It is six o'clock, so I'm gonna call to order the Bend City Council business meeting.

Uh the mayor is currently in Portland and is online.

There she is.

So I will be running the meeting.

Um we'll start with introductions, and Councillor Platt will start with you today.

Steve Platt, he's him.

Megan Norris, she her.

Megan Perkins, she her.

Mike Riley, Ian.

Aurel Mendes, he him.

Gina Francesa, she her.

First uh on the agenda today for good of the order is the Domestic Violence Awareness Month proclamation, which I have the honor of reading.

Whereas domestic violence affects every person in the city of Bend and within our communities, whereas whether as a victim or survivor, or as a family member, friend, partner, neighbor, educator, employee, employer, or co-worker, and whereas systemic oppression and inequity create a culture in which some communities are especially targeted for violence and experience greater barriers to access services.

And whereas intimate partner violence affects more than 12 million people in the United States every year, with nearly three in ten women and one in ten men in the U.S.

having experienced rape, physical violence and or stalking by an intimate partner.

Access to a gun makes it five times more likely that an abusive partner will kill his female victim, and every month in the United States, an average of 70 women are shot and killed by an intimate partner.

And whereas now, more than ever, we are being reminded that we are capable of change, and each person makes choices every day that either support or challenge a culture of violence.

And whereas every individual in our community and within our city has a role to play in moving change forward and promoting health and safety for all people by not tolerating violence, by promoting accountability, and by participating in the efforts to end violence.

And whereas new efforts build on foundations laid by dedicated advocates, preventionists, activists, and other partners who have been doing this work for decades.

And whereas by taking action where you work, play, learn, worship, or live, change is possible and domestic violence is preventable when we are all working together to end systemic oppression, the root cause of domestic violence.

Now, therefore, we, the Bend City Council, hereby proclaim October 2025 to be domestic violence awareness month in the city of Bend and encourage all residents to join in this observance.

Second.

I'm sorry, should I make a motion?

Please move.

I move to accept the proclamation.

Second.

All right, uh, Councilor Francosa and we'll say Counselor Norris for the for the second.

Um we have with us um uh Abby, oh sorry, all in favor of accepting this proclamation.

Sorry, I got ahead of myself.

All right, we have with us Abby Rowan from Saving Grace.

Do you want to come up here and say a few words?

Right.

Well, thank you, Mayor Keebler.

Um, she's been a lovely partner for us, and thank you, counselors, for recognizing domestic violence awareness month at Saving Grace.

Every day we walk alongside survivors and their children.

Um, and we appreciate you helping to bring light, something that often stays quite hidden.

Um, domestic violence affects every neighborhood and income level here in Bend.

A lot of folks think that it does not exist prominently here.

It absolutely does, and we see that every day.

Um proclamations like this help shine a light, and the light saves those lives.

We do invite the community to learn warning signs and respond with I believe you.

How can I help you?

We also encourage the community to share Saving Grace's 24-7 helpline and local resources and check in on friends, co-workers, neighbors, and small questions often open doors that lead to safety.

Thank you to our partners, Bend Police, County Agencies, Healthcare, and schools and businesses, and on behalf of survivors, staff, and volunteers, we gratefully accept this proclamation.

We recommit to a bend where home is safe for everyone.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

All right.

Next up we have another proclamation for White Cane Safety Day, and Counselor Francosa is going to read that one.

Thank you.

Whereas blindness or low vision affects individuals of all ages, all income levels, all genders, and all cultures.

And whereas there is there are different degrees of visual impairment, meaning that someone may be legally blind but can still see colors, shapes, movements, and varying degrees of light.

And whereas white canes and guide dogs are tools that people who are blind or visually impaired use to identify themselves and to navigate their environments with greater independence.

And whereas white cane and guide dog users have the right to travel safely while enjoying all the rights, benefits, and privileges of living, working, and playing in this great city of Bend.

And whereas everyone should be aware that Oregon law requires drivers to stop and remain stopped until a person carrying a white cane or using a guide dog has completely crossed the street.

And whereas October 15th was designated in 1964 by the United States Congress as a day of education and celebration of the advent of white canes and guide dogs for independence and safe travel.

Now, therefore, we the Bend City Council hereby proclaim October 15th, 2025 to be White Cane Awareness Day in Bend and call upon public officials, members of civic organizations, and all people in the city of Bend to join together as we work to ensure that the rights, benefits, and privileges of life in our lovely city are safely available to all community members and visitors who are blind or visually diverse.

And I have just a brief statement, and then you can please make a motion after that.

And I uh am I personally I have had the uh honor, I would say, to work on a lot of projects to bring universal design to our public spaces, be them excuse me, buildings or roads, crosswalks, sidewalks, all those kinds of things.

And so I've really come to the belief that universal design is just better design, and it makes um it makes our public spaces more um more accessible to all of our community, and that is equity.

So I'm gonna thank Charlene for being here today and invite her to come forward to make some comments and also thank her for all of her involvement on um Kobac and her just her tireless advocacy for uh accessibility in our community.

So thanks, Charlene.

I move to accept the white cane safety day proclamation.

Second.

All in favor.

Okay.

Maybe I invited Sherlene before I was supposed to.

That's okay.

That's okay.

That's okay.

Okay, should I talk?

Yes, that's all right.

Good evening, everybody, and thank you, counsel for accepting the proclamation.

I really appreciate it, and I think everyone else who uses a white cane or a guide dog here in Bend and throughout the state appreciates it too.

I have been asked by the pedestrian safety action coalition to do this, and so I took it upon myself to try.

So thanks very much.

I have two things to say, well, three actually.

First, since I moved to Bend in 2012, I've appreciated all the progress being made in adding sidewalks, curb ramps, audible signals, etc.

to make our city more accessible and safer for all pedestrians, really, and for cyclists as well.

My only bugaboo is as many already know roundabouts, but they are here to stay, and so I hope that the engineers who put them in will remember those of us who can't see uh when they put in the audible signal portions and so on of them.

Now, there are two rules that everyone really needs to pay attention to and follow.

They aren't laws, unfortunately, but the one concerns guide dogs.

If you see a guide dog, most of them are lovely to look at.

They wag their tails, they are friendly.

But please, please do not beckon to them, call to them, approach them, or try to feed them when they are working.

If you want to pet a guide dog, ask the owner first.

Sometimes we'll say yes and sometimes we'll say no.

Don't be offended.

It's only because just as if you were driving and you were distracted, your eyes were taken off the road by any distraction, an accident could occur.

