reach out to my office and give me more details on what happened in that situation. If you could send an email to councilor Morillo at Portland Oregon.gov, because that's that doesn't appear to be a staffing issue. That appears to be a reaction issue to how our police are addressing our storefronts. So and maybe it's not. I would love to learn more about why police didn't write a police report or arrest somebody, or do something in that situation when they arrived on the scene. And overall, for this thing, I think I'm, you know, I want to support it. I was supportive of your amendment to support small businesses during the budget cycle, because I thought that it was a material thing that would make a difference. I'm not sure that this legislation does, because some of the other testimony that we heard talked about how this is replicating the work of the small business office and prosper that we just established. And and I kind of worry that our small businesses are going through so much in this city, and that this is going to give people the the impression that things are going to change, but it's actually just replicating work that's already been that's already being done. And I think our small businesses deserve some material changes for the things that they're facing. And I'm not sure that this accomplishes that. I'm going to think about it more as we're having discussion, but that's just something that's weighing on me.
655 Can I just I appreciate but I just heard I, I'm coming from when I brought all the permitting bureaus together and if that wouldn't have happened, we wouldn't be able to pass some legislation such as my colleagues Avalos and Dunphy did recently. I'm a real believer in breaking down the silos. I did it with your former boss to get the cyprus villages built, and it was a hard effort. So I just want to repeat that. I think that in our role as legislators, one of the only tools we have to try to see improvements from the enterprise from is to offer these type of suggestions, because clearly we might be resourced properly, but no one, only one testimony mentioned that all the rest are like, this isn't working, we need better responses, and I'm doing the best I can to try to figure out how to do that with this legislation. And I know we're all on the same page about that, but I appreciate what you mentioned. Yeah.
656 And councilor.
657 Ryan, are you in the queue also?
658 I know that's legacy that was with the amendment passed councilor Kanal.
659 Thanks. I'll propose the.
660 Other amendments together at this time. So it's an amendment to strike the fourth whereas clause in its entirety, the one that that we were discussing earlier, whereas the city's businesses are struggling under their tax burden, etc. It also would change two words in the sixth, whereas clause so currently reads, whereas decrease health and vitality of our business districts directly correlates to the city's declining overall economic health, reputation and identity, and would change that to. Whereas the health and vitality of our business districts directly correlates to the city's overall economic health, reputation and identity. I think the councilor Ryan's approach to connecting those dots is really important. I don't know that it is accurate to say decreased might be accurate. Declining involves a trend assessment that I don't think is necessarily accurate. I think that we've had a good amount of statements from our enterprise about Portland being back, and the increased foot traffic from data from the Portland metropolitan chamber, a lot of different indicators that are going in the right direction. So I think changing that to simply state there is a clear correlation, and we need to enhance health and vitality of our business districts in order to enhance overall economic health. Reputation and identity is a more accurate way to phrase that relationship and then everything. Councilor Novick had previously stated as sort of a problem statement for the fourth, whereas clause is my reason for proposing that second.
661 Councilor Ryan, do you want to speak to the amendment?
662 Yeah, it's getting friendlier. I think you're trying to all get me to go from salty to sweet, and.
663 You like that?
664 Well, you know, it happens. Wait till you're my age. So I believe everybody I've listened to. So what I have in there currently is the truth. And I think that this is aspirational and where you're going, and I think we'll get to the same outcome, which is all we want up here. So I will let this play out as a friendly amendment. I'm not seconding it. I'm just saying I'll let this play out. But I can't define it right now as friendly or not friendly.
665 Councilor Clark, did you want to speak to the amendment?
666 I just want to ask for some clarification. So are you combining these two pieces? Because I prefer we vote for them separately. You're removal of the tax piece and then your change of the verbiage in health and vitality. Are you combining those.
