The record · Transcript
Council Session — 2025-12-17
Transcript from the session's official auto-captions (29,776 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 session of December 17, 2025 opened with a pre-gavel recognition honoring a Dragon Boat coach for volunteer work with a council team, followed by remarks about Lincoln High School students attending the meeting. Council President Pirtle-Guiney called the meeting to order, roll was taken, and rules of order were read. The agenda was reordered to move items between this session and the following day's meeting, approved by unanimous consent. Public communication included testimony on economic conditions and job affordability, and multiple speakers addressed immigration legal services for New Portlanders facing loss of humanitarian protections. A committee referral list and consent agenda were addressed, with votes occurring; outcomes are recorded in the vote ledger. Extended discussion followed on adopting Homelessness Response System Key Performance Indicators, with council members raising concerns about missing metrics, funding uncertainty, and lack of specific numerical targets; a vote occurred. The council also discussed and voted on adopting 2026 state and federal legislative agendas, including debate over an inclusionary zoning bill, behavioral health language, and property tax reform, with testimony from a state senator and community members. Finally, two ordinances assessing properties for sidewalk, curb, and driveway repairs were introduced as first readings, with discussion of notification processes and future cost-recovery approaches, to return for second readings.
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 evening. Before we get started tonight we have a pre gavel. So I am going to turn it over to councilor Ryan to kick us off.
1 Thank you. Council president I have the pleasure of doing a pre gavel for someone who was very, very special to the city. Each last two years we've had a a dragon boat in the annual dragon boat races. And it was a team two years ago with my office and parks and a few other folks. And this year we had a council team. So I would like erika gibson to come up and I will read a prepared remarks for you. And thank you for coming up to the podium. She's our coach. This is coach gibson.
2 Used to being in front of you just on a boat yelling. If you.
3 Will notice, there's four of us that are wearing the t shirts that we made for this event. Do you all want to stand up and model them? There we go. That's nice. Yeah. So. And we'll get you on. Okay. Okay. And then you forgot yours. I did, yeah. Okay.
4 I forgot my. I'm sorry.
5 That's okay. All right. I should get back on the script. The Portland city council extends its sincere appreciation to erika gibson for her outstanding service as the dragon boat coach for the city council team at the peak sca. That means Portland, kaohsiung sister cities association dragon boat race held as part of the Portland rose festival in partnership with our sister city, kaohsiung, taiwan. Erica brought strong, passionate leadership to this unique task. Can you imagine how unique this task is? Challenging the team to work together with focus, determination and shared laughter. Her commitment to excellence. Her clear desire to win while having fun, and her willingness to push past individual egos helped transform a group of councilors and staff into a synchronized and surprisingly competitive team. I'm laughing because we kind of did get competitive.
6 Towards the end.
7 Imagine that on the water. Despite most of us being novice paddlers. The task of bringing a diverse and strong personalities into rhythm is no small feat, and erica met it head on without hesitation. Her work extended beyond the boat itself, reminding us that synchronization, trust and shared purpose are values we strive for not only in sport but also in our work together as a council body. Erica met us on our edges and at times challenged our team to break out of our comfort zones to improve the work that we were doing better together and exercise. Good coaches know how to do with their teams. For Eric erica's leadership, dedication and the spirit she brought to this experience, we offer our heartfelt thanks. Thank you, erica, for being our coach.
8 Thank you.
9 You know, councilor Kanal, we were talking about a facilitator for a said retreat in the in the fall. It might need to be erica on that lovely note. The floor is yours.
10 Hi, guys. It's good to see you off the water. I know you're used to yelling at me, but I don't want to intimidate everybody else in the room. They might get scared because this is not even my loudest volume, as you well know. They might hear me at the water if I yell. Gosh, you guys this year coaching the team was challenging, as you all know, but you guys brought such joy to me during that time. Like just meeting all of you and getting to hang out with you, getting to scold you a little bit was a little bit empowering. You know, you don't often get to just yell at council members and get away with it. Like they tend to get mad when you do that. But I got to and it was just it was a big joy. And for the for the dragon boat community as a whole, it was huge having you guys out there and seeing what we do because it's huge in the community, like Portland has a really big dragon boat community that's really full of, as you guys saw, full of really special people who care a lot about the sport. And I'm just really glad that you guys got a chance to do it. And I'm so happy that I got to coach all of you, and I just wasn't expecting that. So thank you very much. I did bring you guys a little dragons. So I want everyone of you to come pick a dragon. But yeah. Thank you guys for letting me coach you and letting me yell at you. And I really hope you guys make a team next year. And those of you who weren't on the boat, it's fascinating.
11 It's the. It's in the middle.
12 I know, I'm like, I better see you all out there because I'm seeing a lot of people that weren't on my boat, and that's a problem for me because.
13 So, coach, do you want to get some commitments from everybody?
14 Yeah. Yeah. So. Hi, Jamie.
15 They could vote I.
16 Or you in. Oh, sorry. Why? Okay. But you're not in it. You're on top of it. I'm scared. These are really stable boats. All, like, yeet you out the water.
17 All of these guys. To keep me in the.
18 Know, you have to trust me. Just me. Wow. I know who I'm not voting for, but that's fine.
19 Loretta is off to a good start.
20 Loretta, are you in?
21 No, ma'am.
22 What do you mean, no?
23 I already told councilor. Ryan, I don't swim, I don't get in water.
24 You don't have to.
25 I don't fool with stuff that I can't control.
26 Okay.
27 Here's the thing. I can control those dragon boats. And I'm gonna tell you right now, you're not going in the water. Those things are stable.
28 Can I be your cheerleader on the on the.
29 Only if you get on the boat.
30 I want to just be on the banks and be your cheerleader.
31 I would love for you to just get on the boat one time.
32 I know.
33 I'm not convince you guys.
34 That was progress, okay?
35 It was. It was Sameer. Yeah, you got to be.
36 And you have the shirt. Dan, I know you're in. I Elana.
37 I'm in.
38 Yes, Tiffany.
39 I'm in. As long as we're very clear about the expectations and when people are supposed to show up and all of that and everyone knows what they're committing to, we need a we need a quorum on this boat.
40 We do.
41 We do. We can make it go.
42 I think I'm going to have to, like, come in and coordinate starting in like April. Yeah. Just be like, okay, guys, we're getting this together.
43 Angelina I'm obviously in. It was really good to not be the last boat. And I think it was because I joined on the last day.
44 I'm just I mean, I don't want to say that your power contributed.
45 To that. I figured you remembered me.
46 Of course.
47 Muscles from pushing the boat so hard.
48 So of course I remembered you. Steve, are you joining us?
49 I, I shouldn't hold this against the whole sport, and I really don't. But my evil ex-wife was a big dragon boat, so I've got bad associations with it.
50 Yeah. No, I mean, honestly, that's the best reason I've heard so far. You guys should have come up with a story about your exes. I would have been like, okay, that's that's fair and reasonable.
51 Oh, my god.
52 Steve's ex either.
53 But like, also, you can wear a mask and no one will know you can dress up as a dragon. I love this idea for us.
54 Okay. Everyone.
55 Councilor. Wait. Councilor. Clark. She's on.
56 Oh, is is councilor Clark on? Yeah. She was supposed to be on the team. What happened to that?
57 She's coming.
58 I'm sorry. It's all about the timing. It's all about timing.
59 So what about next year, 2026?
60 Well, it's about the timing. We'll just have to see.
61 It's in June.
62 That's that's a yes. You'll get there.
63 Yeah.
64 Mitch I'm going to preface this by saying I've never met councilor Novick ex-wife, but I'm happy to get into the sport. You have my commitment.
65 Yes.
66 I was like, if you say you don't like his ex-wife either. I am leaving this building immediately. Is Eric on?
67 Where's Eric?
68 Slacker.
69 He'll be a guest.
70 He'll be a yes, I got I yelled at him once.
71 He loved it.
72 I was like, he enjoyed it. He liked being yelled at. Right. Great.
73 So how are we going to get these dragons that you said you want to.
74 Come get them? I don't know how this works. I was like, I don't know what it's like to be councilor.
75 Would you like me to start the meeting very slowly so that people can grab a dragon?
76 Yeah. Anyway, thank you so much. I think we have some flowers for erica. And let's give some love once again to erica gibson, our dragon boat coach. Hey.
77 Thank you.
78 I'm going to. What?
79 I just got one little bit earlier, so. And it's a great way to have some holiday joy before we start the meeting.
80 I've already got one.
81 Thanks for letting me take up the start of your meeting. You better wear those shirts for the whole entirety of the meeting. Yes, coach. I'm going to rewatch this later. And if you guys take them off, you will pay next year. This year we're.
82 Like, ridiculous.
83 Thanks, coach.
84 Thanks, guys.
85 And thank you. Thank you, counselor Ryan, for bringing us this gavel. I will call to order our city council meeting. It is 610 on Wednesday, December 17th. This is our last meeting of the year. Keelan, could you please call the roll?
86 Good evening. Clark.
87 Here.
88 Green. Here.
89 Zimmerman. Ramos.
90 Present.
91 Dunphy here.
92 Smith.
Procedural episode · turns 93–110
Parliamentary activity detected in this stretch (see the markers above). An editor-reviewed analysis has not been published for this episode yet.
93 Here.
94 Koyama Lane here.
95 Morillo here.
96 Novick here.
97 Pirtle-guiney here. And is that mike back there? Could you please read the rules of order and decorum for us?
98 Yes, madam president.
99 Welcome to the Portland city council. To testify before council in person or virtually. You must sign up in advance on the council agenda at wwe Portland. Agenda. Information on engaging with council can be found on the council clerk's webpage. Individuals may testify for three minutes unless the presiding officer states otherwise, your microphone will be muted when your time is over. The presiding officer preserves order. Disruptive conduct such as shouting, refusing to conclude your testimony when your time is up, or interrupting others testimony or council deliberations will not be allowed. If you cause a disruption, a warning will be given. Further disruption will result in ejection from the meeting. Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass. Additionally, council may take a short recess and reconvene. 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.
100 Colleagues, before we begin our agenda, I want to just make a couple of notes. Tonight is our last council meeting of the year and our last evening meeting of the year. And as we've discussed at other meetings, we know that these evenings are a huge lift for our amazing operations staff, and we know that we have pushed them a lot with our schedule this year in general. I want to take a moment before we dive in to thank every single one of them for their time and effort. This year. We would not be able to be successful if it were not for the teams that provide us support, from security to tech to ensuring public testimony runs smoothly and so much other work, these folks are the reason that the public is able to participate with us at our meetings. I am sure I'm going to leave somebody off the list, and I want to apologize in advance for that. But I want to make sure that we thank tonight before we lose anybody in the room, our security team, lieutenant steven bjornsen, sergeant mario guzman, adam quince, todd davis, mike houghtaling, tyler cooper and ulm and ben aquino. Our bts team, adam koppenol, aaron johnson and william neville. Sharon thomas and her team upstairs with open signal. Keelan mcclymont and your team in the clerk's office. Dina richardson and your team in council operations. Not always as present in this room, but a huge part of each of our committee meetings. And here to help report out from those meetings today. Thank you all for everything you have put into the first year of this council operating. We know that we couldn't have done this without all of you. I am incredibly grateful and hope that I can speak for the whole council in saying that we value your work, your service to Portland, your service to keeping democracy representative, to keeping it accessible, and to making sure that this is a place that the public can engage. Thank you. Councilor Green is your hand up for before we move any further.
101 Yeah. And I'm sorry, I just I noticed that there's a high school student from lincoln high school here, and I try to always recognize when students come out and just say hello. Zander came down to city hall yesterday with some students to speak their voice, and I was really inspired. So I just want to say, hi, zander, thanks for coming today.
102 Thank you, councilor and zander, thank you for being here with us this evening. Councilor canal are you in the queue for before we move any further?
103 I'm in the queue for the agenda.
104 Okay, perfect. Colleagues, the first item on the agenda is agenda approval. And I'd like to make a quick note about the agenda before we move any further. And then councilor Kanal, I will call on you as well. Following the approval of the consent agenda, we will take up items eight and nine, which are the regularly scheduled items this evening. Because today's agenda was a little bit lighter than expected, we have worked with staff to make sure that we have the right people in the room to then add agenda items 11 and 12, which were previously scheduled for tomorrow, to tonight's agenda. Instead, tomorrow's agenda was pretty heavy and was pushing our limits of fitting within the time. So we're going to take those up tonight. I think we will be able to do that in our allotted time and still get out of here without running late. I want to thank the clerk's office, council operations and our administrative staff for being willing to make those changes and assure you all that at the time those changes were made and posted publicly, there was not anyone signed up from the public to testify. So we hopefully have not inconvenienced any members of the public. With that change. I will also note that tomorrow we will start with a time certain item item ten, and then take up our regularly scheduled items 13 and 14, followed by two appointments which were pulled from the consent agenda. Though I believe we may have a councilor Asked to reorder those portions of the agenda. Councilor Kanal do you have comments on the agenda order?
105 Yeah, thank you for those clarifications. Madam president, I would request that we hear items five and six, which are currently at the end of tomorrow's agenda, at the top of tomorrow's regular agenda, just so that there can be predictability for appointees and staff who would be presenting.
106 So colleagues, items five and six have been pulled off of the consent agenda. This would mean that we would still hear today's agenda items 11 and 12 tonight. Tomorrow we would start with the time certain item ten still. Then hear items five and six and then move on to the regularly scheduled agenda items 13 and 14. Are there any objections to that proposal? Okay. Can we get unanimous consent to approve the agenda? Okay. Keelan I don't see any dissension, so we'll move forward. Thank you for that complicated reordering there, folks. The next item on our agenda is public communication. Keelan can you please call up our first guest?
107 First up we have joseph joe.
108 Welcome. Thank you for joining us tonight.
109 Thank you. My name is joseph joe. I live in district four here in downtown, actually not too far from here. I'm the secretary of secretary of the downtown neighborhood association, and I'm also a reservist for FEMA. However, I did not come here for for either FEMA or on the behalf of the dna. I gave. So I've lived in I have lived off 11th and jefferson since I moved to Portland from atlanta three years ago, and I used to work for for coda, a method and local methadone clinic, as well as FEMA, of course, FEMA, FEMA. But when the federal government got gutted and the agency, well, fell into the wayside, that ended up destroying at least 60% of my income. And and even though I've been living in what was considered a, quote, affordable unquote housing unit, I've found myself having to move simply because simply because I got priced out and wanted to talk about just the economic situation of the city. City jobs are really hard to come by, especially high paying jobs, let alone high paying jobs, and would like to understand what exactly the council's vision is for the future of this city. To bring back jobs, to bring back prosperity, not just not simply for economic, for economic development, but economic mobility as well. For what? To be able to get people off the streets or be able to get jobs that actually pay, to be able to match the the cost of living here, I love Portland, I could not see myself living in any other city at this point, at this point in time, and since. Since then, I've gotten a job with amazon as a safety specialist, and I've heard the grievances that my coworkers talk about when it came to affordability, including one of my coworkers who's one, who's a part of the management team and is a single mother, but was talking about having to skip meals for her child to even have a present for christmas. Or one of my coworkers who who had literally dropped dead dead because of a medical emergency, and he was the sole breadwinner of his of his family. But yet they all were talking about how they cannot afford to live, not really anywhere. And I would like to know, do you guys have a plan just to do fix the city's economy, to help, to really help allow for economic growth? Thank you.