So if a guide dog is distracted from being our eyes, such an accident could also occur.

The second thing is if you see someone with a white cane, do not assume that that person doesn't know what he or she is doing just because he's using something out in front of him to tap and feel for the pavement.

Never ever go up to that person and touch him or grab him or her without first verbalizing that you were present.

We may not even hear you.

And if you come up behind me and grab me, I'm allowable to turn around and hit you with a cane.

And that's no joke.

I actually almost did it one time and scared someone to death.

Well, almost.

But just remember you don't want to be touched when you're walking.

We don't either.

Ask if you can help.

Say, do you need assistance?

Or can I help you?

And if the person says yes, then great.

If he says no, don't be offended by that either.

Because usually those who are using white canes, as the proclamation says, are using them as a tool to help with their independence.

Thanks again, everybody.

Thank you.

Thank you, Charlene.

We're gonna uh actually give you a copy.

Provided in an accessible form.

Oh, yeah.

And I have this proclamation for you.

Oh, I'm grateful.

So this is time.

Okay.

Thank you.

So this is all right.

Next we're moving on to council action and reports.

And um, first on the list is uh letters, and um, I'm gonna turn it over to the mayor to talk about that item.

Thank you.

So just wanted to start by um following up on my email today that um over the weekend there was sort of a letter and statement developed by Oregon Mayors in support of uh Mayor Wilson of Portland to push back about the um federalization of troops that are being sent to Portland.

Um and I actually got to see Mayor Wilson today on my tour of City Hall, and he was very thankful to have mayors, not just from the Portland area, but from other places um standing up together to um stand up for our rights of Oregonians and the uphold our oaths to the Constitution and talk about how Portland is not the place that um apparently um people think it is still um I'll tell you it's been very pleasant here downtown in Portland while I've been here.

So I just wanted to highlight that.

Um I did want to ask counsel about um another letter that has come up in the past day or so as something that we could do to advocate for affordable housing.

We have um the Verde Pines Project and the Cascade Landing Project that were part of our investments of pro housing and affordable housing dollars that are also seeking a tax exemption that requires them to present to the different um taxing districts.

Um so they went through the parks board, which did not reach a decision, and the county and the schools are um have not heard their uh exemption request yet.

I'd like to send a letter to um probably possibly both the county and the schools, um a separate letter to each, which is explaining why this is important, and we hope that they will take it up and consider these exemptions, which are really pretty important for the projects to leverage a lot of state and federal money um and get hundreds of affordable apartments out there on the streets of end.

So wanted to just make sure that council was okay with working on that.

I will send out a draft um by the end of the week that's already been started, but wasn't really ready um for for prime time tonight yet, in conjunction with staff and the providers who are um requesting those exemptions.

Great, thank you.

Uh next for council reports.

This time we're going to start with Councillor Platt, if he is ready.

I'm ready.

Yeah.

Just brief brief updates this time.

I did have the opportunity to go with Council Francosa and Rick Russell to look at some of the safe parking sites at uh Westside Westside Church earlier this week.

And I'm just I'm just amazed at what we're able to do to make to bring uh a further rung on to the uh on the the housing uh continuum for folks in our community.

I'm so pleased with what's being done.

They're so uh well done, and I was happy to see that uh in place.

Obviously, we all attended the joint the joint meeting earlier this week, and I was pleased with what dovetails along with that with our thoughts about how the flexibility for the TSSA is uh gonna go on go forward and still having having real guiding light of coming with a personal solution or a permanent solution, but also having some grace uh as we work towards that that personal solution.

And the last thing I'll say is uh echoing them the mayor's con uh comment.

I do think about uh my brothers and sisters in arms who are being in a tough spot uh these days, um, being asked to do uh a lot for the country and still trying to hold uh hold to the oath that they've sworn to the constitution.

That's all I've got.

Thanks.

Thank you.

That's yours.

Um went to some of the last of the welcoming week events, went to a great concert by Cecilia Isabella, who did a lot of events um uh last couple Fridays ago, and it was just really moving and um a really pleasant and nice concert.

Um and then uh of course went to the city and county joint meeting um and just echo uh counselor Platt's statements.

I'm really looking forward to finding a solution, but also um you know, realizing that there's a lot of great progress that is happening out there.

Our service providers are doing great work, and we need to make sure that um we are supporting the community and actually finding um solutions and and housing for people transitioning them in a way that's thoughtful and caring.

Um, and then lastly, we had our public contract subcommittee yesterday with counselors Rayleigh and Franzosa.

Um, just really interesting to kind of learn more about how the city contracts with all our various um uh you know services and um looking forward to to taking more action on that and the way that we offer those and um and also finding ways to be more inclusive in some of our contract options moving forward.

Great.

I will go next.

Um I was also able to go to one of the final welcoming week events.

Um, this one was on matriarchal systems, and it was a really fascinating conversation.

Um I had the coordinate houses response office board meeting on Monday.

Um we talked a lot about um data and how to get better data, not only for ourselves as elected officials, um, to be able to understand the problem, but also to the community and how we can keep working together.

And um, we heard a presentation uh from the uh Dr.

Pruss from the National Vehicle Residency Collective, which does really, really interesting uh coalition work all around the country um for people that are living out of their vehicles.

And um, I think we'll probably be hearing more from him and that organization um as we look to finding solutions um for people that are living outside or in their vehicles.

Um then we had the regional housing council meeting immediately after that.

Um we spent a lot of time talking about how um we, as three very different counties and as uh the Confederate tribes of Warp Springs, how can we work together um and find areas of common interest, and talked about really wanting to duplicate um the efforts of um the the um the regional alliance that that was put together in the legislature um from Central Oregon as a housing council.

So that was a really great um conversation as well.

Um wanted to share some sad news.

Uh I I spoke last time about the Central Oregon Disability Support Network losing their funding, they were denied their appeal, and so um there will um they are trying to find ways now to um find local and and um national funding to continue to support the very very important work that they do for over 4,000 families in our community.

And just wanted to highlight one more thing.

Um, Indigenous People's Day is coming up.

Um it is on October 13th.

There are two events that I could find.

There might be more.

Um, COCC is um showing at the documentary called Uncovering Boarding School, um, which is um on the 13th between 12 and 2.

So that is a Monday.

And OSU, Cascades on Saturday the 11th, between one and five, is holding the first people's celebration with um the Confederate tribes of Warm Springs, and there's going to be a ceremony and food and dancing, so it sounds like a really great event.

So just wanted to highlight that for everybody as well.

And I'll pass it over to Councilor Riley.