667 As of right now I've proposed them together. You can request to divide them if you'd like.
668 I would request that you divide them.
669 Okay. I'm pretty sure that just happens. You. Yeah, I'm seeing a nod there so I won't go back into the book, but. And I'll decide the order. I'll do the I'll do the, the later one first. So if we do the, the health and vitality, now that they're separated into two separate votes, I'd like to vote on talking about the health and vitality one first, please.
670 Were you trying to get me from salty to sweeten?
671 Okay.
672 They're both nine.
673 Thank you.
674 Are any hands in the queue to speak to? Councilor? Canal?
675 No. I'm sorry.
676 Did you get a second for that?
677 Oh, yeah. So I guess any discussion on.
678 That one?
679 Any discussion on that one? This is separate.
680 That's correct. So we're discussing the what is in the overall file that's on on the website. The second one which is the sixth whereas clause, whereas the health and vitality of our business districts directly correlates to the city's overall economic health, reputation and identity.
681 Striking the words decreased and declining.
682 And adding the word.
683 The word the. All right. I don't see any hands in the queue. So clerk, will you please call the roll on the first amendment?
684 Yes. And just very quickly, one to confirm it was councilor Morillo who seconded this.
685 Councilor.
686 Avalos. Avalos. Sorry. Thank you. All right. And then I heard a motion to divide. But we are just taking up this sixth whereas clause right now. And then we'll look to the next one okay. Thank you.
687 On this one. Correct. Clerk I. Green a zimmermann.
688 No Avalos. I Dunphy.
689 I. Smith I, I. Ryan no.
690 But I am sweet okay.
691 Koyama Lane I.
692 Morillo I.
693 Novick I.
694 Pirtle-guiney absent the amendment is approved with nine votes and two no votes.
695 Would anyone like to discuss the other part to the amendment? Councilor? Clerk.
696 I am going to vote against removing this because I think the tax issue is important. However, I think learning what I have since that conversation, if we take out local, would you be amenable to keeping this in the word local on the third line.
697 I don't know. No is the short answer, I do. I don't have a problem with that. That's a better than it is now in my view. But I do think that there are other concerns with the the particular report that's cited. I do think that we should be talking if we're if we're going to be talking about the broader context, we should be talking about tariffs, we should be talking about e-commerce, digging into in-person sales. And I think what the way I look at a whereas clause is that it should effectively set up a therefore be it resolved. And we're not doing anything about the therefore be it resolved in the therefore be it resolved about this issue. So that's why my approach is, is this. But I do see your point on the word local.
698 My question.
699 Go right ahead, councilor.
700 So if if I support this amendment in case removing it entirely doesn't go through because you're, are you going to bring your amendment to remove that section entirely after.
701 We are currently.
702 We're currently discussing.
703 Oh.
704 So you were trying to do a friendly amendment to his. Okay. But we're we're now voting on just fully removing.
705 It.
706 As of this moment.
707 Yeah.
708 Great. Thanks.
709 Colleagues. I don't see anybody else in the queue. Are we ready to vote on this amendment? Okay, keelan, you have a question?
710 I do, I'm sorry. Thank you. So this motion is in a separate motion. And second, from what we just considered or.
711 My understanding is that they were made together at councilor Clark's request. They were divided and that the original motion by myself and second by councilor Avalos still hold is that.
712 Let me look in this book. I'm just teasing.
713 This is the way we've done it before. According to the book. And when somebody divides a motion, we then choose which goes first. It sounds like that happened. We voted on one, so now we move into voting on the other. So keelan, could you please call the roll?