110 Thank you very much for being here. Thank you for sharing your coworkers stories. I know this is something that multiple people at the dais want to make sure we dig in on more next year.
111 Next up we have eddie rogoway. Eddie. Carrie babin. Carrie's joining us online.
112 Welcome, carrie. Thank you for joining us.
113 Carrie you're muted. Carrie are you able to unmute. Let's. Okay. It looks like carrie is rejoining. Carrie can you hear us.
114 I can hear you. Is it. Yeah I think I see myself now too. So I think it's working. Sorry about that. Should I just go ahead?
115 Yeah. Go ahead.
116 Thanks. So. Yeah. Good afternoon. My name is carrie babin, and I'm a member of the new portlanders policy commission, the npc, the mpc is an advisory board that advises city council on policies and actions that affect immigrant and refugee communities in our city. I am a humanitarian services professional, and I have worked in various capacities over the past 20 years to make our city a welcoming community for new portlanders. I'm here tonight on behalf of the commission to speak about an urgent and increasing risk facing our immigrant communities and the responsibility that we have to act now. Across Portland, many new portlanders are losing or at high risk of losing the humanitarian protections that they have relied on to legally live, work, and care for their families in Portland. When these protections disappear without access to legal support, families are pushed into undocumented status, where they become far more vulnerable to exploitation, detention and deportation. This vulnerability is not accidental. Current federal enforcement practices are actively expanding the undocumented population, creating conditions to easily target, detain, and deport hard working, law abiding individuals and families. We are seeing an increased fear of everyday activities like going to work, taking public transit, seeking medical care or even reporting crimes. Families are being destabilized and entire communities who call Portland home are living in fear. As members of the npcc, we hear directly from community members who are navigating one of the most complex legal systems in the country without representation, often in a language that is not their first, while simultaneously facing life altering consequences. Many in our community qualify for a variety of immigration protections, but without legal counsel, they lose the opportunity to apply for those protections. Legal support is often the difference between safety and separation, between stability and detention. The city of Portland has long committed to being a welcoming and sanctuary city. And while immigration policy and enforcement happens at the federal level, our city is not powerless to support our vulnerable new Portland population. This moment calls for immediate action for the city to intervene where, while there are still new portlanders who can be protected and before more harm can be done, we have the opportunity to expand access to immigration legal services for those at the greatest risk. This is not about creating special privileges. It's about preventing predictable, avoidable harm, preserving family unity, and upholding the dignity, safety and humanity for all portlanders who are deeply woven into the fabric of our city. Thank you for your leadership and for your attention to this.
117 Thank you very much for elevating this today for us.
118 Next up we have mary karam.
119 Welcome. Thank you for being here.
120 Thank you.
121 Good evening. Council president, vice president and members of city council. My name is mary karam and I'm a member of the new portlanders policy commission, the mpc. I am a syrian immigrant as well as a domestic relations attorney that practices in the tri county area. Similar to carrie. I'm here on behalf of the commission to speak on concrete steps the city can take to protect new portlanders facing increased harm from immigration enforcement. In September, some members of the city council asked the commission to provide recommendations for how the city could expand protections for new portlanders through low cost access to immigration legal services. In response, the commission collaborated with saw, immigration clinic immigration legal services to identify practical, cost effective approaches that build on the city's existing partnerships. What makes this proposal especially important is the immediacy. It focuses on people who have lost or will soon lose legal humanitarian protections and are therefore at high risk of detention or deportation. The proposal does not require creating a new system and in fact strengthens the city's current intergovernmental agreement and expands collaboration with trusted providers such as the saw clinic and pcc clear clinic. As you can imagine, the demand for legal services has far exceeded capacity and even modest investments into these organizations can prevent irreversible harm in these communities. We've seen this across the country and even here in Oregon, where cities and counties have passed emergency declarations to fund legal services, access to immigration legal services is a proven preventative measure. It keeps families together, reduces unnecessary detention, and stabilizes communities, often at far lower cost than the consequences of inaction. By endorsing and supporting our recommendation, city council has an opportunity to act decisively, decisively, uphold portland's sanctuary city values and ensure that new portlanders are not left unprotected during a period of escalating federal law enforcement intervention. Thank you for your continued partnership and with the commission, and for your commitment to justice and equity for all portlanders. Thank you.
122 Thank you very much.
123 Next up we have caroline van der herten.
124 Thank you. Good evening. My name is caroline van der hagen, and I'm the director of immigration legal services, a program of ecumenical ministries of Oregon. I'm also an attorney and have been practicing immigration law for more than 17 years. The city of Portland can immediately support immigrants who have lost, or will soon lose, humanitarian protections as a result of the trump administration's executive orders by expanding access to immigration legal services saw legal has been providing immigration, legal aid and education since 1992. Each year between our Portland and hillsboro offices, we serve over 3000 low income immigrants from over 80 different countries. I can tell you we have never seen it this bad. And unfortunately, we know that this is just the beginning. Our office is receiving over 100 calls every single day from the community seeking legal help. The immigrant community is living in a state of perpetual fear due to the executive orders and the increased expansive and arbitrary ice enforcement actions. People are afraid to take their children to school. They're afraid to go to medical appointments. They're even afraid to go to their houses of worship. On inauguration day in January, president trump signed executive orders aimed at terminating various humanitarian immigration statuses. Many of the immigrants targeted by these and subsequent status stripping executive orders have been here for decades, and they're now at risk. Thousands of Oregonians, many of whom call Portland home, have either had their humanitarian statuses stripped or at risk of having the status stripped or terminated in 2026 by this administration. To make matters worse, during these times of confusion, chaos and quick changing policies, notarios and other unscrupulous individuals and scammers take advantage of the confusion to scam vulnerable community members, providing misinformation and oftentimes increase the risk of deportation to these communities. But the good news is, there's something that we can do. Many of these humanitarian temporary status holders are qualified for some path to citizenship, and the city of Portland can help by increasing access to free immigration legal services so that these families will not be at risk of deportation. Under the city of portland's iga with Portland community college, saw provides free legal services, but with current funding, our services are already booked out into March. By increasing access to immigration legal services, the city can provide hope to families. I'm available to answer questions about the proposal to increase immigration legal services through the city's partnership with pcc and soar. Thank you so much for the work that the city is doing for your leadership to protect our community and for the opportunity to speak today.
125 Thank you very much for rounding out the information there for us. We appreciate having you here.
126 I'm going to call the alternate that we had listed since we had public communication not come as julie winters here. Julie winters. That completes communications.
127 Thank you. Keelan colleagues. The next item on our agenda is the committee referral list. Over the last since our last meeting, I referred requiring the deputy city administrator for public safety to provide a report on police officer recruitment goals and costs to community and public safety, establishing a city council governance handbook to the governance committee, annexing the 5048 southwest hilltop Lane property to climate resilience and land use. Adding nondiscrimination requirements for single occupancy restrooms in places of public accommodation to arts and economy, adding code to establish city data and privacy offices to the community and public safety committee. Adding appointed boards, commissions and committee code to the governance committee. Confirming appointment of members to the Portland elections commission. To the governance committee. Assessing property for sidewalk, curb and driveway repair for Portland bureau of transportation to items to the finance committee amending the intergovernmental agreement with Multnomah county for the revenue division to administer preschool for all tax finance and requesting the city budget office provide balanced program. Offer information for Portland parks and rec to the finance committee as well. That moves us to the consent agenda. And as a reminder, items five and six were pulled off of the consent agenda. So the consent agenda includes agenda items four and seven. Keelan can you please call the roll.
128 Clerk a.
129 Green. A Zimmerman absent Avalos. I Dunphy. I Smith.
130 I I.
131 Ryan I.
132 Koyama Lane I Morillo. I Novick. I pirtle-guiney. I the consent agenda is approved with 11 yes votes and one absent.
133 Thank you keelan that moves us colleagues to our regular agenda. Keelan, could you please call agenda item eight, the first item on our regular agenda?
134 Adopt homelessness response system, action plan and key performance indicators.
135 Thank you. Keelan. As a quick refresher, colleagues and an update for anybody who has not followed this item through our process, we act under an intergovernmental agreement in iga with Multnomah county to guide joint homelessness response efforts. That requires us or allows us to meet jointly a few times a year in work session, and also has us move forward on some joint programs together. What we have before us today is draft kpis to approve, and this is an item that we first heard in work session with our county colleagues last month. We reviewed the kpis, provided some feedback, and mentioned at that time that the county would be approving the kpis and then they would come before us. I'll note that these started with the oversight committee, which has county and city representation. But I think equally important to note, has representation from the community as well, where they helped to develop these kpis, which then came before us for discussion and then again to the county for a vote. And to us here, this is just one piece of the larger set of work happening between the city and the county, but I think it is an important piece. We've noted up here many times that having more measurable outcomes will help us do our work better, and this is one way for us to do that. I want to thank everyone on the steering and oversight committee for their work, putting these together so that they could come before us. I support moving this forward today as we continue to strengthen our relationship and the work together, and we'll have more to say on that in my remarks later on. But just wanted to set up this item a bit before we jump into public communication and question and answer and discussion. Because this came out of a work session, we don't have a committee staff summary, and the mayor and I brought this forward, I believe, and he is not here today for a carrier report. Keelan do we have anybody signed up for public testimony?
136 No one signed up.
137 Okay.
138 Councilor Zimmerman, you sit on the steering and oversight committee with the mayor on behalf of the city before we move to questions and discussion. And I see we have our experts up here for questions. Is there anything that you would like to share?
139 I'll do an expert.
140 Up here. They're pretty smart and good at what they do.
141 Yeah, thanks, madam president. I think that this first year new government, a lot of new staff, it has been it has been a long journey. I think that there is a lot that the soc, the community team, the implementation team all want to get done. And for the first time in a few years, I think we're in a place where the the kpis have been put down, but also we're in a place whe tt has been a long time since that existed. And so I think we're on a path that makes sense to me. And I say that because we're we're in a place where I think we have a staff who and a team, frankly, between both both entities and the city of Gresham, as well as a team who is trying to help us understand if we put effort into one part of this system, what is it? How does it move the lever on other parts of the system? And we're having, I think, more coherent conversations in that. So from that perspective, I don't expect that all kpis are going to meet everybody's needs. What I do think is that we are getting closer to a set of kpis that support an ecosystem that has better outcomes, and it has included some things that used to be perhaps taboo in the Portland polite to talk about, and they're being talked about now. So I offer that to you, because I don't think that when gillian and the team present today that they're going to say that their plan is perfect, I don't think that they're going to say that there is no disagreement. I think what they're saying is like, this is a tough, a tough part of our community that has a lot of segmented, segmented parts of the community, and they need segmented kpis to help us get there. And we're looking at the overall things that that help move people out of the system, or to make sure that the system that exists is ready to receive them. So with that, I think having the staff present would be helpful.
142 Thank you, councilor and mr. Mayor, you are technically the the carrier on this item. Is there anything that you'd like to say before we move into questions and discussion?
143 Thank you. Council president, council vice president and colleagues, thank you for this opportunity. Just a few words. I've had the great pleasure of working with the county, with jillian and her team for really the last several months. The kpi project, it's big. It's a lot of data, it's a lot of information, and we've put a lot of good work into it. But I'd be the first to say that it's still has a lack of focus on the overall continuum. It's important information that I think is being brought forward, but I want to also stress that and working with the county and jillian specifically and the atrap, they're open minded to to adding more. So I don't think that we're looking at a finite group of information we're going to have and track these kpis. Jillian and the soc have agreed to go beyond that, and to look at continuous improvement on different kpis, to list them, to really focus on what measurables are today, and to make sure the kpis we have meet the eye test of what's happening on the streets as well. And so I'm looking forward to it. I'm supporting it. They've agreed to continue to make changes not just on these kpis, but to add as well. So I'm I'm encouraged about the chapter ahead.
144 Thank you, mr. Mayor. Colleagues, we did receive a presentation on these in work sessions. So we are going to move into questions and conversation. But as I noted, we have our our staff here with us. So if there are questions we can make sure to get those answered. Councilor Dunphy, go right ahead.
145 Thank you. And thank you to everybody for who presented and has given me some private briefings and answered some follow up questions. A lot of work has gone into this, and I agree with everything councilor Zimmerman said. I also agree with what the mayor said. This is the direction we should be moving. We should we need to be having key performance indicators for those at home who don't speak acronym. We should be having set goals and we should be following up on what those mean. That said, I will be voting no on this today and it is in no part due to anybody sitting up here. But as I said during the the joint work session, if the kpi document and the goal document fell off of my giant pile of papers on my desk, my staff would have no way of knowing they were related. The plan is attempting to do many things, and it does none of them particularly well. There are some bizarre one offs that clearly are now stated as goals that are obviously reflective of conversations that happened in these workgroups, but are not themselves goals. There's a goal in here about self-certification. Self-certification of developments is not going to reduce homelessness in any capacity. It is one step of the reforms that we are doing more broadly towards permitting. I think that these goals and the kpis are deeply unrelated to each other, and they lack a clear focus or an overarching goal tied to measurable impacts. We are being asked to approve goals that do not have numbers attached to them. This is an enormously complicated process. This is an enormously complicated system, and homelessness is the most complicated challenge that I think we will likely have to deal with. Arguably more complicated in many ways in the immediate than climate change. If we can't prioritize, costs are going to continue to rise, and we're going to see the number, an increase in the number of people sleeping on our streets. In the report, we saw that the track we are on right now, if we don't nearly double our investment in our homeless services response, that we won't see measurable reductions in homes in homelessness for years. Additionally, I just I think it is worth noting that the point in time count showed that 94% of the people who were surveyed in Multnomah county that night as being unsheltered were in Portland. And I agree with commissioner Singleton. Dollars should follow the need, and the need is here. Portland needs real support from the county to ensure that resources are proportionately focused. Here. I understand that this is the direction we are going. We have not nailed it yet, and this is so important and this is our opportunity for the next year to say what we are going to do and how we're going to do it. And this isn't it for me. And so I will be voting no today and encourage you all to follow your hearts. Thank you.
146 Thank you. Councilor councilor Novick.
147 So I did not propose amendments. I think it's probably too late to propose amendments to the kpis. I apologize for this, but I wanted to mention a couple that I would propose if I were. If I weren't saying so, if we weren't too late. One is, and this obviously is inspired in part by the article, article in Willamette week about the huge vacancy rate that home forward has is I would have liked to have a kpi. That reduce vacancy rates for affordable housing to below the overall vacancy rate for housing. That sort of presumes that the vacancy rate is higher than the overall for housing. But I kind of, based on the anecdotal things I've seen and think it might be. In fact, I talked to a developer the other day who said the units where vacancies are more affordable units, and I talked to another developer who said that the non-profits do a really lousy job of marketing the existence of their affordable units, that people don't know they exist. So that is a question, which I mean, again, I think it's too late to add it to the kpis, but how many vacancies there are in affordable units is something I think we should be tracking. Another thing is more of a conceptual one, and might be hard to to make it a real kpi, but what I came up with is compare Portland Multnomah county's level of homelessness with that of other cities or counties, accounting for one shortage of affordable housing and two amount of money spent to address homelessness. What I mean by that is I think that homelessness is driven by a lack of housing affordability. The rents are too high. I think that we can find other cities, maybe boston, maybe seattle, which have similar problems in terms of rent compared to incomes, in terms of shortage of affordable housing as a percentage of overall housing. Et cetera. And what I would like to know is. Compare their statistics to ours and see if money is making a difference, like if other things being equal, boston and seattle should have the same level of homelessness. We do, and we spend three times as much as either of them do, and we still have higher homelessness than we suck. On the other hand, if they're spending three times as much as we do in their level, homelessness is higher than ours than they suck. But I haven't seen those comparisons and I think they do exist. I mean, at one point I asked the joint office, tell us what the natural level of homelessness would be given our housing shortage. Is there a sort of indicator of here's what you would expect the level of homelessness to be, given the cost of housing and the absence of housing, and see how we compare to that expected level of homelessness? That might not be possible. But one thing I think we although I'd like it, one thing I think we can do, and maybe this is like a research report rather than a kpi, is let's look at other cities that also have affordability problems, look at what they're doing and see who seems to be better job of handling that situation and limiting the amount of homelessness.