I wanted to just first of all express um this at the last meeting.

My gratitude for the Bend Roots revival that happened September 24th, or September 12th and 14th.

This is a great celebration of local musicians and local bands and all the people who put that together.

Mark Ransom and all the volunteers have been doing it for I think it's like 15 plus years now.

It was just a great local community event, and I encourage people to look for it next year in 2026.

Bangroots revival.

And then a panel discussion that was at the new newer Spice Land Restaurant downtown.

It was a great gathering.

And then one called Threads of Belonging, which was a combination of in a cov Kovtun, who's a Ukrainian folk singer and a Native American rapper Scott Kalama, known as Blue Flames, from the Confederate Tribes of Warm Spring.

It was a really interesting event that brought together two different traditions that are threatened and dealing with resilience and trauma in a variety of different ways in our world today.

It's an OPB documentary.

I'm excited to hear that it's going to screen again.

I highly recommend it.

It tells the story of a woman named Abby Hall.

She's an enrolled member of a clamat scribe.

She tries to understand the impact of native boarding schools on her own family.

And then in the process, it really uncovers the legacy of trauma and cultural erasure and shows how profoundly people in the native community are still struggling for healing and justice as a result of all that happened to them through the boarding schools.

So it was very sober truth telling event.

And I think I was really honored and just really appreciate them telling the truth about our story as a country.

I think it's particularly important in today's climate.

The last thing I wanted to mention is I went to something called the on the road to the Ben Venture Conference that was held at Worthing Brewing late last week, where 10 businesses that not all just from Ben, but regionally competed to make it onto the stage.

I think five were promoted to the actual Ben Venture conference, including a local company called Toastware, which turns your favorite outdoor jacket into a little mini heater where you can adjust the temperature.

It's actually pretty cool.

And they won the $3,000 audience prize.

So just a big shout out to the impressive innovation and entrepreneurship from all the people who were participating in that event.

And there was great turnout from the local community.

Thank you.

Councillor Mendez.

Thank you.

Um Thursday, September 25th, I attended the City of Bend's Accessibility Advisory Committee, and I just wanted to share some of the comments that members made about what losing support for organizations like the Central Oregon Disability Support Network means.

These programs are a lifeline for some families in our community.

And losing that funding has put a lot of people in pretty desperate situations.

And you can tell that they they feel desperate.

So I just wanted to say that I think you know, if we are hopeful that we can find additional support, these organizations are going to try to band together, but it's hard not to see how this will mean anything but a cut in services.

And I think stepping back when you contrast that with the news about how much it will cost to send troops to cities in this country that are unnecessary and unwanted.

It's it's pretty heartless.

And so I just wanted to express my gratitude to the mayor for joining a statement of solidarity, describing how unnecessary it is and how unwanted it is to send troops.

And it's it's just so wasteful.

So I'm glad that uh we have at least our shared values and commitment here and um to the families that are experiencing this.

We hear you, and um we're gonna do our best to try to find what what additional support we can.

Council Francis.

I on September 18th, I attended the core area advisory board meeting.

Um I just want to thank that committee.

Um, they are really tireless in their dedication to activating the core area, and they've started a new uh theme with each of their meeting uh meetings, bringing in um representatives to talk about various issues that affect the core area could impact the core area, and I thought that was really valuable, and I thank them for their leadership there, um, as well as staff Jonathan Taylor, of course, for enabling all of that to happen.

As well as staff Jonathan Taylor, of course, for enabling all of that to happen.

I toward the safe parking venue at the Westside Church with Councillor Platt.

And it was it's a it's a really great venue, and I um I thank the church for making that space available and for their leadership on um housing and homelessness.

Um I want to express gratitude to all my fellow council members for the robust discussion that we had with the county um on Monday the 29th or 29th, I believe.

Um days are running together.

Um I you know it's a tough is a really tough issue, um, and there's a lot of confusion in the community, and so I I um I'm glad that we had that conversation.

Um, and I I'm I'm glad that we're gonna be bringing some more clarity to how we are gonna support um the most vulnerable folks in our in our community.

Um I wanna thank also uh counselors Norris and Riley and City Staff, Justin Sweet, Sam Nelson, Mike Gaffney, Ryan Oester, and Russ Grayson for the public contracts meeting that um was really well planned for.

Uh we had a really informative and productive conversation about innovative uh contracting um practices or alternative contracting practices, I should say, um, and then also the innovative thinking that the team is doing um into really some mundane topics and some not.

Insurance and bonding are pretty mundane, but um those are actual barriers to um emerging small businesses to working for the city and we spend what 170 million dollars every two years in contracts, something like that.

Um it's a lot of money and it's a lot of opportunity for businesses in our community.

So the more that we can make those opportunities available, I think the better.

So thanks to everyone for their work on that.

Um that's all I have.

Thank you.

Mayor Kepler Thank you.

Um, so just a few things.

Um this week was part of the sort of kickoff here locally um with a group of staff and the city manager and myself who are part of the Bloomberg City Leaders City Leadership Initiative.

Um, and it's in partnership with Bluebird for Philanthropies in Harvard.

Um, this is a program that accepted us in and is helping um cities across the globe really um tackle a problem and really dive into it.

Um and the issue that um the team is working on with these additional resources is around wildfire resiliency.

So really cool to see that project get started, and I think staff are going to be able to use these resources to bring us some really cool ideas on how we continue our work and our goals on wildfire resiliency with the community and how we get the community to buy in with us on all of our rules on um preparing and being better prepared for wildfire.

So it was great to kick that off.

Um had our leadership meeting with Mayor Potem and myself and uh Ben Parkson Rex leadership last week, um, discussed um you know how to have a uh more holistic conversation at our meeting coming up in February.

We understand they're gonna continue to give us feedback on TIFF.

You know, we express our disappointment they couldn't reach a decision on the affordable tax exemption, but I think a bigger conversation needs to be had, and we talked about this of what is the vision for how the city is going to grow and urbanize and how does their vision for parks, how do we understand that better?

Um, and maybe even give some feedback on that the same way they're giving us feedback and we talk about that together maybe at our upcoming joint meeting.

So more to come on that.

Um we expect to probably meet in February.

It's kind of what we're aiming for.

Um I got to meet the COC president, um, Dr.

Greg Pereira, who I missed his um his meet and greet, so he came to City Hall graciously to talk with me and really excited for his leadership as he's settling in.

I already had a few ideas for him, one of which might be some safe parking.

Um and so we'll stay in touch and um he seemed really eager to dive in to to the work at COCC and becoming part of the community.