714 Okay.
715 Thank you.
716 Clark,
717 No.
718 Green.
719 Hi.
720 Zimmerman. No. Avalos.
721 Hi, Dunphy.
722 I Smith.
723 I. Canal I Ryan. No. Koyama Lane I. Maria I.
724 Novick I.
725 Pirtle-guiney I.
726 The amendment is approved with nine yes votes and two no votes.
727 Councilor Kanal. Are you back in the queue?
728 Yes.
729 But not for an amendment.
730 Go right ahead.
731 Okay.
732 So everyone who's been listening to this whole thing, we've kind of been talking around the main issue and I wanted to to just explicitly state I'm very supportive of this. I think that councilor Ryan has found a way to sort of thread some of the various needles that could be threaded or not, and I think it's been very successful in that. I really appreciated the written testimony that came in. I did want to specifically reference one of them, which was about the things that could be added to this conversation around commercial rents and lease terms, which I think will be picking up in March after a report asked for by a budget note around vacancy fees for for vacant commercial properties. And then the other piece of it was commercial anti-displacement efforts. I can't say that there's a conversation planned on that, but I wanted to daylight that request. I think it's outside the scope of this resolution, but really, really important that we talk about it. We talked about it a little bit in the noise code conversation around anti-displacement, but not in a broader sense. So I just wanted to to highlight that as well. Back to the the main document, though, I think that I'd like to see that as this is implemented. We're talking about anyone who's got access to the right of way and what maybe a lesser level of support might be for other folks. I think this is part of that scoping exercise around lloyd center, around things of that nature. We've got some of the same problems in lloyd center as well. And finally, I'm glad to collaborate with councilor Ryan on this again. We as as councilor Ryan mentioned, we both put up amendments to replenish the repair restore grant fund. I'm glad that his passed because I had more money in it than mine originally did, and that's going to be better. So I'm excited to to get a chance to provide support as well. And the last thing I'll mention is, for those who've been talking about the lack of police response, I share councilor Murillo's concern. I want to make sure that we're not spending 800,000 plus dollars a month doing overtime at the ice facility, as we did in June, and that now that our budget no. On prioritization of police overtime has taken effect, that we're able to ensure that police are responding to these sorts of things. I agree that it is an emergency. I agree with all the concerns around life safety that have been brought up, and I think that the way in which we prioritize our public safety dollars, not just police, but all the other parts of the public safety system as well, should reflect this with the level of concern it deserves. And that will also be part of my conversations with the da's office about some of the concerns brought up about catch and release. I'll leave it at that. I'm going to be very excited to vote yes.
733 Thank you. Councilor, colleagues, I wanted to make just a few remarks here, and to start by thanking my colleague and district two councilor Ryan for bringing this forward. We all did, I think, a lot of work to try to find a few ways to support small businesses during the budget, knowing that there was more to be done. We heard from a number of businesses today about the need, and we know that with folks in our community struggling in mental health crisis, with cheap drugs on the street, with poverty that leads people to make desperate decisions, there are a lot of factors that are leading to the the things that our small businesses are seeing. I am excited to support this. I do have a few questions. I want to make sure that I understand a few pieces here. The first is we had one of our testifiers bring up the new programs at prosper Portland and the office of small business, which I think is a fantastic resource that we've not yet fully capitalized on within our city. I am wondering how we're going to make sure that the plans that are developed here are done. So in coordination with the work of prosper Portland, and that we don't end up with duplication. And I'm not sure, councilor Ryan, if that's something you'd like to speak to or if you'd like me to direct that question toward the city administrator or somebody else from our administrative side.
734 Thank you, council president. I think it could be an and but that's the entire heart of the matter of this, is to celebrate the fact that there's a new office in prosper Portland focusing on small businesses. I appreciate that Mitch is here, and I see he and his staff all over town. And so they will be knitting this together with the people that were also mentioned from the bureaus. So it's an and okay. And it was discussed even a little bit when you were out with.
735 The council.
736 It's okay. But councilor Avalos had those same concerns and we had some dialog about that.
737 I think that's an important piece here.
738 And I've just found that any time when there's a problem that we're not solving that that perpetuates, it's usually about us being trapped in our silos, as opposed to breaking those down and figuring out how to be more efficient as we work together. So it's getting to that part of the matter as well. And I look forward to what comes back to us on January 30th.