148 Thank you. Councilor. I think one of the benefits of doing this work annually is that we can continue to iterate and add some new things in in the future. Councilor canal.
149 Thank you, madam president. I guess I'll start with just a thank you and also a question. You know, we had this first discussed, I believe it was November 18th ish. Somewhere in that ballpark. We had the work session on this, and I wanted to know from your side what actually changed. From then till now, we don't have a red line version of any of this. I'm just trying to understand where city council's influence and the county commission's was felt in this.
150 There's only been minor changes since we were here presenting to both governing bodies. We added an action item to name the metro regional housing production workgroup that is meeting now. We made it more clear with how the state is involved by adding an additional appendix that sort of named all of the action items, where there's some level of state involvement. And then the county board did add one sentence to exhibit one, the kpi document. Just for clarification purposes. It is in the updated exhibit that I submitted on December 11th. It's the underlined sentence in the first paragraph that follows the list of the 12 kpis.
151 There's a bolded sentence. Is that.
152 Underlined sentence and what I resubmitted on December 11th. It reads. Final baseline baseline data for the goals is from June 2026. It was just a clarifying sentence.
153 Yeah. No, I appreciate that. And that does imply that this could still be adjusted, which I appreciate as well. My concern with this is very similar to what councilor Novick just mentioned. I specifically asked about something related to affordability of housing and not exclusively capital a capital h affordable housing, but the broader indicator of rent as it relates to average income. This relates to what our first testifier today was talking about at the beginning as well. And certainly the job site matters too. But but the affordability of housing, and I see that there's this number of units affordable to households with extremely low income. But we were talking about rent burdening. And so the proportion of people who have rent that's greater than a third of their income or rent that's greater than half of their income, as well as the ratios of income to rent at the median level was something that I was really interested in seeing added here. And I'm I'm not seeing it here, and I'm concerned about some of the same things that both councilors Dunphy and Novick raised, particularly as it relates to the longer term end goal here, which is to get people not merely into shelter but into housing. Thank you, madam president.
154 Council president, do you want me to? I'm not sure if I'm ready to respond. I just a few things that have been named already. They are something I would call them. Sub indicators. There are many, many things that are tracked and measured by any given department or bureau. That data exists. The the, the bureau and the departments can pull it for more in-depth analysis. It just didn't make the 12 that represent the the the entire system.
155 That's fair. I did ask for it on November 18th. Where is it in the big document?
156 I would need to go back to the soc, but in o in the plan?
157 Yeah.
158 The plan. As mentioned on November 18th, think of the plan as the policy document. Those aren't goals. Those are action items. It is literally everything we want to look at to make sure we're doing a good job at it. It is continuous quality improvement. The kpis are those system level kpis that are all connected, that represent the entire system with any given data point. They're connected and we can really drill down from there. When we are not meeting a goal. And it will. They demonstrate that the term that I've been using is the hydraulics of the system. Like councilor Zimmerman pointed out, you put in more money here. You're going to see it play out in the kpis. In this way, you put less money over there. You're going to see it play out that way.
159 Thank you. Councilor, colleagues, I put myself in the queue because I agree with some of what has been raised. There are things that we have talked about over the course of the past year in our joint meetings with the county that are not yet in this document. And I also think it is important to note that this document starts with the soc. It starts with community member input and comes to us as a final check. Is everything okay with what the soc has put in there for us? I will continue to ask for some changes over the coming year so that we can work with our staff and our representatives on the soc to make sure that we continue to improve these kpis. I think what we have before us is much better than what we walked into at the beginning of last year. It is more measurable. It is more equitable, it is more specific, and I am excited to move it forward today. I hope so that we can make progress and continue to iterate and work with the county to make this system and make our partnership to serve portlanders who are unhoused better. I think that's good for our community, and there's always a balance in making sure that we respect the work of our boards and committees, like the the soc with community members there, with our need to provide that final level of oversight. I hope we can continue to do that final level of oversight through the work that we do, leading to next year's kpis, and respect the work that has come before us this year, which I think is a much better product than what we had last year. And I appreciate all the time that went into those improvements, even if there are still more things that I want to push us to do in the coming years. Councilor Green.
160 Kind of stole a little bit of my thunder there. Yeah, I'm not on the housing committee. I'm not on the soc. I'm not part of any formal table. So this is the space I get to sort of weigh in. And part of that, for all those reasons, I actually don't feel it's appropriate to try to amend this document in that way, because there's a lot of work that goes into this. So I want to recognize that. So I'll just in the spirit of saying, you know, to the mayor, you set this set, you set this context up when we started, yes, we've got more work to do, but continuous improvement is a thing that we can do. So I'm going to offer a suggestion here. In the spirit of what we've been talking about, I do think a kpi is missing. So if there's an opportunity to add one, I would suggest a kpi that measures the cost efficiency of that overall system. And I know that's a little bit awkward and difficult because you have a you have a model that says given resources, here's our structure of our system, here are the outcomes. But I think what's missing from the discussion and what I did raise earlier in our conversations across over the course of the year, is that we have a scale problem, and that's an important kpi to measure because because we can't double we can't double our resources. We just can't do it. And so we're gonna have to figure out a way to get more efficient, and we won't know if we're becoming more efficient with our trade off choices unless we seek to try to measure that. And so that's an idea I'd like to just put in there as an opportunity to think through and and contemplate on how we might measure such a thing and how we might maybe change our modeling approach for that. But I think it'll allow us it could enable us to be more successful across our two governments. But I'm going to support this today because I think it's good work, and I am encouraging us to kind of continue to work for it. So and thanks for everyone who's lent their time to the various different tables to get us here. Thanks.
161 Thank you. Councilor, councilor Ryan.
162 Yes, thank you, council president. It's good to see you all. I do have the pleasure of sitting on the housing committee with councilor Dunphy and councilor Avalos and others, and I have noticed and acknowledged the that this has come a long way. It's improvement. I'll repeat a couple of things that I'm still not seeing in this, and I will call those out. One is most of the goals are certainly we should be tracking are there. And but there's two things I'm hoping for more clarification on. I'm not seeing any specific measurement targets listed for each kpi. For example, in kpi one seeks to reduce homelessness over two years, similar for number four, ten and 11, which is great, but by what metrics?
163 So back to the joint work session. What we shared then was that we are setting. We are identifying and setting our goals in three phases. Phase one was sort of the what we want to measure. That's the list you see before you. Phase two is sort of how are we going to measure each one? Is it a hard number? Is it a percentage? Is it just directional over time up and down, or is it strictly an indicator like eviction judgments? We're just watching that data point to know what's coming at us. So there are multiple types of kpis. And that's what you have laid out here. The ones in bold per the paragraph below, there represent the phase three that we haven't gotten to yet. That comes next summer after your fiscal year 27 budget process. We felt as we were going through this journey with the steering and oversight committee, given the how the financial floor below both of us, the federal nofo other the state cuts that came down after we started this process, the financial floor feels so shaky that what I told the soc is we're adding a phase three to set goals after the next budget year, when we know more about our financial situations. It felt irresponsible to set specific goals for those in bold right now. So we made that very conscious decision for all the right reasons. It is irresponsible when we know we may lose $36 million from the feds for permanent supportive housing that represents 1200. Portlanders could lose their housing. We need to be able to figure that out. That is very uncertain right now. The federal government put out a notice for funding opportunity. They yanked it back last week. I think it was, or maybe the week beforehand. We are now waiting to hear back about if we even have access to that $36 million this fiscal next fiscal year. So we just and of course, if we don't get that money, gets priority number one is going to be keeping those people housed. That changes the game for the fiscal year 27 budget process, especially on the county side of the equation. So that is that is the process by which we're following it is the responsible approach. I emailed to all of your offices last night, a transition timeline for implementation of the new kpis. I will send it again and I could share the slide now if you wanted to see it. So everybody sort of understands how we move away from our current set and to our new set.
164 That was fair. And what's also fair in good practice is to still have clear metrics in what our targets are. And then we can explain, perhaps one of the reasons we didn't make that target is because of the funding that you just said. But I think by pre baking everything because of funding, it doesn't always, in my opinion, give you give us an excuse to not set up really clear, measurable targets. And so it's perhaps a different way of looking at it. And that's what I've been trying to stress. And everything you said right now is just was fair to listen to. I'll go ahead and save some time and go down here a bit. You know, I've been asking for this for years, so you won't be surprised. Jillian, this will be my next point. There are two points where the metrics on behavioral health addiction getting transitioned out of homelessness. And why don't we include workforce metrics.
165 I'll take the easier one. First, workforce just did not elevate to a system level kpi. Doesn't mean that for any given program offer, in particular on the county side of the equation, there aren't outputs and outcomes. That is all required for the budget process on the county side of the equation. Again, that's a really good example where metrics exist. It's just not elevated to the 12 system level kpis. Behavioral health did make it in there for the obvious reasons. And we are we are focusing on number four is reduce exits from permanent housing to homelessness. For the high acuity behavioral cohort of folks, we now have a new data set. We call it the combined data set. It takes miss data. It matches it with medicaid claims data via healthshare. And we now know precisely who falls into that high acuity behavioral health cohort. We are using that data to try out something new in the behavioral health system. We hope to be able to sort of reveal that new pathway for folks come March ish. We're also using the data to inform our federal nofo applications. When we do turn those in, whenever that comes to be, whenever the feds shed light on that. In addition to that, we're using that data to look at everybody currently in psh and learn more about that. But that is a new data set. So we're sort of on the front end of being armed with that data and turning it into actions.
166 Okay. I would still rather see them as key performance indicators. And let me just say a couple more things about that. It's so critical to focus and improve in these two areas. Most portlanders would agree and are crystal clear that we will not get out of this crisis unless we focus on the addiction crisis. The more majority of those who are homeless are also aged, and this is an and 25 to 54, and many are not physically disabled. As such, if they were integrated into sober living and working in due time, they would move on to being independent from government resources. That in my opinion, should be a goal as we're trying to get real concrete results and start to look at the efficiency of the money that we're spending. And so I was I've been disappointed in this for some time. And so I'm going to keep raising it. And and so I just don't know why why we are not measuring work that leads people to sobriety and to workforce. The sub indicators matter and it's helpful for the public to see. So if those are sub indicators then I think we should see them. We also passed amendments the last 2 to 3 in 23 and 24 that asked the county's providers in the county as the as the the mothership, to identify the kpis that they're moving with, the revenue they receive from taxpayers. This is accountability that's needed. Has this been implemented?
167 Yes. I mean.
168 It's in their contracts.
169 Dashboard was relaunched at the beginning of this calendar year. In addition to that, with the county has not only do they have their adopted budget, where you can go down to the program, offer level and see outcomes and outputs for every pot of money, but they have a budget monitoring dashboard as well as well that shows you the burn rate for any given bucket of money. It's moving from the city to the county. Quite honestly, I'd like to.
170 See the details of the of some of that. The contracts are going out. That's the kind of accountability that I think taxpayers deserve. And as we look to asking the taxpayers to re-up, if you will, I think we have to continue to get crisp and clear about the effectiveness of their investment. And I'm trying to help us get there so we can pass this next time we go to the voters. Because I've seen the most success with getting people who are chronically homeless off the streets by actually getting into some sort of a program that allows them to be sober one day at a time, quickly into the workforce, because I haven't seen anybody that remains sober if they're not busy doing things that are healthy, like working. I cannot support this until we have those kind of metrics. It just goes too much against my values. And I do think that this is improved. And I'll be joining then. Councilor Dunphy, who in the committee voted. Yes. But today I just want to send a message that until I see those types of measurements, I'm uncomfortable going forward with this dashboard for the public. Thanks.
171 Thank you, councilor, councilor Smith.
172 Thank you, madam president. I think it's important that we move forward with the kpis with a sense of urgency. The fact is, the public and taxpayers expect excellence in our actions, and we should continue to work closely and expediently with our partners at Multnomah county. The challenge before us is very immense, but we have short term opportunities to make progress towards these goals, and one critical way we can build on this work well before the next budget process is by supporting the resolution that I co-sponsored with councilor Avalos and councilor Dunphy as a district one coalition, and it's called slow the flow, which recently passed out of the housing committee. I know we have a lot of competing priorities, but this resolution moves the needle on at least four of these 12 kpis before the end of the next fiscal year. I do agree with you, councilor Ryan, about workforce and making sure folks have an opportunity to go from. To to go from getting services to having a job. So that is so very important. But there's a question that a couple of questions that I have for you all, jillian. Were we successful in receiving medicaid funds towards building housing? Housing? We had talked about seeing if we could use those resources. Have we?
173 Medicaid for capital construction?
174 Yeah.
175 Yeah. Okay. No.
176 Have we got it for services at all for housing. Yes okay.
177 Yes. Services. Yeah. That that can happen. And that does happen.
178 Okay okay. Perfect.
179 But we do councilor I think the point you're making is like go after every medicaid dollar possible perhaps. Is that what you're saying at the end of the day maximizing our use. So we have another well, we have a contract in place up to there's about six action items in this document that aim to look at where we're tapping medicaid dollars and making sure we're getting all that we can.
180 And those are the medicaid credits that Multnomah county receives that we're talking about. Correct.
181 I think I need to phone a friend. I don't call them credits.
182 I just call them credits.
183 Yeah, reimbursement.
184 For reimbursement.
185 That's yeah, yeah.
186 Yeah, it's the reimbursement. Yes. To what extent will the kpis be used to guide decisions in the next proposed budget for 2627? Yeah. If if this passes.
187 That's a wonderful question. And it's part of our transition timeline because what we as a team plan to do is to, is to we are developing a tool, and I'm going to kick it over a to Ryan in second to be able to be stay in constant dialog with the board of commissioners and with the city council as we play around with the math. So everybody is fully aware, you make that budget decision. This is how you're going to see it come out the other side and our key performance indicators. So we plan on being an active dialog with you. So in effect the budget votes cast and for the fiscal year 27 budget become the foundation really of where we start with this next set of kpis. So when the soq comes back together in July of 2026, your budget votes are going to inform sort of the starting point of where we're at. In addition to that, the other part of the the transition to the new kpis is to align it to the budget process. When we set our first goals associated with this plan, they were tied to the calendar year. We actually only had one budget cycle within that. That was not smart. We're doing it smarter now. So that's why the the clock is going to start ticking July 1st at 2026 on these new kpis. So you have your fiscal year 27 votes to help create a solid foundation. And then you have two other fiscal years to influence what we actually achieve when it comes to our kpis.