Um and then the last meeting I'll mention was the district mapping advisory committee, which met last week.

They also met today.

I missed that meeting today.

I haven't had a chance to watch it back.

Again, ask everyone to really pay attention to this committee.

This is a pretty big deal to draw a map that would maybe be recommended to the voters as early as next May.

Um so the next meeting will be next Wednesday from one to three at the county buildings if folks are interested in following along with that.

Um and then finally, um, been having conversations since I'm a resident of of Southeast Bend.

That's where I grew up here in Bend.

Um that's where I currently live.

Um been having conversations with neighbors and folks who just there's a lot of change and a lot of growth going on in Southeast right now.

Um so understandably people are are perking up, paying attention.

There's been stories in the newspaper.

Um staff have been talking about our next round table with neighborhoods that we've done a few a few of those before and um have a thought that I wanted to make sure council was okay with of doing a uh Southeast neighborhood round table specifically for that area of town to really dive into what's going on out there, what what the changes are, what they can expect, um, some of the infrastructure that we may be investing in.

So I think that's a really great opportunity also to talk about commercial neighborhoods and things like that that we know are concerns, um, especially in that part of town and across town.

Um so just wanted to run that by council, make sure there's no objection to that.

Getting that set up is maybe our next round table, no timeline yet, but um I think that focusing on that neighborhood in that quadrant might be a good move at this point.

So that's it for me.

You love a good round table.

We do love a good round table of the city council.

Thank you, Mayor.

All right.

Next on uh the agenda is the visitor section.

Um for those who have signed up.

I saw two of those signed up for an item later on in the agenda, so I will call you then.

Um visitors section, you get two minutes.

Um we'll call, I'll call you up.

You can go sit at that table.

If you want to know how much time you have, you cannot miss it.

Um it is a it is a very large uh two-minute countdown uh for you.

Uh we just ask that you please address us as a body and please refrain from any harmful or violent language.

So I will start with Mark.

Mark.

Oh, gentle, yeah, gentlemen.

Yeah, sorry.

Mark Mark.

Gentlemark.

Gentlemen Mark.

Mayor Pro Tem, Council members, hello, Mayor.

My name is Mark Gentle.

I'm a resident of Bend.

Later this evening, you'll be asked to grant the Core Area Advisory Board the authority to appropriate public funds.

It may seem like a small detail when you read it in the motion.

But when I read the words, and I'll read the words of the motion compared to the municipal code, they don't align.

The municipal code could not be clearer than that it does not allow an advisory body to bind the city or its agents, including BURA to financial obligations.

And yet that's exactly what you're proposing to do.

The Core Area Advisory Board is very important.

It might be the most important advisory committee you have, but you have several.

So this is an opening the door to a strategy which would require you to amend the municipal code in order to allow them to begin to bind you to financial obligations.

Even if it's a small program, even if it's extremely beneficial, which then this may surely be.

No board, committee, or commission as a whole, or any member or members individually or collectively, may bind the city, its officers or agents to financial commitments or obligations.

If this allows you to grant the authority that's being proposed, then words have no meanings.

Blue is yellow.

And we can just all go home and do what we want.

Thank you.

Oh, go ahead.

I mean, just so you know, Mr.

Gentle.

I think if you're able to stay, we'll make sure that we have our legal staff talk about this during that part of the agenda.

It's going to be a while, but you can also watch remotely if you can't stay here.

Thank you.

All right.

Next we have Leslie Larson.

Good evening.

My name's Leslie, and I'm a homeowner in Petrosa.

I stand before you today to break bring attention to an important issue regarding the 20-acre commercial parcel at the entrance of Petrosa on Northeast Butler Market Road and Northeast Eagle to the Chutes Market Road.

This area is critical for the future of our community, and I respectfully ask the city council to be fully aware and uphold the Petrosa Master Plan development.

It's essential that the city continues to honor the vision outlined in the original Northeast plan.

This plan is not designed to this plan is not only designed to serve the residents of Petrosa, but also the broader Northeast community, including those visiting Pine Nursery Park.

The goal is creating a 15-minute walkable community, should remain a central priority for the city's developmental strategy.

The original master plan envisioned a grocery-anchored retail center, pedestrian-friendly shopping street framed by mixed-use buildings, live work, townhomes, and vibrant outdoor spaces.

These spaces are intended to host events like festivals, farmers markets, and other civic activities that help broad bread build a strong connected community.

I strongly urge the council to uphold this vision.

In 2023, the clerical project proposed by Polish was developed with an understanding of affordable housing in alignment with the master plan committed to balance mixed use development.

However, I understand that the Bella Pines Apartments, a project from a builder based out of Montana, is also being considered.

This new development doesn't meet the approved master plan and seems in conflict with the commitments made by Polish Homes and the City of Bend, who are local developers and have already pledged to fulfill the affordable housing goal within the community.

I ask why are we attaining two separate housing affordities?

Perhaps this would be a neighborhood round table.

Thank you.

All right, up next is Don Miles.

Good evening.

Pro Tem Perkins, Mayor Kebler, and City Councillor.

I'm Don Mill.

I'm the Bendaria Director for Economic Development Central Oregon.

Edco has been supporting Bend's economic prosperity for over 40 years by helping grow middle income jobs and diversify the economy.

Thanks for the opportunity to provide some input regarding the electrification policy initiative and its proposed and purposeful intent to reduce carbon emissions in our growing city.

Tonight, I would like to share some of Edco's concerns about the potential electrification policy proposals that are under consideration.

Edco works closely with local employers who invest in our community and provide living wage jobs.

What they are telling us is clear.

Housing in affordative affordability and infrastructure capacity are among the top challenges.

Any electrification policy that increases housing costs or pushes workers further from their jobs may conflict with City Council's shared prosperity goal.

Policies need to be carefully evaluated from all relevant perspectives.

We're also concerned about the strain on our already pressured power grid.

A shift to an all-electric requirement for new residential conduction construction could restrict Bend's ability to support existing growing employers and startups and attract target industry businesses as outlined in the Invest Bend Economic Development Strategic Plan.

Policies that significantly increase energy demand before infrastructure are in place and to accommodate it would likely work against City Council's shared prosperity goal.

We believe that the recommendation for City Council's own joint advisory committee comprised of the Bend Economic Development Advisory Board, the Affordable Housing Committee, and the Environment and Climate Committee, which emphasized outreach and education over fees is a more balanced and appropriate approach.

Let's learn from other cities' experiences before moving forward with policies that could have unintended consequences.

Thank you.