739 Great.
740 I'm also wondering with the data collection system, and I loved hearing the testimony about that. I think that that's a really interesting tool. Councilor Ryan, in your view, and I know this will be discussed more as we move forward with the creation. Who would have access to that and how would that work?
741 What was your first part? Again.
742 We heard testimony about the data collection system piece of this, this place where our business owners could enter information. Is that something that we would create citywide for business owners and for Portland residents? Is that something that would just be available to business owners? What would that system look like? How comprehensive would it be?
743 Yeah, well, my job isn't to give you the details on that.
744 I'm wondering what your. Yeah, what your vision is exactly.
745 It would be something that the small businesses would have access to. And it's it's something that I look forward to hearing how this group that gets together will lead in that. And I think prosper Portland will take a lead voice in working with the administration on that.
746 Okay.
747 I look forward to learning more about who has access to that and how it can be a resource for the whole community.
748 And we also talked in committee about the need for metrics like how do we measure success? Clearly, the easiest one right now is you almost see a for lease sign on every block. And so you'd like to see the for lease signs go down and more activity. And just another note that I think is important for all of us is our city used to punch up in terms of people activating storefronts in person prior to the pandemic, where other cities were doing more online purchases. Sadly, we are now flipped since the pandemic, and that's not the Portland we want to live in. One of the vibes about Portland was always the vibrancy of our small business storefronts, and that what that creates, we don't want just every mississippi fair to be the day everyone's on mississippi. We want that to be year round.
749 Thank you, mr. Jordan. I think I'll direct this comment to you because it's something that I think as we pull this group together is important to keep in mind, and that is that I hear loud and clear, not only in this room today, but as I'm out in my community from small business owners that are looking for a more coordinated response, especially a more coordinated public safety response. But I also hear from Portland residents who are not small business owners, workers, employees, that group of people that they need a speedy response when they have an emergency in their home as well. And I know we have many conversations to hold in our city about right response, right place, right time and how we can have a holistic public safety system that can address all of our community's needs. But as we move this forward, I would like to see results that address our business community's needs by doing things better and not at the expense of the needs of our other residents as well. And I don't know yet what that looks like, but I hope that as the group that that comes together here does their work, that we keep that in mind. With all that being said, there is a huge need. There is a huge need for support for small businesses in Portland that goes beyond just public safety, that goes beyond just storefront repair grants, though I know that that grant is very important, and I'm frustrated to hear that some businesses haven't been able to access it. And I hope that this work looks bigger than just those things, and that this work ties into the work that I know we're doing elsewhere in our city, to figure out how we can support our small businesses in a more holistic way. Portland has never been in likely never will be the cheapest place to do business for a lot of reasons, but we should be an easy place to do business, and I think that we can hold on to our values. I think that we can make sure that we can still afford to provide the programs in our community that people rely on and that make this a community. People want to be and also be an easy place to do business. And I hope that this work helps to move us in that direction, because we know that our small businesses, those storefront businesses, are part of what makes Portland the incredible, quirky little place that it is, and that all of those independent businesses are a huge piece of what makes this the place that a lot of portlanders want to be part of what draws people here. So I'm looking forward to supporting this and seeing the work move forward. Councilor Clark.
750 Thank you, madam president. I want to thank all the small business people that came today to testify. It was incredibly emotional and there were some great ideas, including the gis idea, the livability, the apps, all of the really great ideas that I hope we can pick up on. You know, I grew up in a small business. My entire family worked in it. I cannot imagine continuing to have done that under the kinds of the duress that some of these small businesses are under. I just can't imagine it. It was great testimony. I also want to thank the sponsor, councilor Ryan, thank you so much for bringing this forward. It's been a long time in coming and I appreciate all your efforts. I think the key here is bust the silos. That's what you said earlier. It's bust silos. The new form of government allows us to do that. It's not about duplication, it's about coordination. And lastly, I'll just say we heard repeatedly from our witnesses today we need more police. We absolutely need more police. And I think we also need to bring back some sort of a neighborhood crime prevention or neighborhood awareness team or something in in the meantime, we need all of our neighbors to take some responsibility, just like we do on any teas. And I'm going to be pursuing that in the future. But thank you, councilor Ryan.