188 I think that's so important to to to relate those to actual actions. And, and I can tell you, I saw something in action last night. I was at a, a community meeting with, with the mayor and a group of folks from a neighborhood. They were really upset about us putting in a overnight shelter in the neighborhood without talking to the neighborhood leaders first. But and I talked about this this morning, I was I was really impressed because the mayor was getting so many questions. And he was he was answering the questions and he said, look, I'm not going to ask for permission to do something. We're in an emergency. And this is what you get when you get an overnight shelter. And I think one thing that was really effective is when you listed and showed all the things that you can get from a neighborhood. When we bring in an overnight shelter. And I think that part is the thing that you're talking about with the kpis, this is what you're going to get for this because people want to see what what are the what's going to be new, what's what's new and different. We just think you're going to bring folks who are vulnerable in our neighborhoods, and it's just going to be more of them. And I think when you can identify that with specifics, that it really, really makes sense. So thank you for pulling this together, I appreciate it. I hope this passes today and want to be a partner with you.
189 Thank you.
190 Thank you. Councilor councilor Canal, have you spoken? You did okay. Thank you. Just clarifying, councilor Dunphy. Go ahead.
191 Thank you. A lot of my colleagues made a lot of really good points, and I want to just sort of comment on them. You know, I will I will start by noting that, colleagues, you know, we are 21 years into the ten year plan to end homelessness. Clearly, a lot of work has gone into this. I'm really trying to not undermine that. And I know that you all in particular are trying to herd dozens of cats. You are trying to get government partners, nonprofit partners, community partners to move towards around a single round table in order to talk about getting, defining the work, defining success. And a lot of a lot of process has gone into this document. But I have said this a couple of times. I don't care how good the process was, if the product isn't there and the product isn't here, this is a better product than it was a year ago. But this ain't it. I'm. I'm in response to councilor Kanal line of questioning. I'm actually really disappointed to hear that there wasn't more change done in response to the work session. I thought that was a work session. I didn't think it was a briefing. I thought that we were, as elected officials, coming together to say staff and community have come to a point, and this is where we think that the process should move forward. And then we all had a lot of really, I thought good conversation, good questions, good specifics and good requests for follow up. But it didn't it didn't appear in the document. Jillian, I do agree with you that if 50% of the kpis on here, which are the bolded ones, are tied to our ability to do the work based off of our budget next year, it is irresponsible to put dollars or numbers specific metrics into here, but 100% of these goals do not have metrics in them. So I'm not sure if the bolded ones just don't have metrics for now. And I think that's I think it's just irresponsible of us as a body to approve any metrics that don't have numbers attached to them, any goals that don't have metrics attached to them. Excuse me if the budget realities come to fruition in June and in July, the staff come back to us and say we are going to meaningfully reduce the net homelessness over two years by 1%. That is a failure on our part. But we are. But with our vote today, we are saying, go forth and find a number by which to fill this this blank. On this paper I have a couple of specific questions and I promise they're not loaded questions. I'm not trying to be a jerk. How many different organizations are a member or contributing to the homelessness response system, and also are contributing towards this document? Ultimately, do we have too many cooks in the kitchen?
192 I don't know that that's a loaded question. I think that's a hard question to answer, because there's a variety of constituencies that we intersected with, and I'm not sure I would take any of those constituencies off the table fair.
193 I just I worry that I see staffing options go out. I see staffing recruitment listings go out to try and staff up homeless overnight shelters. Or, as I understood it, some some staffing services are now also directing people to overnight shelters and to doing things like that, which means that there isn't a inherently right now waiting hundreds of employees who are waiting to be put into action. We have hundreds of nonprofit groups and community groups across different contracts, across different governments, who are standing up their own administrative processes, their own executive leaderships, and then going out and hiring and executing. And I just worry that that is leading to deep inefficiencies like this document, where a year's worth of work of roundtables got us to six bolded lines and six unbolted lines without any numbers in them. Knowing that there's not an opportunity. I'm not going to introduce amendments. I'm not going to try and fix this document. I'm still going to vote no. But it sounds like the majority of my colleagues are ready to vote yes. How can the city council meaningfully impact this document next year?
194 Okay. So let's I'm going to revisit what I felt I heard out of out of council members in particular on November 18th. There were lots of questions about housing production. Maybe what I failed to do in that moment was explain that the housing production items that are in that section right now are pulled from the housing production strategy that is on the books. We have one naming the unified housing strategy. And what I said that day when I kicked it to council, councilor Avalos was until that is unpackaged. I don't know what to add and it is not unpackaged yet, but by all means when it does. And I shared this with her as recent as this morning, we can add new housing production related action items once they are named, but that doesn't exist yet.
195 Sure, and I appreciate that and I recognize that. But I'm being told that this is my yearly opportunity to impact how we measure success in the homelessness response system. And I'm being presented with a document with no numbers in it as to to defining our success. And I'm hearing that this is the best we're going to get this year. And what I'm asking is, how does the city council impact this document next year so that we can actually have kpis that are tied to goals and goals that are realistic, based off of the lived and worked experience of the hundreds of people, thousands of people who are doing the work right now, and the thousands of people who are experiencing homelessness, and the professionals who you all manage and are doing this work every day. How does this city council make this process more successful next year? Is there a is there a time that we can start getting involved now? Is the homelessness and housing committee able to play a bigger role? What do you recommend?
196 And sorry to be clear, action plan or kpis.
197 I both.
198 Okay the action plan. We certainly consider it a living document. So again I leave the door open on the housing production items when those are actually ready to be discussed, whatever process they end up following over here on the city side of the equation, I, I have no doubt that I will be informed.
199 But the city, the city council also, I mean historically we we I understand there's some budget conversations about this year, but we do historically have a homeless services. Before the joint office was formed, the city of Portland did our own homelessness services. The county did our own. The decision was to jointly operate that and then for the city to contribute dollars towards that. So I do appreciate that the city's role is housing production. We are bricks and sticks. We are permits. We are public spaces, but we also do contribute meaningfully, substantively policy wise, to the success of responding to homelessness. And this document isn't, you know, our dollars and our responsibilities don't end at housing production goals. And so I'm trying to get again like, what table am I not at? What table did we as a body not have the invitation to to actually meaningfully impact this, where we're now being asked to approve it? Is there an opportunity in the next year to have city council meaningfully impact this document.
200 On the action plan? Certainly, yes. I will say under the current here's iga. The specific charge on the kpis is to the soc as the recommending body that not only refers out the kpis to to the, to the city council and the board of commissioners, but they are specifically charged with revisiting those every year.
201 Thank you.
202 But your votes, your votes for the fiscal year 27 process. And actually even before then, whenever the the $21 million is addressed, for example, like those investments have the opportunity to impact kpis in a positive way.
203 Anything further, councilor Councilor Avalos.
204 Hello. Oh. All right, well, can you hear me?
205 We can hear you. Yes. Go ahead.
206 Okay. Thank you. First and foremost, I am really grateful for this work because as we have heard and seen, this is a product of many constituencies, leaders and metrics. I understand both why it's frustrating for us as councilors to approve a document without these numerical targets. And I also understand why it was hard to set those targets right now, given the uncertainty that we are going to face in the coming months, not just monetarily, but in leadership and many other things. I think what you're hearing from my colleagues is frustration for inheriting a problem that for too long didn't have direction and it didn't have a vision. And so I want to flag for my colleagues that the importance of the unified housing strategy, because that is exactly what it is seeking to do, is to provide a vision. And importantly, what we need to do is get our ducks in a row at the city so that we can show up better to our county, metro and state partners who are all tackling the housing crisis from their own lanes. So I would really encourage everyone to spend this winter break defining your priorities and your goals, because we need to go into that conversation in our work session that's been rescheduled for January, and I really want to hear from everybody. What is your your vision, your priority? Because until we do that, we are just going to keep aiming in different directions. I, I hear the call for the housing committee to help guide this discussion for the council. And so I'll look to my housing committee colleagues for us to keep brainstorming how we do that and make sure that everyone on council that's not on committee feels that they can weigh in. And ultimately, I am planning on supporting this and voting for this today. I think that it is a good start, but I, I also think that it's clear that our lanes are really undefined. And I think there are parts of the kpis or of the map that will ultimately become part of the unified housing strategy. And so I look forward to unpacking that with you all in the coming months. Thank you to everybody who has put in hard work in this. And I think I'll just leave with not only reinforcing what councilor Smith has mentioned about the slow, the inflow resolution and how important it is right now, but also for us to just be clear eyed about the extreme affordability crisis that we are facing and that at the end of the day, the inability to pay for the base level of rent is the number one problem. We have to stay on that goal. If we cannot focus on that one goal. It does not matter how much people can get through recovery services, it doesn't matter. All of these other factors does not matter if they are not able to one get a job that they can afford to pay for, but also, just in general, can afford to pay because not everybody can have a job. Let's not forget, most of our incoming people into homelessness are seniors. People who have done their due, they have paid their debt and they have. They're now in this insecure situation because they have fixed incomes. They have no way to work. Many of them are struggling with disabilities. And so I just want us to be real clear that if we continue to put our focus on addiction or on people working, we're going to miss a huge swath of the people who are vulnerable right now. Thank you for your time.
207 Thank you so much. Councilor councilor Councilor Zimmerman. Okay, councilor Kanal, go for it.
208 Thanks. I have a couple questions and I'm struggling a little bit here to to try and wrap my head around kind of the conversation around what the the point of the work session is if it doesn't result in any visible impact. So I'm going to ask questions about the visibility of that. You've mentioned a list of sub indicators a couple times. Where can I see that list.
209 Oh my goodness. That list is exhaustive. I at the county, it goes down to the contract level. I mean there are an absolute ton of sub indicators. Again, when we showed that chart about sort of where kpis live and how they they connect all the way down to the contracts that go out the door, like there's no way to possibly count them all. What I did after that work session was send to everybody some documentation from ph, because I felt like a lot of the questions were about data that ph collects and tracks and uses to inform its work, to share those data sets that they use as an example of sub indicators that exist on this side of the equation, I.
210 Okay, so maybe it's the use of sub that that implies it is under one. My the questions I've been asking about rent which which of these 12 does it fall under.
211 And your question about rent burden. Yeah I could probably I think there's a lot of data available on rent burden. I think it probably tells you that over the last time I looked at it, over half the people in the city are rent burdened. That probably has only gotten worse, but I can find that data. Could it be one of the indicators where it's sort of just the finger in the wind to understand what's coming at us? Sure, it could be it didn't get named, but that data is readily available.
212 Yeah. And I understand that part of the way that we would actually try to reduce that percentage is something completely outside the scope of the hr's, and I want to recognize that.
213 I think.
214 You're talking about economy jobs.
215 Yeah. On the job side, yes. And on the policy side, as it relates to long term vacancy fees for for residential properties, which I am working on. But as it relates to the the in terms of are we building the types of units that people need specifically, we don't have enough three and four bedroom apartments being built because we measure things based off of the number of units or doors, which is not the same as measuring the number of people that are housed by these units. And when we try to maximize that, we maximize studios and one bedrooms. And so there are things like that that I think having this would have, would have helped. And so I'm trying to figure out where can I find it.
216 That kind of data exists in the housing needs analysis at fb.
217 Okay.
218 The councilor Dunphy mentioned that there's a built in check on these that we're going to be coming back in a year. Is the intention that it would be around this time of 2026, that we would revisit these kpis and potentially make adjustments to it based on the recommendation?
219 I, in all honesty, again, the transition timeline to the new kpis is we get through the fiscal year 27 budget process, where y'all's votes will create the foundation, the starting point for these, these the new 12 kpis. The clock starts ticking on them July 1st, 2026. That same month, the soc will do specific goal setting. We will keep you apprized along the way, but I do think those should sit for at least a year. I don't know, we don't I don't think we change them six months in. So no.
220 So you're saying 18 months from now is a better time frame to expect? Okay. Is that built in? I mean, is that guaranteed or are we relying on someone initiating this conversation without a deadline?
221 I think part of my job is to stay in communication with you on that, but it is a stated responsibility of the steering and oversight committee.
222 Okay. And then the other question I had was whether or not the July numbers, which are mentioned in that first sentence, after the list of 12 soc was directed to set specific goals for those, are those a recommendation or are they deciding the goals? Will we vote on those numbers? If they say reducing homelessness by x percent?
223 No, you will not vote.
224 Okay. So then I'm think I'm back where councilor Green was, which is I'm not on the housing committee. I'm going to be held accountable for how by voters for how you all do. And this is my time to talk about it. So and I've, I've consistently voted no on things that ask us to outsource our legislative prerogative to unaccountable people. So I feel like I'm trapped here and I don't want to be. But that's where this conversation is leading, because there's not enough information here. I will say that the other piece of it is having. I agree completely with councilor Ryan about the where the the order between money and goal setting, because I don't know if we a lot a certain amount of money, how much of that money is going to go to item eight versus the others. And I am concerned that we're going to end up spending all of our time trying to get unsheltered, homeless, houseless folks who are unsheltered to be sheltered instead of actually trying to get them a permanent place to live. And I don't know that right now. And even if I knew exactly the dollar amount to the penny that got budgeted to this in June, I wouldn't know the weight that each of these six things gets. And I understand that it's I'm oversimplifying. It's not 1 to 1, I get that, but my point is, I'm not 100% certain. And I understand that the action plan helps with that, but it also does not. It actually helps quite a bit with it, but it doesn't give me the weight. Knowing that we're trying to reduce homelessness over two years by 50% would help with that, knowing that we're trying to get or 20% either way. So that's sort of the the challenge that I'm dealing with here is, I don't know. And I'm being asked to outsource a legislative prerogative. And frankly, voters are not going to be asking me or asking, you know, people that are on the soq that aren't electeds, they're going to be looking at us and that that seems like a structural weakness that you didn't create. I don't want to place anybody at the table here responsible for that. It's not your fault at all. But not having enough detail here does make that a much harder proposition than it was in November.
225 Before I kick it to Ryan, I just want to state that certainly how the soq was envisioned. You do have two representatives on there that information feed through those two. They bring it to the soq space. What happens to the soq space is then fed back to both governing bodies and also the city of Gresham. That was certainly how it was envisioned, right?
226 Yeah. Good. Good evening everyone. Just for the record, my name is Ryan deibert. I'm the deputy director at the homelessness response system council president, vice president. Thank you. And councilor Canal to specifically to some of your comments around being able to connect some of those those budget decisions that you're making to the the full range of the key performance indicators. So not just looking at a single indicator, but multiple of those. That's exactly the work that we hope to do with you throughout the budget season. As we start to try to develop some estimation tools around, if you invest in intervention x, we expect that to decrease inflow by roughly this amount. We expect that to increase outflow by roughly this amount. We expect that to shift the balance of sheltered or unsheltered folks by roughly this amount. So we're hoping that we can once, once we get clear indication to move forward with this suite of key performance indicators, we can we can build those tools to help you understand how those budget impacts, you know, in rough estimations, are going to be shaped, are going to be shaping different impacts across those multiple measures. So I'm very hopeful that we can give you a much more dynamic and better informed budget season, grounded in this whole breadth of indicators.