Next we have George Schott.

Good evening, Mayor and Council members.

My name is George Schott, and I am a homeowner in the Petrosa community.

I represent a significant group of homeowners who are extremely concerned about the recent application by two developers before the Affordable Housing Committee department for two projects, Bella Pines and Clerical Workforce, located on the commercial property within our master plan community.

This market place at Petrosa was designed for this area to highlight the walkability concept and include a grocery store, retail shops, and restaurants to serve Petrosa and the other Northeast Bend residents and Pine Nursery Park.

In 2023, Polish sold this property to a local developer and per Karen Swenson of the City of Bend Planning Department in a January 24 email to the residents.

We were assured by her and the city that the marketplace would move forward as planned under the new owners.

While we are aware of the recent law passed in July of 25 regarding affordable housing and the allowance for these projects to proceed on a portion of commercial property, we also feel that the City of Bend needs to review the history of the Patrosa Master Plan and the commitment that the City of Bend Polish and Kevin Spencer made to the residents with regard to our marketplace.

Also of concern to us after reviewing one of the applications for Bella Pines.

There is language by the applicant that states this is urgent to get this moving while also stating that they have not spoken to the Petrosa community.

Our home prices were all based and sold on the marketplace concept, and to have these commitments set aside without explanations or involvement is very disturbing to all of us.

This is the largest financial investment most of us have ever made.

Thank you.

And the last in-person speaker is Sarah Odenhall.

Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, Counselors.

My name is Sarah Odendahl, and I'm from the interim CEO of the Bend Chamber of Commerce and a resident of Bend.

Thanks for the opportunity to share the perspective of the chamber and the broader business community on electrification policies that you're going to take up in a work session in a couple of weeks.

We recognize and support the city's climate goals.

At the same time, we believe it's critical to balance environmental progress with affordability, reliability, and economic vitality.

As you heard from Dawn, and as you all know, uh housing affordability remains the number one challenge facing Benn's workforce and employers.

The median home price is north of 700,000, but affordability for a family at the area of median income is closer to 400,000.

The city's own housing needs analysis shows we need nearly 2,000 new homes each year, half of them affordable to families below 80% AMI.

Every new fee and regulation tied to construction increases costs and risks, making housing even less attainable.

We know that our community values energy choice and predictability.

Polling, which has been shared with you all previously, shows that 67% of Ben voters oppose fees on natural gas appliances and new homes.

And 86% believe that such fees would reduce energy reliability.

At the same time, 80% support innovation in renewable natural gas, demonstrating that residents want a practical and balanced path forward.

We believe that policy should respect these values while supporting the transition to clean energy.

As you know, more than half of Benn's workforce commutes from outside the city limits due to housing costs, adding emissions to the transportation system.

Climate policy must therefore consider housing affordability and commute patterns alongside energy systems.

Innovation is already happening.

You all are aware of Cascade Natural Gas piloting a dual fuel heat pump in 20 homes across Bend.

This and other promising solutions should be evaluated before more restrictive measures are put in place.

We believe that council should direct staff to provoke pursue innovation and data-based approaches, not fees that may have unintended consequences.

The chamber and our members share your commitment to a sustainable future for Bend.

We urge you to adopt a balanced data-driven approach that protects affordability, preserves energy choice, and invests in innovation and education.

And of course, we always look forward to being a constructive constructive partner as these policies develop.

Thanks.

Thank you, Sarah.

We have one person online, Ashley.

James Teeter.

Hi there.

Hi.

Good evening, Council.

I'm James Teeter with Bend Bikes.

Sorry I couldn't be there in person.

On tonight's agenda, you're being asked to approve construction for the Bend Bikeways miscellaneous intersection project, including new RRFBs, the flashing beacons at crosswalks at uh Delaware and Bond and Delaware and Wall.

And uh these will even auto-trigger for people on bikes, which is really cool to see uh since the typical buttons on the sidewalks are out of reach for people on bikes.

Um so I want to say thank you for making these crossings safer.

Uh it's uh very important to understand the global context of what we're doing here, though.

Um excuse me, our RFBs they do help in the in a recent large Florida study sites with RFBs uh installed, saw a 69% reduction in total pedestrian crashes crashes.

Um they are a proven safety measure that we should be using.

Um but the critical burn context is that we only install them at a two-lane same direction crossings, the classic double threat setup.

Um, and that's a policy decision, and it's dangerous.

And with two lanes going the same way and unsignalized crossing.

Uh, one driver can stop while a person begins to cross, but the driver in the next lane often cannot see that person crossing in time and um the first car blocks the view.

So the beacon may help for the first driver stop, but it doesn't remove the the second lane threat.

And um that same Florida study that found the pedestrian crash reduction also found that crop rear end crashes increased by 11% after RFP installation and um so you know when one driver stops loop for a per person crossing, but the the driver behind them often runs into them.

And so, you know, when one driver stops loop for a per person crossing, but the driver behind them often runs into them.

And so this shows us the RFP doesn't fix the double threat geometry.

It really just exposes its dangers.

So RFP is the only detour and crossings.

It does two harmful things.

It normalizes it and it uh withholds on that single lane.

So I'm a times up.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, James.

All right, item number four on the agenda is um our consent agenda.

Asking for a motion.

I move to approve the consent agenda.

Second.

Moved by Council Norris, seconded by Councillor Platt.

All in favor?

Aye.

Moving on to number five.

This is the closy judicial public hearing and first reading of an ordinance adopting the emblem tax increment finance plan.

Okay, I'm going to open a public hearing and turn it over to Elizabeth.

So we have a this is a quasi-judicial proceedings.

I'm going to read a statement and ask council questions and then ask them questions that are relevant to the audience.

So this is a quasi judicial proceeding.

And the first thing is for council to declare any ex-party contacts or site visits.

Do any of you have any of those to declare?

No, seeing none.

And do any of you have any actual or potential conflicts of interest or other personal interests that would interfere with your ability to serve as an impartial decision maker in this matter?

Seeing none, seeing the mayor shaking her head.

All right.

So now I'll read a statement for the members of the public in the room.

All testimony, argument, and evidence must be directed to the applicable criteria.

The person testifying believes are applicable to this matter.

The failure to raise an issue with sufficient specificity for the decision maker tonight, that's counsel or other parties to respond to the issue will preclude an appeal to the land use board of appeals on that issue.

The failure to raise a constitutional issue or other issue with sufficient specificity to allow the decision maker or other parties to respond will preclude an appeal related to that issue.