751 Thank you, councilor Councilor. Ryan.
752 I just want to acknowledge, first of all, thank you, colleagues, I know we spent a lot of time in this in committee, and then we're having even deeper conversations as a whole, which is great. I want to really acknowledge those who testified today, especially the ones that have never been here before, never testified before. I'm thinking of alberto and omar in particular. And so for them, for us to see and hear and listen to those authentic voices in our chambers, I think is really one of the best parts of this legislation today, and I'm really grateful for that. I do think the data collection is really important, and I know that it was hard to get the impact reduction dashboard built, but that only happened because different offices were asking for it. Neighbors were asking for it. It just helps them to see that they're being listened to like, oh, I reported that, oh it's happening. Thank you. I can at least track it. So that is customer service to our to our constituents. And I'll end with this. I didn't know this would be my new movement. I knew what it was like to be mad at president reagan and and get in trouble and act up because they weren't giving money for hiv. I knew it was like to go on marches and enter into state capitals in the 80s and 90s and talk about gay marriage, when a lot of people would hiss at me. So, you know, I know how to show up for a movement that gets my head and my heart connected. I had no idea this would be it. But in the time that I've been in office, listening to these people who love our city so dearly that they're putting in extra hours, spending extra money on security, risking their lives, as we heard today, so they could be part of the solution. And then for all of us to remember, we have a revenue problem. And this has been something we've taken for granted for decades, that these business taxes from these small businesses would keep coming in. And so for this to be going in the wrong direction is red alert. And so if we're really focused on one thing here, if you want to be really boring about it, is that we have to focus on this so that we have the revenues for all the programs that and values that you want to uplift in our budget. And I thank you again for all your time. It's refreshing when we can all come together to talk about something so delicately and with such big ears and authenticity. It's an honor to be on this council. Thank you.
753 Thank you, councilor Ryan. Colleagues, seeing no one else in the queue for debate. This is a resolution. So we do vote today. Keelan, could you please call the roll?
754 Clerk I.
755 Green. I.
756 Zimmerman, I davalos.
757 I I Smith I know I Ryan hi. Koyama Lane I.
758 Maria I'm not convinced that this does something that doesn't already exist. But since councilor Ryan was feeling sweet today, so am I. So I vote I.
759 Novick I pirtle-guiney.
760 I the resolution as amended, is adopted with 12 yes votes.
761 Fantastic. Colleagues, before we go, I had said that we had a special or an emergency executive meeting after this. Our attorneys have asked that we do this a little bit differently and that we suspend the rules and add an executive session to the agenda of this meeting and that procedurally, that is an easier way for us to do this. So I am looking for a motion to suspend the rules.
762 So moved. Second.
763 Thank you. So we are suspending the rules to vote to add an item to our agenda. I will note that adding an item to our agenda takes nine votes. We are adding an executive an executive session to the agenda, which would begin immediately. Seeing no discussion keelan could you please call the roll?
764 Apologies. May I ask who the second was? Thank you. Councilor canal.
765 Okay.
766 I'm sorry.
767 Clerk.
768 Hi, Green. Hi, Zimmerman.
769 Madam president, I.
770 Am a.
771 Dunphy. A Smith.
772 I I.
773 Ryan. I Koyama Lane. Hi maria. I Novick. Hi pirtle-guiney.
774 Was that me? I'm sorry I.
775 The motion carries with 12 yes votes.
776 Thank you. And colleagues it is 115 right now. I want to give everybody a chance to take a quick break if they need grab some food on their way up. So let's meet in the rose room at 125 to begin an executive session, and we will end the regular session of our meeting.
777 About an hour.