227 Thanks has never happened before.
228 I do recognize the vast improvement here, and I guess the question that we're being asked is ultimately, is it enough where we think it's good enough? So I do respect that a great deal, and I appreciate the clarity from you both. I wanted to just kind of clarify who's our second person from the city council. We have one person on the on the soc, as far as I'm aware.
229 Mayor and councilor Zimmerman are your two city folks.
230 Thank you, madam president.
231 Thank you. Councilor councilor Zimmerman.
232 We could always pull out of this iga. I just say that right. We could and I say that. And the reason I'm saying that is that remains an option. I think that there are a lot of people who have. Worked with this iga on the gurney chest open, and it was touch and go for a long time last year. And I think that was a an important surgery to happen. The point I'm trying to make is that. Our housing and homelessness committee, I think, could inform this body's decision making a hell of a lot better. I don't know what the one housing plan to solve them all is. I know no meat on those bones. It is a catchy time or a catchy phrase right now, but I don't know what it is. Last week I think it was last week or two weeks ago, we got a we had a discussion and what I really appreciated from the five of us that sat on that sit on that committee, was that in the spectrum of nothing, meaning a tent on the street to owning a home? We had a colored spectrum of housing, and we all indicated that we felt our role, fbs role was more in the area of production ownership, a little bit of subsidized, making sure that we subsidize some models so that people can live in them, but not very many of us. And we really only in acute a few moments said we really wanted to be in the emergency shelter space. Immediately thereafter, my colleagues on the housing and homelessness committee introduced a resolution to go the opposite of that. Right. And so I'm not saying that to be appointed or embarrassment. My point is, is that we've had some discussion tonight about staying in our lanes, and I feel really strongly that our Lane is with capital, bold, underlined, italic letters, housing production. I think that's our Lane. I don't really want to see the county in our Lane. I want us to be really good at that. One of the things that I think we'll get out of, out of this is we do have a better idea about the types of units that can be developed the next time. If we go for a housing bond and making sure that we structure it. So it's not just an oversaturation of 60% ami units. Those types of things are the ways we can be better partners at this. And I say that because it's this is our point and I think I want to offer I want to offer that up because I don't know that we're in the rent assistance business. I don't know that we're in the behavioral health business. I don't know that we're in the incarcerated reentry business. I don't know that we're in the addictions health business. In fact, I actually know we're not in any of those businesses because I worked ten years at Multnomah county, and that's our social services agency. We are frustrated at this document. And that's okay. Like I'm okay being frustrated about it. My point in that is because we bring the production lens to it. I think we have also been able to because we contribute and because we're members of it. And I think both bodies want us to stay in it. We have been able to tweak the parts of the social services continuum to meet our expectations as a partner to this meaning. You know, the mayor has inserted, I think, some some new types of urgency. Or we have. One of the things that I talk a lot about is I want, I want now that we have a by name list, I want a by name list who also gives me the number one thing that the system, the, the smart people categorize as the number one thing that a person's reason for being homeless is because I, I have a belief that unless you know what your what you're trying to fix or attacking, and if and many people have so many things that I think we get lost in the sauce a little bit, our, our being a part of the iga, I think, has helped move Multnomah county to being more open to those ideas than they would have been. The by name list would not have occurred without the city of portland's push. I hope that one day the by name list with the by name. What is the major issue? I hope that that's something else we can look at as the city of Portland, for why we want to be a part of this, and what I hope this Multnomah county gets from us is that Multnomah county can say the city invested in the right types of housing productions, or they or they jumpstarted parts of our housing continuum that maybe didn't get enough attention before because I was around before this existed in Multnomah county, we were putting out stuff to try and get people to develop affordable units. City of Portland was occasionally we did it together. If we can stay in those lanes, and I think there's a desire to stay in those lanes. But there's also this feeling that we all have, which is there's a lot of really tough stories on these pages. My ask to you, as my colleagues is if there are parts of this, especially in the social services continuum, that you would like us to emphasize as an important point for the city of Portland, if we're going to stay a part of the iga that the mayor and I can convey those or you can convey them to, to jillian and her team, but we can convey those even though they're not our Lane. But right now, I've been feeling like sometimes if we want to fix a social services piece of it, we're trying to insert a new line of business in the city of portland's piece. And I think it's better to leverage, hey, if we're going to stay happy. Partner, a happy partner needs to see this increase, right? We saw that happen in previous iterations, and I think we can keep doing that. I say all that because. A lot of what I, what I'm when I've been listening tonight, a lot of the frustration I'm hearing, I think is perhaps in the areas where our government is not set up to be the experts because we're not the social service agency. And I think we can still weigh in on that. It just is different for if we feel we have the duty to fix it, or if we have the duty to influence it. And I take those differently, like in my own decision making, what I could use from the housing and homelessness committee is are there things from from the soc moving forward that we would like to debate as a position for me to take into the room? We've not done that, but I think it would be a reasonable conversation. Are there types of housing developments that we hear from the soc that I can bring into to h and h and say, hey, we need to focus at this type or transitional housing being developed this way where they do the services, we do the bricks and mortar, I don't know, but I think that's what the partnership in spirit is. So I have I've listened intently and I and I am hearing this, my recommendation would be that we do pass this. And I say that as a person who has been incredibly critical, I think it's probably why I got put on the darn thing, incredibly critical for many years. And there's a long way to go. And I also I also want to just note so the soc can we I just want to revisit the soc membership if we could. Jillian I'm going to miss some points here, but it's the mayor of Gresham, mayor of Portland, chair of Multnomah county, county commissioner, city city councilor, the director of home forward, the director. Healthshare health share a a representative of the public who doesn't live in Portland, who but does pay the tax, and a business community member. I think that's.
233 And number ten behavioral health expert.
234 Who is that?
235 That's laura.
236 Laura, yes. And a behavioral health expert that are that we approved. So this conversation, it's half political and half people in their various industries. And it's been there have been some rough meetings I think. And then there's other times where like, okay, we're on it. And I think I see where we're attacking a problem and we're able to use the similar language. And yet it is so much better than it was. That's what I'm trying to convey. I think that whether it's six months, 18 months or whatever it is that was brought up in terms of when we come back, it is so much better than it was because of, frankly, I think everybody was willing to walk away. And that was an important part, because if you are in a deal making and you're not willing to walk away, you're just getting taken. And we didn't walk away. And so I find that important. At the end of the day, we always could pull out of this and just say, we're going to do the things that we think are important and they're going to do the things that they think are important. I think if we can stay in our Lane and production and they can advise us on what they would like us to see produce more of, we can take that under advisement. But I will damn well tell them what I think is appropriate for behavioral health or treatment health or or shelter, health, etc. Because we should be telling each other about what would be more helpful in our lines of business and still staying in our own Lane, if you will. Thank you, madam president. I have deeply appreciate everybody's comments tonight. That's all I have.
237 Thank you. Councilor councilor Novick.
238 So I just wanted to note that these folks with us here tonight are resources that we can talk to in between formal sessions. And I would recommend that, particularly those of us who aren't in the housing committee, but even those who aren't like sort of to the extent that there's a lot of us and all of us to do this to, you know, shoot the, as it were, with our colleagues here over some of these big housing issues. Like, I had a really interesting conversation with Ryan where he said at one point at a separate briefing that generally based on national statistics, you have to give ten people rent assistance in order to avoid one case of homelessness. And jillian had sort of a caution on that. But then I, like I saw some other statistics that led me to say, well, I think that means we'd have to spend 518 million extra dollars on homelessness and on rent assistance just to hold the homeless population steady. And Ryan said, well, that might be a bit of an overestimate. Here's some factors that go into that. That's a conversation I'd like to continue at a conversation with jillian. I don't want to like I hope that you won't think that I'm putting you on the spot here, but I mean, where I said, you know what? Given national interest rates, given the investment climate, given the cost of housing, sometimes I think that we should just admit that we're going to have a large number of people who aren't. We aren't going to be able to get into housing for very long time. Should we be thinking about things like building a bunch of tiny homes, recognizing those will be the homes people live in for a long time? And jillian said, I think you're talking about a conversation about x. It was like some category that I hadn't heard of, but she was able to fit it into that category, so I would just I think that it behooves us to have more communications with the our experts and colleagues about these issues in between formal sessions, because, you know, we can't talk to each other, but we can talk to them. And as long as they don't tell us what we what we've respectfully said to them, then we're okay. So that's just I mean, that's my touchy feely comment for the evening that I outside of key performance indicators or whatever, I really appreciate the opportunity to discuss housing issues with our team here. And I think that's if we're all doing that, I think that we'll have we'll feel better about this whole process next year. That's all.
239 Thank you. Counselor. Colleagues seeing no one else in the queue. Keelan, can you please call the roll for a vote on the resolution before us?
240 Clerk I.
241 Green.
242 I Zimmerman. I Avalos.
243 I Dunphy.
244 No.
245 Smith I canal.
246 No.
247 Ryan no. Koyama Lane I Morillo I Novick. I pirtle-guiney.
248 I. The resolution is adopted with nine yes votes and three no votes.
249 Thank you colleagues. I think that was an important discussion and will hopefully lead to many related discussions. Thank you all for being here tonight and for answering all of the questions.
250 I appreciate you all.
251 Welcome. Thank you.
252 Keelan could you please call the next item on the agenda?
253 Item nine adopt the 2026 state and federal legislative agendas.
254 Thank you and colleagues. This is again a resolution that comes out of work sessions. So there is not a committee staff summary or chair report. This is the item. I was incorrect before that. The mayor and I are jointly carrying. I have a few remarks to make and then, mr. Mayor, I will turn it over to you if there's anything you'd like to add. Colleagues, this resolution establishes a shared framework for our most essential intergovernmental priorities. It will guide how we collectively interact with our state, federal and regional partners. I want to thank sam chase and our government relations team for working with 12 of us who brought very different priorities to the table, as well as the mayor incorporating the needs of our bureaus and the administration as well, and working with us to put it into a single unified agenda. That's not an easy task. The resolution before us asks council to adopt three core elements the state's legislative agenda, which will serve us through the short February session and set up our work for the coming year. After that, our federal legislative agenda, which we made, I think, some very important changes to and then we have some evaluation criteria to help guide our ogre team as they do the work of vetting and reviewing things that come up that we didn't contemplate in this work, and that will help them as they move forward in determining how to work with us, to find other opportunities where we need to weigh in and when to decide to let things go by. In addition, the resolution affirms a commitment to align our work with operating best practices in government relations and sets clear, shared expectations for how we operate together in intergovernmental forums, particularly on those things where some of us have a key interest and others maybe don't share that interest. These practices don't alter any legal or charter authority. They're simply intended as a guide that can be continually improved as we work through the iterations of that collaborative work. I also want to take a moment to situate these documents in the broader context of our advocacy, because these priorities are not just an abstract wish list. They are the things that we have decided are most important. As we figure out the best way forward for our fiscal, legal, and political needs as a city. In the current environment at the federal level, we know we are operating in an unusually volatile and unpredictable environment. We are prioritizing pushing back against federal overreach, something that is new on our agenda. And we're continuing to aggressively advocate for the resources Portland needs to deliver core services at a time when that is harder than ever. We have clear federal priorities. We've continued from past years, as well as those two critical new pieces. At the state level, our context is a little bit different, but equally challenging. As cities faced constrained property tax authority, rising service costs, declining or uncertain federal support, and increasing expectations without the corresponding resources, we've continued to prioritize protecting our local authority and avoiding new unfunded mandates and safeguarding city revenue, while pushing for long overdue property tax reform, something we've not always been as overt about. We are defending the investments that we have, knowing that the environment for new investments is difficult, and supporting our economic development and growth of workforce supports, while also continuing to advocate for our public safety and emergency response needs, and taking on other issues that will allow us to run our city effectively. The coordinated approach that we've discussed strengthens our relationships and will continue to validate our credibility, both at the federal and the state level. We've reviewed the documents before us through a series of work sessions, as well as individual meetings with the team in between, and approving this resolution will allow our government relations team to move forward with the advocacy that I know. We hope they will all be successful in, not only on our behalf, but on behalf of all portlanders. I'm looking forward to the conversation tonight and appreciate the work we've all put into this over the previous work sessions. Mr. Mayor.
255 Council president, council vice president, councilors. Thank you for this opportunity. I just want to point out sam chases office and the work that he and his team did to bring this forward. It was exhaustive. He worked extremely hard. He was in my office to my office often, and I know he was in yours as well. Council president, it's an honor to share this with you to all the points that you made, the point you made about a guiding document. I kind of look at this as a living document, because we're going to do a series of subtractions and additions throughout the course of the year as changes occur. It's a multi-jurisdictional document that we should use to add and subtract on ideas and certain streams and priorities that you have, and I look forward to working with you. This really is a shared document for all of us, and thank you. I urge you to vote yes and appreciate the opportunity to participate in this.
256 Thank you, mr. Mayor. Colleagues, before we move into questions and discussion, I want to make sure we get to public testimony because I know we have at least one person signed up who is a fellow elected official as well as, I believe, 1 or 2 community members. Keelan could you please call our first panel for public testimony?
257 Yes. Thank you. We have four people signed up con pham, benjamin gilbert, douglas allen, jared essig.
258 And I am.
259 Available online. Go right ahead.
260 Representative pham is joining us online. Go ahead.
261 Hi. Council president pirtle-guiney Portland city councilors. For the record, my name is con pham and I'm the state senator for district 23 representing northeast and southeast Portland in the Oregon legislature. And I'm also the chair of the senate housing and development committee. So thank you so much for your efforts to adopt an agenda for the city to effectively partner with me and my legislative colleagues this next spring. I'm here tonight to share with you a few details about a particular priority housing bill that I've introduced for this upcoming February legislative session, and to encourage you, as councilors, to discuss tonight whether or not you believe the city should actively use resources to oppose this initiative, to build upon one of the recent policy victories for greater construction of market rate and affordable housing. Legislative concept five is an effort to build on portland's now successful inclusionary zoning program, and to provide pathways for other jurisdictions to follow suit. This bill provides greater flexibility for Portland and other regional municipalities to implement inclusionary zoning programs at different levels of affordability, provided that these municipalities follow portland's lead in ensuring that the program is funded and appropriately studied to ensure its effectiveness. I want to be explicit that the bill does not mandate the city of Portland to do anything that it is not already doing tonight, the legislative agenda that you're considering for adoption includes language that states the city's lobbyists should, quote, defend inclusionary zoning as a key affordability tool and to prevent state imposed mandates that limit locally tailored solutions. This is a reasonable objective, and I firmly believe that the adoption of this language should not be read as explicitly directing the city's lobbying agenda to oppose this inclusionary zoning bill. So tonight, I'm asking you in your discussion of the adoption of your agenda, to explicitly state whether you, as a city councilor, believe that the city should be the sole entity actively opposing this widely supported initiative. Lc5 is not a state imposed mandate. And if anything, the bill is designed to give municipalities like Portland more flexibility to explore locally tailored solutions to run effective inclusionary zoning programs. My office and the bill's advocates have worked with the city of Portland for months to fine tune the specific components of this bill, and I want to thank the staff of the city attorney's office, government relations, and the housing bureau, as well as many of you and your staff who have all engaged in our efforts to get this bill right. Legislative council has received and incorporated specific statutory language recommendations from the city attorney's office to address concerns about potential liability. And my office is more than eager to continue to work with the city to address further concerns. We've got a diverse crew, from housing advocates to the Portland metro chamber and developers who all support this bill to implement these guardrails to codify best practices. And I wouldn't be here calling in tonight if I didn't believe that this technical fix didn't firmly align with what I heard and understand to be our shared desired housing policy goals for the city of Portland and the state. And I just thank you all for your your time today. Thank you.