If prior to the end of the public hearing a party requests additional time to present testimony, argument or evidence, council will allow either a continuance or additional time in its discretion for parties to submit additional testimony, argument, or evidence to the record.

And did anyone have any challenge to the shaking of heads by the council earlier?

I forgot that part.

Seeing none.

Thank you.

Great.

Jonathan, it's all yours.

Good afternoon, Mayor Pro Tim, Mayor Keebler, members of council.

My name is Jonathan Taylor.

I'm the urban renewal manager.

Tonight I am presenting you the proposed tax increment finance plan for the emblem tax increment finance area.

A little bit of background.

On October 6, 2025, Borough, the Bend Urban Renewal Agency adopted resolution 158 establishing the policy for tax increment assistance for housing affordability and growth.

This provides property tax rebates for developments, including housing at 90% AMI or less.

It was developed in consultation with council advisory bodies and over 25 opportunities for public involvement.

The policy has been paused on July 17th.

It is being reviewed by the home committee this fall.

On July 16th, Borough recommended the creation of this particular new site-specific TIFF area to support housing development.

On August 11th, 2025, the Planning Commission found that the proposed area is in conformance with the city of Bend's comprehensive plan and has recommended adoption by city council.

A little bit of background about what tax increment finance is.

What it does is it uses property taxes in a specified area to fund identified projects that address community needs and blight within that specific area.

What it is not, it is not a property tax increase on the property owner or anyone in the city limits of Bend, and it does not reduce existing revenue to taxing districts.

TIFF can only be used in a blighted area.

And while I understand that oftentimes blight has various connotations within the public, it is defined in state law.

Usually this is not developed as zone or consistent with surrounding areas.

Visual examples of blight can include, as per the previous slide, inadequate streets and stagnant or unproductive land.

These are two particular photos from the emblem site specific area.

We do know that community need rent is affordable when it is less than 30% of someone's income or a household income.

Last year, during the policy justification for the site specific salaries for eight out of 10 occupations do not meet this test, which 50% of our households could not afford if they had to rent today.

Later this afternoon, you'll be notified that the new state of the housing report has been released, which will have updated numbers, but the community need is still the same.

BIN will need an additional 33,000 housing units targeted for affordability among various income ranges over the next 20 years per the Oregon housing needs assessment.

As always, as we've seen in the market, interest rates and economic uncertainty are stressing the multi-unit sector in order to provide naturally occurring affordability, and the community still needs units to be constructed to meet this need and also the future need of future residents.

What this particular program does is that focused on historically vacant land for implementation of five years or more.

The borough policy to support is a minimum of 15% of units have to be rented to households earning 90% area median income or less.

At rents no more than the 30% of household income, and annual rent increases for those rent restricted units are lower than the statutory maximums.

The extended rebate is available if the development provides additional affordable units, provides minimum 25% of local contractors, or offers an energy certification, or one or more of the following.

In the employment side, which we haven't had a policy, but just a caveat with that, certain sectors of our target sector industries must maintain or create a minimum of five new jobs with an average salary of 72,000.

The development assistance is in a form of a rebate of increased property taxes paid by the assisted development and or the use of payment for the city of portions of system development charges.

As I noted earlier, it does not use taxes of any other property and it does not raise any property owners' tax.

There is a process for establishing a TIFF plan.

So on July 16th, Borough considered and recommended the emblem TIFF plan.

It went to the planning commission for comp plan conformance.

We notified the taxing districts, which are 11 of them.

The county declined a presentation, and a public notice was sent out on September 1st.

Tonight is one of two meetings that the city council will consider the emblem plan.

Tonight on October 1st is the public hearing, and the second reading may occur or could occur on October 15th.

The proposed recommended TIFF plan and report report are broken into two aspects.

The tax increment finance plan identifies the projects to be funded, a map and a legal description, relationship to local objectives and land uses, and a maximum indebtedness.

There is no debt being issued under this form of TIFF plan, but that is the common colloquial term for what the funds are.

The tax increment finance plan report identifies the existing conditions in the TIFF area.

It provides reasons for selecting this area.

It provides a blight remediation plan, which is often associated with the projects to be funded.

It provides an estimated cost of those projects, an anticipated date of the project completion, a financial analysis, and a financial impact.

The TIFF plan and the TIFF report report have to provide relationships to state and local objectives.

These are the summaries of what those two documents provide, that it provides needed housing units identified in the OHNA.

It supports chapter 11, chapter 5, and chapter 1.

So chapter 1 is public involvement, goal five is housing, and goal 11 is growth management.

Under the growth management, it makes efficient use of large blocks of land, supports mixed income housing, and supports the Southeast Area Plan goals to add a mix of residential units and transportation network.

It also supports the Bend Economic Development Advisory Board Strategic Plan, which supports goal two, supporting workforce housing opportunities.

And the project conforms to the Bend Development Code.

Here is a summary of the comp plan and the development code of the Southeast area.

The proposed area is the yellow star.

It is an expansion area development.

It is located near parks, schools, and commercial lands.

It implements the Southeast Area Plan with comprehensive plan policies by supporting a mix of residential uses, types, and densities, and also between existing and new neighborhoods.

In addition with the on and off site improvements of transportation development, it supports the build-out of the overall areas transportation network.

There are statutory limitations both by acreage and assessed value.

There are statutory limitations both by acreage and assessed value per the statute, TIFF areas, which is the entire uh core area, Murphy's Crossing, Juniper Ridge, the previous site specific plans or any future urban renewal plans.

They must be less at or below 15% of total acreage and 15% total assessed value.

If this plan is adopted and goes into effect, then we'll have 7.8%, 7.80% acreage and 3.38% of total assessed in those areas.

So we're far below the statutory minimum.

There has been conversation about the overall impact of Borough in terms of its activity since 2005.

So the historical taxable assessed value and the diverted taxable increment value.

Borough has had less than 1% impact on diverting total new incremental assessed value since 2005, with the little sliver of yellow, that is Borough's impact, and that's core area, Juniper Ridge, and Murphy's Crossing, and also including the last 10 years of the downtown urban renewal area.

Just a recap of the proposed location in the proposed project.

It is near High Desert Middle School and along Ferguson Road near Knott Road.

The emblem TIFF areas overview, it's 8.38 acres.

The current assessed value for the properties is 101,000.

It is zone medium and high density residential.

The identified blighted conditions in the TIFF plan and report are inadequate infrastructure and stagnant and unproductive land.

The plan maximum indebtedness is 22.1 million.

The plan term is 26 years.

And the projects identified for funding are development assistance for the specified project and plan administration.

The proposed projects are broken down as such 97% of 21 of 22.1 million, which equals 21.4 million for development assistance, and $663,000 for plan administration.

The financial impacts are to the city of Bend.

It's a about $128 for your general fund impact, $118 for the average annual impact to our taxing districts.

This is based on the foregone revenue of the frozen base.

Bonds and levies will receive $3.9 million, and that goes to schools, parks, and fire.

And in addition, this will spur development that has long been delayed in the area, which will generate $4.7 million for system development revenue, with $2 million of that going to the parks system development charges.

The project is $85 million.

The bloody conditions are 10-year vacant lot.

There is a total of 264 units with the average market rate rent of $2,333.

The anticipated date of certificate occupancy at this time is 2,000.

2026.

They have applied and were granted through Borough's adoption of an extended rebate.

They have gone above and beyond the 15% minimum requirement and are providing 20% of units, which will equal 53 at 70% through 90% for 24 years.

They have also applied for the enhanced affordability, which is the expanded option, the 45% of local contractors, and a green energy certification.

The breakdown of the total bedrooms is 112 for one bedroom, 128 for two bedrooms, and 24 for three bedrooms.

The rent restricted units are below with 13 units for 70% area median income, 13 units for 80% area median income, and 27 units for 90% area median income.

The first comment was the concern that the relying of lack of infrastructure and undeveloped lot condition as blighted conditions is too broad and could be applied to any urban growth boundary expansion.

Staff recommendation is no changes because this complies with the general statute as such, and our city attorney can speak to that a little bit more.

But we say that if you do provide or at least consider staff recommendation, you can also consider this with the policy updates that you can recommend to the home committee.

The second BPRD comment was they would like the TIFF plan to be included in the consideration of BPRD adopted plans.

Staff recommendation is no changes at this time.

BPRD and other plans were considered and addressed in the larger Southeast Area Plan project, which is the development assistance per the TIFF plan is in conformance with those plans as implemented through the BINCOMP plan and site review for the project, which were already addressed in the TIFF plan.

I don't have anything to add unless you have questions.

Yeah, why don't you expand on that?

The second bullet, the first bullet.

The one that's Jonathan said the city attorney's office could explain a little bit more.

Yeah, so the statute, as Jonathan laid out in one of his earlier slides, has a long list of what is counted as blight or can be counted as blight under statute.

And this parcel and this area comply with the list of blighted conditions and the policy adopted by to set up this program doesn't restrict um assistance to a subset of those blighted conditions, but that's what um Jonathan is referring to.

A policy updates could consider.

Are we only interested in supporting um areas or developments that that are meeting a subset of those blighted conditions under the statute, but it does comply with um the blighted conditions under the statute is our recommendation?

So you UGB area expansion areas greenfield, it's never been developed before, so but you can still call that blight.

Green green field can meet the definition of blight under the statute.

Yep.

And that's like legally defensible, like there's precedent for that.

Yeah, it's happened across the state as well, so it's not unique to us.

Um and it's as Jonathan pointed out, it has been raised before and has been raised as a criticism, and it's allowed under the statute, and um is something that that council and Burr could consider with the policy updates that you have uh coming before you in the coming months.

And what is I don't understand the second concern of BPRD, the would like the TIFF plan to include consideration of BPRD adopted plans and the staff response.

This might be a Jonathan question, I don't know.

I we could uh parley off that one.

So, in one of the requirements of adopting a or at least for borough to consider a TIF plan.

This is different from the public hearing requirements under the or S457, but in the TIFF plan development, it says consider local objectives, adopted plans and and goals and policies.

Normally that just applies to our comp plan and our economic development strategy because it's a city function and is a city agency and goal and objective.

They're requesting that in the coming months or at least I don't know when they're suggesting us to do it, but they would like you to consider in addition to our local objectives and adopted plans, other taxing districts adopted plans.

But in the staff recommendation, because this is part of a larger Southeast area master plan, it is in conformance with those adopted plans because it has to meet the overall development requirements of the area.

I think the mayor wanted to jump in.

Sure, yeah.

I actually have the same question about precedent, and it sounds like it's been answered that this statute has been challenged before and upheld.

It sounds like it, Luba.

Am I correct?

Yes, yeah, there have been challenges to different determinations of blight, and the statute has not been changed.

And then on the second point, I was just reviewing the letter, and the request was to literally um address the comprehensive plan that the district has, you know, independently put in place.

That was the request.

And so that just to clarify that.

And I think that's as Jonathan pointed outside of what we've already kind of decided here as far as the policy.

So the statute that they cited is the requirement of what belongs in an urban renewal plan, what must be in an urban renewal plan, and um the I can read the section for you.

It's an explanation of the plan's relationship to definite local objectives regarding appropriate land uses and approved traffic, public transportation, public utilities, telecommunications utilities, recreational and community facilities, and other public improvements.

And the Southeast Area Plan as a whole addressed all of those items and in its adoption, and as well as the Ben Comprehensive Plan addresses many of those elements as well.

And so the recommendation from staff is that the description in the plan already about how the proposed project is in conformance with the Southeast Area Plan, and the Benn Comprehensive Plan meets this requirement, and no changes are necessary.

We adopted a master plan for this area, also, right?

Yes.

That's not just this parcel, it's bigger than this parcel.

We adopted an area plan, the Southeast Area Plan is in the development code, and then there are Southeast Area policies in the comprehensive plan that that area plan implements.

So there's a couple of still adopt a master plan for this big chunk of land that's um bigger than this parcel, but it's this parcel is a subset of it, I thought.

No, based off of the um the way the Southeast area plan was set up.

Master planning is not required because of what that Southeast Area Plan accomplished.

So there's there's a certain set of policies in the Southeast area plan of how these these projects will be developed and what problems can do.

So I mean, I'm remembering some sort of process where we we reviewed some kind of plan for this area.

Yeah, it was the Southeast Area Plan.

Which is more recent than that.

Okay, well, there wasn't.

Well there wasn't are you thinking about the other the lot immediately adjacent to this one?

I seem to be there there is included this annexation that needed to occur to bring that in.

That's uh we gotta bring that to council for that.

Yeah.

Uh Jonathan, I was I wanted to ask you about the there's an estimate in here that says the the 53 uh affordable units are expected to have a reduced rent average of 1,618 dollars a month.

I think it's notable that the you know granted the the program did not require anything other than one bedroom units.

Um so this meets that requirement.

I do think it's it's unfortunate that there aren't more three bedrooms units in this project, and that there are out of 264 units, all 53 are one bedroom units.