262 Thank you very much, senator, for joining us today. We appreciate you being here. Please.
263 Hello. My name is ben gilbert. I am a volunteer lobbyist with the Portland democratic socialists of America and a resident renter in district four. I want to appreciate the strong emphasis on protecting all portlanders, regardless of their documentation or status. I also appreciate pushing back on federal overreach. As I leave my apartment every morning, I see those unhoused portlanders who have been pushed onto our streets by higher rents and pay. That doesn't keep up more. Portlanders are becoming unhoused every month than being housed, and the biggest reason for this is the cost of living crisis we're all experiencing, specifically the outrageous rent prices. While it is heartening to see land banking, the preservation of affordable housing, support for unhoused neighbors, and rental assistance in our legislative agenda in the recognition of this crisis, it is disappointing to see that lifting the preemption on municipal rent control is absent. I also hope social housing is a part of our approach, and that we can work with the state to come up with a robust social housing policy that's funded. Thank you. I yield my time.
264 Thank you very much for being here.
265 Good evening, president pirtle-guiney and councilors. My name is doug allen. I'm want to testify about the city's state legislative agenda. And hopefully I can read my notes that I wrote while I rode the bus down here. Better transit is integral to portland's goals for climate, employment, livability, accessibility and urban form. Trimet plans to cut service by 15% because of the legislature's failure to come through with funding and the referral of what little they did come up with. There's also going to be no six cent gas tax increase, of which half would have gone to local government. We can't wait until after the 2027, the 2027 session. The cuts are already happening. They began at the beginning of this month, a stopgap transportation measure in 2026 is a necessity and should be high on your priority list. I noticed that transportation really wasn't even on the list of priorities, but I'm glad to hear from mayor wilson that this is a living document, and I would hope that transportation, a stopgap solution for trimet's proposed service cuts, will be part of your agenda. Trimet can't fix their funding problem without aggressive leadership from you. Thank you very much.
266 Thank you very much. We appreciate you elevating that issue.
267 Jared essig.
268 Welcome.
269 Thank you. Good afternoon. Council. Mayor wilson, the federal legislative agenda has a lot of points that this council has actually. Or it could have that you have in common with the current administration, for example, housing production. Now, don't you think that that's probably the number one priority of our current sitting president? You need to learn how to work with him. You know, one of the reasons why donald trump is successful is because he's a democratic socialist at heart. And that also speaks to some of his authoritarian tendencies. But, you know, you've heard of the horseshoe theory of politics. And there's something to that. I think you should invite donald trump to visit the city of Portland. He would be the first republican since before ronald reagan, who I think gave this the name of little beirut. And I'm sure he would love to come out here. Now, another thing is reducing homelessness and housing stability. That's why we need housing production. Or what about economic mobility? Like councilor Ryan mentioned, that needs to be in your your homelessness response action plan. How many houses people have been offered day labor? How many of them have been offered a bus ticket? Geographic mobility and economic mobility were the reasons why I became houseless. Eight years ago. I used to hop freight trains between here and los angeles when I was a college student. Okay, you need to think about the reasons why people do what they do and what their objectives are, and help people to build wealth and equity like you say you want to do. These are also very much points of commonality that you have with the current president. Community safety, behavioral health. How about making Portland healthy again, mentally healthy again? One of the reasons people become mentally ill is because they don't have meaning or purpose in their life. Give them the opportunity to have economic mobility and social mobility. How about encouraging people to self-deport? I would have loved to self-deport when I was homeless. I just never was given a bus ticket out to marion county or to yamhill county to work in agriculture, or to work in maybe harvesting grapes for the, you know, the wine industry. Or I was never given an opportunity to get on a boat to go out to sea for a couple of months. You know, I used to actually work in commercial fishing in alaska when I was younger. I could have done that. I was never given the opportunity. And so you want to get people into services and apply them with psychopharmaceutical medication so that you can provide services and employment support for the, you know, government contracted service provision providers. That seems to be the purpose of a lot of your, your your your plans. And instead you need to find common ground. There's a lot of it. As for immigration, you could easily deport, you know, criminals who are illegal aliens find common ground on that. You're going to maintain a sanctuary status. I understand that we should do that. We can push back on that. We shouldn't be deporting hard workers who are seeking day labor at home depot, but find common ground and then push back where you can.
270 Thank you very much. We appreciate your feedback.
271 That completes testimony.
272 Okay, colleagues, we're moving into questions and discussion. We do have our our team here. If there are any questions for the team, councilor Smith.
273 Thank you, madam president. Can I have director sam chase come up?
274 Mr. Chase, welcome.
275 And your team, if they're here. I heard they were here.
276 You've got. Come on up. We've got a few of us here.
277 Okay, great. I always know I'm in the right place when jack is here. I want to thank you and thank your team in the office of government relations for the work that you've done in multiple work sessions and meetings to kind of digest and dissect and add and subtract our legislative agenda for the city. I think there's an immense value in moving as one unit, as one united city, and as one united Portland. I don't give you necessarily my my goals, my own personal goals for district one. But to advance the city in in harmony with colleagues and leadership. So I'm supportive in what's being brought forward. And I'm hopeful that the state legislature and the federal government will be receptive to the needs and priorities of portlanders. Since we last talked, I believe. That we found out that there was going to be no. Gas tax money and no transportation money. The governor was just going to let the will of the voters for the ballot measure. Are there any other opportunities for us to to add any other things to our agenda? It is a very healthy, rich agenda. I think that as we're talking to folks, you know, in people look at it, they say, well, just tell me, what are your top three things? I get the whole booklet, but what are your top three things? So if you had to say what our top three things were going to be in this short session that we were trying to achieve, I know that senator pham, she brought up something that I didn't understand or or know what was being talked about. And could you also explain what that was if we got a request to put that in our, in our, in our legislative agenda?
278 Yes. So let me start with the first, I think we have of course, as you point out, we have eight top priorities. And if I were to summarize those, I would say, you know, three buckets that capture those are protecting the city's local authority. Yes. Seeking opportunities to identify and address revenue issues at the state and then protecting and I think this is critical, is protecting the resources that are the most directly related to the city's ability to provide services. And of course, we talk more specifically about economic development, housing and behavioral health and those things. But but if I were to categorize it in a shorter format, I would say protecting those those.
279 Okay.
280 Excellent resources. To your question on the inclusionary housing proposal, I want to say first and foremost that, you know, we've been working with senator pham's office over the long session, and many of you were very engaged in the long session on this proposal. And so we are our continuing to do that work. That is something we in our team center. Pham is very important leader in the legislature, in our community, with our council and and in the city. And we want to have a productive, positive, really good working relationship with her and our our team and the housing bureau. And the attorneys are committed to doing that work and continuing to try to get to a path where there is success in improving inclusionary housing, creating more opportunities. With inclusionary housing, there's four concerns that that this proposal has. One is it provides unfunded mandate that would. So that's one. Two is it creates legal liabilities. Three is it takes the decision making about the funding away from council to the state. And then four is it it would eliminate or significantly diminish the ability to have a statewide inclusionary housing program because their jurisdictions are that we're the only jurisdiction with inclusionary housing. Others are less likely to engage because of the preemption, the unfunded mandate, and the legal liabilities that they would be subject to.
281 Thank you. And and I'll tell you, someone asked me what is what is going to be your your priorities down in Salem. So I feel like we're in a defensive mode. We're not playing offense. We're trying to defend what we have right now. We're not we're not putting things forward in this short session when there's so very little money. Would that be a short way to describe our our activities?
282 I would say that's in large part the strategy. There are some places where there will be some work that will be proactively seeking to advance some of the more policy oriented issues, but we have you're correct in that we have recommended that the agenda not include any funding asks, because we recognize the the situation that the legislature is in right now in, in trying to mitigate for, you know, revenue reduction, federal overreach, covering the costs of, you know, of of those loss of federal resources.
283 So it's not just like we're not signing on to the inclusionary housing. We're not signing on to anything. We're we're just trying to play defense and what we're doing and making sure that we can defend the things that that that might have the possibility of going away. So I. I want to just caution folks, because senator pham, her district lies, part of her district lies in my district. And while there may be some issues that we need to work out with the the lawyers, but we're also not we're not proactively getting on certain things. So period, because of the legislature and the and the limited amount of resources that we've heard, that may be available, I understand that there's a $66 million gap in the in the budget for the state legislature. And understanding that gap that there's not going to be a whole lot left over for a lot of cities and communities, am I correct?
284 I think that's right. And then, of course, that doesn't consider some of the other costs that are going to be out there, that they are going to be looking to try to mitigate from the loss of federal resources.
285 Exactly. I just want to say again, your team, four stars, love you. You have done some amazing work over the years and I just didn't follow you. This just this last year. I have followed you in the last couple of years or so and you all are the bomb.com because it's a lot of work down there. I mean, I know it's fast moving and you got to act on, on the go, but just know if I can do anything to be helpful, whether it be to testify or call someone, just don't hesitate to give me a call.
286 Thank you so much. We look forward to enlisting counsel in this activity and engaging you all. So we appreciate that.
287 Thank you. Thank you team.
288 Thank you, counselor. Councilor Avalos.
289 Counselor schmitz line of questioning made me think of a question. I wonder to her point around playing defense versus offense, what does it look like for us to prepare through both this session and just in the rest of this year, ahead of next year's long session, to build partnerships and work with our state electeds to create a joint agenda that our reps and senators can champion on the city's behalf. Like, is that common practice? If not, why? Like, I'm just.
290 Trying to.
291 Understand how ahead of next year's long session, we can be helpful or engage with your office to actually develop with our electeds some proposals that they champion does that. Does my question make sense?
292 Absolutely makes sense. And I think the inclusionary housing is a place where some of that could happen. And I know that your homelessness and housing committee has had some conversations around that. I think that would be something that the housing bureau and attorney's office would, would really welcome and be enthusiastic about engaging in and finding a a common path to move forward. We do work with legislators, you know, the cycle for the long session in planning for that really is starting now to it's it's it's there will be a number of these issues that will likely carry over into the next year. And the end of session will be a time where we of this short session will be a time where we'll want to get started right away on how do we best position ourselves to be a resource to those legislators, to make sure that they have all of the information and, and, and tools they need to support the, the work and and the city and its agenda.
293 Thank you. Sam. Those are my questions. I just want to read into the record some expectations that I have. So first, I believe that community involvement cannot end with this agenda. Adoption, these priorities that we're talking about. They affect renters, workers, immigrants, people experiencing homelessness, communities of color, especially in east Portland. And so I expect ongoing visible pathways for community input throughout the legislative session. Happy to work with you on what that looks like. And I think there are a lot of areas where we can we maybe need to create new best practices around that, particularly when things are fast moving and new issues are emerging. I just want to make sure that community voices are not incidental or filtered solely through internal channels. I want to make sure that they have meaningful access to shape our advocacy as conditions change. Second, I want to be clear about council process. When feedback is gathered on legislative priorities or emergent bills, councilors should not be isolated from from one another. I expect transparency about how priorities are being weighed across council, especially in a 12 member body with different district realities and committee responsibilities. And as I have said before, informal one on one processes can't replace shared understanding and equitable participation. So I really look for coordination that strengthens council alignment, not obscures it. Third, I just want to expect I expect a clear and inclusive rapid response approach. We've been talking about the ways that you all are planning to create spaces for us to check in as things change. We are operating in an environment where state and federal developments are shifting really quickly. Transportation funding and stability is a current example of that. And rapid response cannot mean narrowing decision making to a few voices. So I want to see timely notice to council space for alignment clarity about when and how positions are taken, especially when there are significant district level impacts. And finally, I just want to underscore that trust is built through transparency and respect, not just in outcomes, but also in this process. Right. I support coordinated advocacy. I want to I expect that coordination reflects our values. I want to see equity among councilors. I want to see this community engagement be meaningful, and I want to see clear communication when these circumstances change. These are the kinds of expectations that I think are for me, are going to be essential to how I evaluate our intergovernmental work going forward. As you know, my office is always open, and I'm happy to brainstorm and think of new and creative ways to do that, especially as we are navigating a new form of government. And I'll just end on, I really do see and am curious about how we can start to work with some of our state elected partners. I've been in close communication with our new state rep, lamar wise. Him and I are cooking up a lot of ideas, and so I'm just trying to figure out what the right process is for us to bring those ideas forward to ogre and of course, to the broader council. Thank you. That's all.
294 Thank you, counselor, I appreciate that. I think those are very fair expectations. And I think, you know, I'm believe and hope that we can meet those. And I look forward to connecting with you to learn a little more about some of the the ideas. And and finally, just the trust building is such a critical component for us. That is something that we want to build, you know, continue to have a trusting relationship because we think that's kind of the the magic that that makes us successful.
295 Thank you.
296 Thank you, counselor. Councilor Koyama Lane.
297 Thank you, council president. First, I want to say thank you to the office of government relations for adding age friendly housing to the affordable housing area of importance and also regarding the property tax and state revenue reform, I'd like to highlight that the state legislature passed hb 2321, which directs the legislative fiscal officer to analyze and prepare a report on this very topic around options for modernizing our state property tax system. And so that h. House bill is encouraging, and I am hopeful that we can engage those state partners who also see this as an area of urgency and importance. And thank you for all your work.
298 Thank you.
299 Thank you, counselor. Counselor Zimmerman.
300 Sam, I'm just trying to understand how to compare the general principles and areas of importance document to the state legislative agenda, the reason or what's what's made me highlight the differences here is my fellow councilor Koyama Lane just mentioned that the property taxes are in one piece but not the other. So I'm trying to understand what carries more weight, what's actually the agenda.
301 The the top priorities you could think of as something we're going to be more proactive in engaging and seeking to advance city, the city agenda.
302 That's what's listed under agenda.
303 And so that's the top priorities. And then general principles, areas of importance are areas that we know are also priorities for the city and that we will be tracking, monitoring and reactive to. But we will be less proactive in those areas.
304 Okay, I, I disagree slightly and agree in part with what councilor Avalos stated. I did appreciate that she laid out some expectations, and I think that's really fair. The deference to districts is something I really agree with her on. If you see something that is particularly of district importance, I hope that there's at least a lens to that. And I think that our colleagues in each of those districts, if there is a micro issue, are the best ones to speak on those. When it comes to community engagement, I hope you all are not. I think your job is to be engaging with the body down there, and I think if you need community engagement, I hope you call upon us because our network to reach into the community and rally them to your effort is better. And I hope that those can be complementary efforts and maybe where councilor Avalos and I are saying it. But if you were out there trying to do community engagement instead of be with the body, I'd consider that a worst practice, not a best practice. So if you need it, I'd say call upon us. And that's our role to rally the troops, so to speak. I'm very uncomfortable with the behavioral health capacity paragraph as it's written. It's low energy. It's weak. I don't see that anybody actually would get anything from it or know what we care about. I, I cannot support a statement that says stand with providers. Anybody who's engaged in this area of our work knows that some of the leading providers in this state are the leading problems in this state. Relative to this topic, I do not stand with the providers as a blanket statement, and I'm not going to hold this agenda over a barrel to get serious about my theatrics of ripping this whole thing up and just saying, we want a mental health hospital in the north campus for the metro area, which I've said in previous meetings. But the seriousness from which the city of Portland advocates for behavioral health capacity cannot go underemphasized. We are not in this line of business. And yet this this item affects almost every line of business we are in. And I just have to emphasize this better. I think that we can make this a stronger statement. I think anybody who talks about behavioral health with we want to increase capacity in the number is not in the hundreds. I don't want to know their name if they want to talk about safeguarding access. I don't even know what that means. I am looking for the city of Portland to have gloves off on this topic, and to be supportive of the counties when they go gloves off on this topic. I think you guys know that about me. I'm just saying that from councilor Smith's point. Like, what are the top three when I get an agenda handed to me? I'm kind of doing the quick glance. And our seriousness of behavioral health didn't come off the page that way. So I just want to share that with you guys. I, I think you guys have done a good job splitting a 12 part cap. So I get it. But I, I actually I'm willing to bet that most of my colleagues would be comfortable with you being more sharp mouthed on behavioral health with our especially with our state folks. I do have a question, and I'm just. In a world of strange bedfellows, I did not expect to get a letter from the business community, smart growth realtors and senator confam on an inclusionary zoning topic that has put me up in the upside down world, which is probably good that the stranger things last season has come out, but I, I what I'm here's what I'm trying to figure out salmon I just cannot one I don't have the legislative concept right I've just here this idea but I haven't been given the language. So as nice as her request was, I'm not willing to take a different point here based on her public testimony until I actually see the real language here. I just have this like one liner, but. What I can't tell right now is if this is an effort to expand inclusionary zoning, which we kind of call the 19 unit experiment, that doesn't hasn't produced great results in Portland across the entire state of Oregon. Or is it recognizing that we have a 19 unit problem and trying to still expand, but fixing it? And I can't get that from here. And so when I can't get that, and when I'm looking at strange bedfellows, I'm probably willing to go with the housing bureau years and our attorney's position, which is this might be a problem, but I'm really having a tough time tracking this, and I have not been brought into this conversation that you mentioned that some people have been working with various offices on. So I might be working from a position with a little bit less information, but I'm hoping that we can, because that was a very specific request she made, and I don't I'm not yet ready to take that leap. What's going on there?
305 So let me first address that engagement. I think you make a very good point about engagement. I think that if there is interest in engagement, I think there are opportunities for the council members and for our electeds and for other forums where there are topics being covered by the community to monitor and track those. And we can can help make sure that there are understandings of legislation. If you're having town halls or other kinds of activities. We are not an entity that goes out and does direct negotiation with the community. That's that we are getting that from you and we are wanting to support you. If you need community engagement as a part of your way of processing the issues. And and so we're happy to help with that behavioral health. We of course added this as a priority based on the work session conversations, the the position of the city is that behavioral health. It is not it's not a service that we we directly do. And we are often reluctant or to to put forward things that aren't directly related to the city's work. Behavioral health is so integrated into the success of the work that we are doing with our homeless community, with and and with, you know, a number of issues at the city. This is really to identify that we are in a cut session right now, and that we want to make sure that we're protecting those resources. And to do that, we need to come to the table with the other partners, that and coalitions that have been working toward that effort to protect those services. And so how can we help amplify and identify what those are? These are these are issues that these are are pretty broad buckets. When we have an issue that we think is is council may not align with that. We're going to have conversations with you about that. And we're going to bring that back to you. And and of course the timeline might be really quick and short sessions going to be happening very fast. So we're going to we're going to try to do it with all of these mechanisms that we've set up with you all and, and try to make the best judgment call, but it's one that we are going to make that we hope continues to maintain your trust on the inclusionary housing, the the homelessness and housing committee members have been pretty engaged in that conversation beginning.
306 I'm one of them, I wasn't.
307 Okay, well, we offered you briefings, I think.
308 Yeah. But in terms of we can't like having us come together in quorums and working through it.
309 So this was that council.
310 I think.
311 But I'm saying the.
312 Committee, there's no I have never been in a meeting with, with senator farm. I haven't been in a meeting with, with anybody else about expanding this as far as I know. So.
313 Well. They came and presented it to the homelessness and housing committee. And and so that was just one touch point. And I and, and you know, there's other business that counselors need to do. And so it may or may not have, but we've tried to keep updates communicated. We've tried to email council and engage. And so we have not had conversation. We've tried to make sure the door is open and and and be available and make sure that you're tracking that there's an issue. But we we need you to reach back and say, I do want to learn about this. And so, you know, that's part of how we need to get that better. We need to make sure that we're connecting with you in in the ways that work for council members to process the housing, the the inclusionary zoning issue is one where there is a different perspective on what the bill and the legislative concept would do. And and at the end of the day, the city has done a lot of analysis through the housing, through the attorneys office, through the housing bureau to identify that this this would require it would take the decision making authority on how much money goes into the deals from the city, and the state would determine how much money the city needs to put in. It would be put in statute if the developer that was building something didn't agree with that. Then they have an avenue to sue the city because of this statute. So that's, that's that's the legal liability and the unfunded mandate part. And I guess the preemptive part, which is taking that decision making away from we're the only jurisdiction with inclusionary housing in the state. So it's really impacting Portland and not the other cities. The the final part is that there's 241 cities in the state, and they are. Indicating that they're far more likely to lean away from putting inclusionary zoning policies in place, because this is more restrictive and onerous for them because of these liabilities.
314 So it doesn't do anything to fix the unit cap that we've seen. That issue. Right. We've seen units of 19 and 18 get developed so they don't qualify or they fall. It doesn't do anything to fix that gap or that issue. It actually expands this wider or more broadly to the rest of the state.
315 It doesn't expand it to the state. It just it just adds this additional funding mandate that you have to you have to comply with the you have to make whole the developer on the amount and the state determines what that amount was. Now I do want to thank I mean there was some discussion during the session. It was originally proposed as it needs to be 120% of the cost provided to the developer. They've reduced that to 100. So that's the right direction. But it's still a it's still a requirement that the state would determine instead of council making that decision, the state would make that decision.
316 Okay. Since it's a question was posed to us, I would say, like there are parts of that answer where the preemption is concerning to me. There are other parts where. You know, I can't tell yet, if especially without the legislative concept, right, without having that available in that language, I think it's hard to make this call in that request that was made. So I'm probably not there yet, and I'll stick with where the city staff have have made the recommendation, but not for the reasons of preserving portland's model. I just want to be clear, I don't I don't think that's working great either. But this is a little murky. And so thanks for diving in a little bit. I hear that and I appreciate, senator, from getting in and advocating. I just I'm not quite there yet to to make a call. Thank you.
317 I will mention, you know we and this again was late coming last night because we understood that there was more conversation around inclusionary housing. But we did present. We did provide all council should have copies of the the legislative concept.
318 This came in last night.
319 Yes.
320 All right. Thank you.
321 Thank you, councilor Councilor Morillo.
322 Thank you, madam president. Thank you so much for this presentation. I, I just want to say, in my experience working with your office, it's been really helpful. I've gotten briefings. I think you've even proactively flagged things based on my values that I've expressed up here that you thought I would be interested in or firmly against. So I just appreciate your team a lot. I think you've taken a lot of time with me and made sure that I felt comfortable with things. I also really appreciate that you outlined that, the general consensus form for how we are discussing consensus among council, but then also outlining that counselors are still able to speak as individuals, because we know that ranked choice voting and districts means that you're going to have people that are going to be all over the spectrum on different issues, and that's actually healthy, and that we still get to keep our voice. But when you're representing the city, you're in a very particular role. So I just want to honor that very difficult position that you're in. I also think that it's our job as councilors to be the conveners of community. We're the ones who are having constituent coffees and town halls where in our districts. So we have the staffing and the manpower to do that. I suspect that you guys do not in your office. So I would say that if there are questions about what we're hearing from our community, we should convey that to you, and you should use us as that community tool. And I feel very comfortable that if I ever had a town hall or anything, I could invite you. If there was a matter of public interest in some policy coming up. So that's just where I'm at with the community engagement piece. I, I also apologize if you did try to reach out about the inclusionary housing portion. I think I was carrying too heavy policies over the past few weeks and months, and so maybe I missed that. I would say my my team ended up getting a briefing on this. I did not get a chance to connect with your team on this, but in general, I think that there is a broad concern about preemption, but I think that this is an issue that does impact the entire state. This is not actually just a Portland issue. We have this issue across all of Oregon, and I think that state mandates are also an important tool when it comes to the area of housing, because we have a statewide crisis. And I think that Portland can't really solve these issues alone, even if we are doing everything possible to build more housing here, we need neighboring jurisdictions to also pull their own weight. And I think that this proposal, it seems, resolve some of those issues. I also haven't had a chance to read the lc yet, so I'm curious to hear about more details on that. But I'm generally leaning towards being supportive of senator pham's proposal here. I also think that requiring funding of inclusionary zoning programs is a really sensible step, because it avoids allowing inclusionary inclusionary zoning to become a tool for nimbyism. And I think affordable housing is the top priority. So that's where I stand on that. Given my limited and last minute understanding of this policy. But appreciate your explaining more of that to us here.
323 Thank you. And I and I want to correct myself there. I sent out a email yesterday articulating the ways that we're working on inclusionary housing and some of the analysis that we have received from the city, and it included a legal memo, but it didn't have the legislative concept language that was requested by some. And so we sent that. But I will I will be very happy to make sure that anybody that would like to read through that has that opportunity. And we also want to continue to work on, you know, getting to the right place with an approach to inclusionary housing. And we want to do that with senator pham and any other allies that we can. We are happy to to to take some time to help make sure that folks are understanding the, the, you know, recommendations that we're getting from the city as well as from others in the community.
324 Anything further, counselor?
325 No, thank you so much, colleagues.
326 I just want to note that if we want to get to the last two items on our agenda, we can take about 15 more minutes on this item. Councilor Green, go right ahead.
327 Thank you. Sam and I just I want to recognize that your team has been very busy. I think you guys are one of the hardest working entities in our government. I know it's really impressive and it's really appreciated. We have worked a lot together. You've been in my office a lot, specifically on lc5 and the inclusionary zoning stuff. So I I've seen you try to work with me on this because I originally asked that this be part of the agenda. You raised the concerns. We had a meeting with Portland housing bureau. So I'm I'm up to speed on the city's concerns in that regard, but I'm not up to speed on is how the conversation has evolved between ogre and senator sam's office. And so, you know, what I'd like to sort of articulate here is an appeal that the language that's in the legislative agenda isn't going to lead to an opposition place. And I think what you've expressed to us is, is you're still open to to getting to yes, or at least neutral on this. And I just kind of want to offer for some of my colleagues who maybe haven't been in the trenches on this, why, why I do think it's worthwhile getting to. Yes. On senator pham's proposal. You know, my understanding on the lc5 proposal is it doesn't mandate that you that you use inclusionary zoning or inclusionary housing. It's just that if you have that, it needs to be fully funded and there are some certain kind of conditions there. And so I think to the earlier point and question and concern that councilor Zimmerman rightfully raised, does this create more of the 19 unit problem? I don't think that it does. And I think it's actually an effort to sort of address that problem. And I and I, I had the benefit of being in a space that senator pham had convened with a bunch of developers, and this was a few months ago now, and this was a topic that was addressed. And you, you know, on this letter, I don't think Portland metro chamber was there, but pmaa was there. Oregon smart growth was there, and there was discussion about how fundamentally broken inclusionary housing is in producing sort of adverse outcomes based upon our structure, and that this was an effort to fix it, but not just for the, you know, for cities like Portland adopt it, but but really try to move us forward. And I do want to advocate that. I think it's appropriate for state level preemption in some cases where we we are just fundamentally way too slow because we are in a housing crisis. There was an earlier idea that I don't think was ever seriously going to be considered, but I wanted to bring it into play because I thought it was important to talk about was, I think the state I think I think the state should preempt and sort of give us a zoning map that fixes our low density problem in the city of Portland, because I because I don't think we're going to get there in a meaningful amount of time working through our, our normal channels. And we have a crisis on our hands. So I do think it's important that we we do support some preemption efforts where they're applicable that help us address kind of regional level housing shortage problems, because I think, as my colleague, some of my colleagues earlier noted that that this is a state level issue and the metro region as a whole deals with portland's inability to build housing. And then that continues to spill out and so forth. And then that that drives pressure to expand our urban growth boundary and that drives sprawl, that, that that moves us back on our climate goals. So this is all very interconnected to me. So I'm very compelled by the letter that I received and I think we all received. It's in the written testimony for this item dated December 15th, that does offer support for lc5. And it argues that there is a pathway for some of these legal risk questions. And I do think it's important for us to engage on the legal risk questions, because we don't want to expose ourselves to unfunded mandates. And I'll note, colleagues, it's habitat for humanity. It's housing, organs, organ smart growth. It's the metro chamber, it's the Portland metropolitan association of realtors, it's brown, and it's the sightline institution. So this is a very interesting cross section as you noted. So that's very compelling to me. We're in the upside down as it were. So I'm going to kind of support senator pham's appeal tonight. But I do want to recognize that you guys have done a lot of work, and I want to continue to offer to be at the table to help that work move forward. But but I really caution against us going to an oppose. And then I'm going to wrap up here just by saying, I know it's a short session, you can only do so much. But to the extent that these conversations do emerge around revenue, specifically around decoupling from hr one, I would like us to be on the right side of history there, because I don't think that we need to pass through the trump tax cuts that starve our community of the resources that we need. So I'll leave it there and you can respond to me if you'd like.
328 Thank you. I you know, I think we are the way I would view the inclusionary housing is that the, the recommendations of of the administrative arm of the the city is that this causes more harm than than not to to the city's ability to to run the program and causes more harm than is intended, I think, by any party to the ability to have jurisdictions throughout the state adopting inclusionary housing. That is an assessment that is, of the city, and that does not mean that that's, you know, that that's not where we get our directive. It's it's the combination of this. And so if we can't get to an agreement, that would be more of a neutral position. I would ask that folks have conversations with the housing bureau and the attorneys to really understand this, because as I understand it, it is a significant liability that the city would be taking on. And and I think unclear what the benefit is for the city of Portland. So I think, you know, my request is to is to take some time to hear from those, you know, parties at the city to, to to hear that perspective. But we, you know, are and and we will come back to you and really identify where council is in terms of that issue. We won't we won't just proceed without engaging you.
329 I appreciate that. Thank you.
330 Colleagues, I'll note that we do have a process that we have talked through about what we consider consensus and how we determine that. That, I believe, is part of the documents we have before us today. One of the the supplemental documents. Councilor Novick.
331 Yeah, I've spent a chunk of time just in the past day going back and forth on this, and I started off sort of councilor Zimmerman is that wow, there's a lot of strange bedfellows. And I heard a good case from sightline yesterday. And then I went to sam et cetera today, and they had a pretty good response to sight lines case. And at this point, I kind of feel like we should have further conversations about it. And, well, I mean, I want to figure out if there's a group of us that can agree to keep on talking about it, avoiding a quorum. I mean, I think there's these four people on this side of the table. Is there like a fifth? I mean, and I think, I guess we're a quorum of the revenue committee is like the revenue committee will be dealing with this. Is there anybody else who would like to be part of these conversations? Councilor Dunphy okay, does that make six of us? Well, wait a minute.
332 We may quickly get to a quorum, but folks interested?
333 Well, let's see. No, I mean, wait a minute. Did. Okay. You can. All right, so Zimmerman, Green, Novick. Morillo. Dunphy.
334 Ryan councilor. I want to make sure we also have all opinions on council represented. So why don't we take offline trying to figure out if there's a group that can do this that represents the breadth of opinions on council and doesn't lead to a quorum, because there are some folks here who we haven't heard from, and I'm not sure what their positions on this particular issue are. I don't plan to go into my own tonight, but let's take this offline, I think.
335 Okay.
336 Did you have anything further?
337 Oh, yeah. I'm just pleased as punch that measure 50 is part of our legislative agenda.
338 Thank you. Councilor councilor Canal.
339 You have the unenviable task of following councilor Novick. As per usual. Thank you so much to everyone here. The whole team at ogre, I, I think we have seen a lot of topics come before us where it's this is an iterative process, it's getting better and all that, and that's all true for all those items. This one is one where I felt a pretty significant change, not only from previous years to this year, but also within this conversation. So I want to thank you for that. I think this is a really important conversation, because often city councilors are reached because we're more reachable by our constituents than folks in dc or in Salem. And often we're asked for things that are outside of our authority as city councilors. And I don't want to just say, that's not my job, or here's who to talk to. But I also want to be able to say, we're working on it when we are. And this is, I think, one of those key places where we are working on things that are happening at other governmental levels. So I wanted to start with that. Thank you. I, jack, and I think evan as well made a lot of changes based on my feedback. I really, really appreciate that. I think that the state agenda, affordable housing, civil rights and racial justice, public meetings, law, the federal agenda, had the strengthening civil rights and racial justice, the community safety section, and the regulating emerging technologies going into the local authority. And I just wanted to explicitly get those on the record as thank yous. I did want to ask a question. I agree, it's been a while since this came up, but I agree completely with the terminology issue that councilor Zimmerman raised around behavioral health and the phrase stand with providers. And I thought as I read that it was a really interesting sentence. It says support safeguarding equitable access to treatment and care for individuals. And then there's some context that says and stand with providers in navigating limited resources. So it's about safeguarding equitable access given the resource constraint and is how I read that. And so it sounded like we were supporting efficient use of limited resources to deliver services. And it didn't necessarily need a sort of blanket stand with providers. So I did want to raise that just to flag it. And I think that there may be a better way to to phrase that for the, for the future or even for now. I also appreciated adding reduced rent burdens for low income households. The other written testimony, written testimony was about rent protections, but we have received some around rent rent burden as well, and I wanted to appreciate that. So the only other thing I'll mention, there's a scrivener's error on the header and the criteria. It says politically viability should be political viability or politically viable. Either way works. I don't think that constitutes a substantive change. So I don't want to propose it as an amendment. But I wanted to flag all of that. And as a result, I'm going to be supportive of it. I did want to mention there is nothing in the state agenda about emergency routes specifically, but I my understanding and expectation of this and this is regarding the cut in north Portland and the ability of the city to lobby for money. In that particular, there's a 30% design bill that representative nelson raised about the columbia boulevard bridge. It's under community safety in the general principles and areas of importance on the state policy side under community safety, it says, strengthen emergency management and preparedness efforts, including coordinated planning, mitigation, disaster response capabilities. That's not a specific call out for that, but I do. My understanding is that a bill like that would fall into this is that, yes.
340 And our staff are tracking that issue closely.
341 Great. Thank you. And then I did want to just note a couple other things here. One, that's a concern but not a deal breaker for me. On the issue of evaluation criteria, I appreciate the update from city bureaus to elected and city leadership in the context of collective agreement, elected and city leadership generally agree that the proposed solution addresses city priority needs. I think that's good enough for me this year, but I would like to improve it further for the future. And then, although I want to be clear, because the resolution says we are not, we are not approving or adopting this fourth document. So I just want to get these on these concerns quickly. On the record, I still have pretty significant concerns with the operating best practices, specifically the roles and responsibilities section, which I think subsume our authority as individual councilors too much and does not have a comparable set of of descriptions of the mayor, the council president and the councilor. And I'm particularly concerned around the still the expectation that we're going to escalate things to people that are not in our chain of command, which is to say that the city administrator and deputy city administrators, that's not an escalation, that's a consultation. And I, I wanted to just flag that and get that on the record because we're not approving it. I am not going to make a thing out of it. But I did want to flag that for the future. And I guess I'll just I'll wrap it here. But I would be curious about the stand with providers language and if any, if there was any interest from either councilor Zimmerman or from staff about finding a way to wordsmith that without changing its meaning.
342 On that one. What I can tell you is that with behavioral. So yes, that could be better defined. And and I think we will be we can one option is that we are just I'll tell you right here on the record, we will be adamant about making sure we're checking with council before we're engaging in that work, particularly around anything related to provider agenda focused actions. And, you know, we want to have conversations and and engagement from you as we're getting up into the short session and getting informed about what the real, real options are around where there may be some cuts threatened. And so we expect to be engaging with you in conversation about that. And I think, you know, I've circled and flagged it, and I think we can make sure that we're particularly careful about our approach on that.
343 Thank you, counselor. Counselors Ryan and Avalos, we're going to try to do this quickly so we can get to a vote. Go right ahead, counselor. Ryan.
344 All right. Got that. Thank you. Sam chase and the government relations team. You've been doing a great job taking a lot of feedback from all 12 of us. And I keep seeing that in the document. I for one, am happy at least behavioral health got on our agenda. As you know, I've been asking for that for a few years.
345 So what was it?
346 Behavioral health that it's actually on our agenda? I will stay away from the criticism at the moment, but I'm just glad it finally got on the agenda. And it's prominent and very important for a state that's in last place and behavioral health services. So I appreciate that. Like others, I promise to dive into what I heard tonight about inclusionary housing. I too am intrigued and curious with the who came together to support it. So that gives me pause. I met an acceptance place at this moment most, and I have a lot of respect for how you've navigated this, but because the decrease in business licenses and property taxes, not surprisingly targeted tax revenues are up. So there's this very odd game going on with how we look at the color of money, if you will. But I also know that as goes Portland, so goes the rest of the state. So I have that lens on right now and I'll just say I will lift again. I've said this to you several times to go after as much revenue as possible in areas where you can find common ground with the state and the federal partners, to ensure our general fund dollars can serve portlanders as much as possible next year. So I'm just looking at you as trying to find as much money as you can for our general fund, and I will stop there. Thanks.
347 Thank you. Councilor. Councilor Avalos, did you have more to add?
348 Just quickly. Sorry for confusing everybody with my comment about community engagement. I was not saying sam and ogr should do community engagement. I was saying that it is our responsibility to do that and for them to create space for us to bring in our constituents voices into advocacy. So I just wanted to clarify, it sounded like some folks were interpreting my comments that I was suggesting ogr should do it. I think that it was out of context, because I've been talking with sam a lot about how I get my constituents voices into the agenda. Thanks.
349 Thank you councilor, colleagues, we've heard some calls for some things that may need to shift around in the future, but no amendments and no one else is in the queue. So I'm going to ask keelan to call the roll on vote on the resolution before us.
350 Clerk. I Green.
351 I Zimmerman.
352 I davalos. I.
353 Dunphy.
354 I Smith I I. Ryan I. Koyama Lane I. Morillo I.
355 Novick I.
356 Pirtle-guiney I.
357 The resolution is adopted with 12 yes votes.
358 Sam and the rest of the team. Thank you all very much for the hard work here. We really appreciate it and we appreciate the work that we know you will engage in through this agenda.
359 Thank you so much.
360 Keelan. We are at 853, so I am going to ask you to open the next two agenda items, which come as a package.
361 Item 11 assess property for sidewalk, curb and driveway repair for the Portland bureau of transportation. Y1106 item 12 assess property for sidewalk, curb, and driveway repair for the Portland bureau of transportation. Y1107.
362 Thank you. Colleagues. This is a first reading of an ordinance out of the finance committee. And I believe we have christopher haire joining us online for a committee staff summary.
363 Yes. Thank you, madam president. And good good evening. Councilors. For the record, christopher haire, council policy analyst with council operations, and I serve as staff to the finance committee. The ordinances documents number 2025 467 and 2025 468. We're considered in the finance committee on December 8th, where they were referred to full council with a recommendation that they be passed the ordinance document number 2025 467 assesses 180 properties for sidewalk, curb and driveway repair liens totaling $518,204.16, and directs the revenue division to record these assessments and mail final assessment notices to the respective property owners. The ordinance documents 2025 468 assesses one property for sidewalk, curb and driveway repair liens totaling $0 and directs the revenue division to record these assessments and mail final assessment notices to the respective property owner. The full impact statements include financial and budget impacts and analysis, and community impacts and community involvement. There was no verbal or written testimony on either ordinance prior to committee action. This concludes the committee staff summary. Thank you.
364 Thank you. Christopher councilor Zimmerman. Is there anything you'd like to add? Okay. Keelan has anybody signed up to testify on these?
365 No one signed up.
366 Okay. Then we will take questions and discussion together. Colleagues, are there any questions or is there any discussion about the items before us? And I should have asked before saying that I apologize, mr. Jordan, this came out of the administration. Is there anything that you'd like to add in lieu of a carrier report?
367 Nothing to add. Thank you, madam president.
368 Okay.
369 Councilor Koyama Lane.
370 Thank you, council president, I am wondering how property owners are informed and what resources do we offer to those who cannot pay or struggle with time frame presented?
371 Thank you councilor, I know we have a few different staff who are joining us this evening, and I'm not sure who's best to take that question.
372 I'll be happy to jump in there if it's okay. Council president pirtle-guiney. My name is thomas lannom. I'm the revenue division director. The property owners are given multiple notifications. They receive a notification 60 days before given 60 days to complete the repairs, and then a second notification 30 days before, and then a third notification five days before. In terms of resources to help pay, they can have extended payment plans. Someone knowing as little as $2,500. I believe the payment plan could be extended for up to five years, even for that low dollar amount. So the city's terms, if you will, are quite reasonable.
373 Counselor. Anything further.
374 The only other thing I wanted to say is I just wanted to uplift the work that councilor Smith is leading, to focus on even getting sidewalks in district one. So this just seems like a time to bring that up. Thank you for leading that.
375 Thank you councilor. I'm putting myself in the queue on this one as well. And I think, mr. Lannon, this will be a question for you. Also, what types of sidewalk repairs or what how do you properties get on the list? Because I'm noticing that some of these look like they are people who live out of town and own properties, or the. The mailing address is listed as an llc, but some of them, the mailing address is listed as the address where the work was done. So it's somebody who is living in that that home where the property, where the repair is done to the sidewalk. What are these? How does something get on the list? Is it complaint driven?
376 It is. So this is primarily PBOT area of expertise. They do have someone here that can speak. But then very briefly, it's complaint driven. Pbot inspector goes out, determines there's a violation of the city's code or requirements around the driveways, the curb or the sidewalk. Notices the owner, which may be an out of town owner or someone that's residing in the home, gives them an opportunity to rectify that. And then ultimately, the PBOT will contract with a repair service. The repair service will go out, schedule the work, get it done. They build PBOT PBOT pays the bill, and then revenue creates these liens.
377 Thank you colleagues, I'll be supporting this today because this is our current practice and property owners were given a warning. But I am concerned about some of the the folks in my district and whether this will be a grave impact on them. And I hope that this is a practice that we can discuss and debate at some point in the future. I understand that shifting the cost to the city is is difficult, and we may not have the funds to be able to do that. But I do worry about the impact on individuals. I also feel strongly that if this is our current law, our current process, and folks were given notice, I. I need to make sure that we are following our own laws and rules at the city. Councilor Smith.
378 Thank you, madam president. I just want to say ditto, ditto, ditto what you just said. Those are our rules and regulations. One of the reasons why I brought up cip, which. Thank you, madam vice vice president, for talking about the sidewalk initiative that many of you supported this last year is because there are a lot of our neighbors and friends who can't afford a sidewalk, period, let alone a repair for sidewalk. And so I believe that we're we're working towards it. I and others are very passionate about it. And, you know, seeing some of these expenses burden property owners who often thought, you know, and some folks don't know that, that they are responsible for it. And yet this work is so critical and it's not free. And I know someone must pay for it. But I want to explore with you all how we might consider cost recovery differently in the future. When economic conditions represent an emergency, as is the case is today. If these liens end up displacing even one of these property owners, it will surely offset any positive impact of $518,000 and 204 cents, both financially and some might even say morally. But I think that we are aware of the rules in in regulations. And I do agree with you. We have to abide by those. And I think we need to figure out how to do better in the future, so that we want to make sure that our our neighbors are safe and that they're not being harmed by the by the derelict curbs or sidewalks. But we also want to figure out ways in which we can help people, too. So I just want to say thank you for bringing this forward, and I will be supporting voting for this agenda item.
379 Thank you.
380 Councilor councilor Green.
381 I'll be brief. Ditto to what you said. Councilor I'm sorry, council president. It's been a long day and I'll remind us that we we had a similar conversation when we were contemplating the urban canopy plan. And I think what I liked about one of those amendments was that it was going to sort of compel a conversation around this. You're inviting a conversation around this. I'm telling you that I'm very interested in that conversation around this. I understand there will be some trade offs. We'll have to figure out, you know, who's the right party to bear. But I'm eager for that conversation because I know that this is a burden for a lot of my constituents as well. So thank you for raising that. I will vote yes for this today.
382 Thank you. Councilor. Councilor Ryan.
383 Yeah, I wasn't going to weigh in, but I just want to ask this question. Thomas 180 properties is what you said, and none of them came in to testify or to push back.
384 That's correct. Yes. They were. They were all noticed, many of them elected after notice to have the city do the work. So, you know, they're they're, you know, fully informed. And I assume that's why they're not here.
385 Yeah.
386 So thank you, colleagues, I agree with everything that's been said. And I've also been here before. And this is rare. I mean, to not have anyone show up and push back means that I don't. Anyway, I'm a yes on this and I appreciate that you gave us that type of information. I've definitely been on the side where, thomas, we've had people come in and testify and then it's a different conversation. Thank you.
387 Do you guys mind if I make a brief comment just really quick?
388 I know.
389 Signing up to testify is through our clerk's office, so you'll have to.
390 You know, you guys were open night. It had to be just passing by really quickly.
391 Unfortunately, we're not able to do that because there.
392 Are I have a comment about this thing that one of the things that we've worked on is very important. I've worked do a lot of work.
393 I'm sure that folks would be happy to chat with you after the meeting.
394 Jennifer I'm brandon, I will I will call her about something very important when I bring up is important, it really is and doesn't get addressed.
395 And we'd be happy to have you sign up for public communication at another meeting.
396 Okay.
397 Colleagues, I don't see anybody else in the queue. So this these are both first readings. We are going to move them to second readings. They will be back on our agenda for a vote in the new year. Mr. Jordan, are you here tomorrow for our recess meeting? Okay. I'm going to save the niceties for then. Then? With that, colleagues, I'll note that we do have a very full agenda for our recess meeting tomorrow. So I will see you all then. And I will adjourn our meeting or recess. There we go. I will recess our meeting for this evening.