So my question for you is do you have an estimate for the difference between what the market rent average is and what the reduced rent average expected rent is for those affordable units?

In other words, if we wanted to know how much money are we expected to uh be giving in terms of community benefit, could we do that math?

You know, if it was 200 a unit, we could we could do that math, or what would that number look like?

So at the last meeting I had all that information tonight was not was not that night.

I think uh we had estimated that I'm not gonna provide a number because I don't have the one right off the top.

Um that's okay.

I think um yeah.

We had we had that number at the last meeting that we discussed this, I believe.

Is that correct, Jonathan?

Yeah.

But in addition, they've also applied for uh local contractors, which is a little bit more expensive, green energy, which per the EPA's green thumb when we went through the policy review on the first year was about two to seven percent more on total development cost.

We do have it broken down that we can send out at a later time, but um staff staff does recommend the at the time the borough adoption of the policy and plan.

Thank you.

So Jonathan, uh I um you wouldn't have been involved in this though.

I think the isn't the property immediately to the west of the emblem property under development currently to the to the west, the the light or the medium residential yes, yeah.

That is under development.

Yeah, so I I mean I was not on council at that time, but I I don't know, Councilor Riley, if this is what you were thinking of, but when that application came through, that was a land use application.

And I seem to recall there was some discussion at that time about the amount of park space that would be um included in that development plan.

And um there were some advocates, community advocates that thought that amount of park space was reduced from what the um Southeast Area Plan kind of called for.

Um I'm I do wonder you don't you don't have a site plan for emblem, do you?

I I don't see it in the no because that's not that's not part of the yeah, I believe there's some early iterations of the plan that showed a potential little park site.

They really the larger park is located in the bottom right of the southeast area.

Um they were really trying to meet their open space requirement, which they met when they came back in.

That one plan had shown a park like a private park in there before, but their their main requirement was for our code was meeting an open space requirement on that development, which they did in their in the revised plan.

The 10%, yeah.

Yep.

And and this project meets the 10% open space requirement.

So it's just open space, it's not park space.

It's it's been approved for its site plan, I believe, so it meets what the applicable criteria for the development are.

I I don't know if this particular one has an open space requirement for it, but it it's been approved, so it meets the criteria.

Okay.

Yeah, I'm just trying to understand, but maybe in the public comment.

If the parks department is making public comment, then maybe we'll understand a little bit more what the concern is about the parks plan being taken into consideration here.

I if I understand their request, they're asking us to incorporate their goals into the site specific policy in the same way that we are incorporating our desire for more affordable housing units and job creation in in the site specific.

And we're saying that we need that by the Southeast Area Plan.

Right.

Yes.

Okay, turn it over to the mayor real quick.

I was just gonna add that my memory was there it was not there was no BPRD park planned in this area, but it there was that private park potentially in RN, and then they changed it to meet the open space differently, and just also remind us this is RH zone land, um, and we're looking at multifamily development.

This is a little bit different than the other things that are going on in Southeast right now.

Yeah, I get I mean I I get all of that.

I think the difference between this and the RM property is that the RM is not uh a TIF district, it's a street developer, it's just a straight development.

So it's different there's different laws that apply here.

If I may mayor pro ten, um I do actually have that number.

I do have my binder with me.

Um so the total project cost is uh estimated to be 85 million.

They have uh indicated that they're going to at least have 45 percent of local contractors that will put 38.3 million into the local economy, which will generate an additional 72 million after the project is completed.

The estimated household savings impact on the local economy is 13 million.

But if the development does not occur, the estimated tax to generate over that site over the next 24 years is only 59,000.

One thing that I do want to point out that we often overlook, but is an important point of the actual policy.

Any project that gets an enhanced rebate has to produce a two to one return for our taxing districts over the same amount of time.

If it did not produce a two to one return, we would not have approved it.

So given the fact that we're only offering 24 years over the next 24 years after that, it will generate a two to one return.

So if I could just follow up then on the household savings, because if we look if we figure it's uh expected rent of 1,618 and 20% of the units are available at 70 to 90 percent, most of them are at the 90 percent.

And so if we just said, well, that probably around 300 a month difference, rough.

Maybe it's 200, maybe it's 400.

If we do that math and we take 300 a month, we multiply that by 53 units, we multiply that by 12 months and 24 years, I get 4,579,200.

But you said 13 million over 24 years?

That's right.

With the standard rental increases every year that's allowed under state statute and/or the market, that's also including so there's a there's a uh divergence over time because the the market rate goes higher than the than they're allowed.

Okay, I get it.

Uh and one of the key requirements under the has to preserve rent under the state statute, it does not apply to new developments with five or more units.

You've elected to apply the state statute for these particular ones in order to receive the rental increase or the rental restrictions.

If new developments build in the city of Bend, they are not prohibited, they are allowed to raise their rents that are applicable under the state statute.

So this is actually another level of trying to preserve affordability uh for those uh 20% of units.

So that 13 million is is it with the expected rent increases, and then I guess I would expect that to be in today's dollars and not inflation adjusted dollars.

So, yeah, everything today is in 2025 dollars, but it does include the three percent to five percent rental increases for those units uh per year.

Okay, thank you.

And there's no you're you're it right for presentations.

Um I think I'm gonna do that.

You're the whole rest of the night.

Um great.

I guess we'll move on to public testimony.

We have two signed up to speak on this topic.

Um first is Karen Johnson.

You're up, yeah.

Come to the front here.

Good evening.

Umson, the land use chair for the old farm district neighborhood association.

Um speaking on behalf of the board, uh, we support this project.

It seems like a very clever way to get some more affordable housing.

Uh hopefully it works.

Uh I'm not uh entirely familiar with the figures, but it seems like it should work out.

Our problem, one objection, is the restricted units, as have already been pointed out, they're all one bedroom.

But some of these folks are going to have families, they're going to have kids, and they're going to need at least one more bedroom.

Uh ideally perhaps two more bedrooms.

So we suggest that some of these units be designated for two bedroom and for three bedroom.

You can get two or three kids in a bedroom, but they're going to need their own bedroom.

So that's that's our only comment.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And uh last but not least is Sharon Sampson.

Yeah.

I don't have a whole lot to say.

Good evening, everyone, because everything just got covered.

I really liked the mayor's idea of a round table so that we will know in that area, because I live in that area what exactly is going on, besides just a little flyer in the mail.

Sure.

Um I I don't understand how he can fathom that even at the $1,600 a month in with three percent increases is going to be affordable housing.

This does not sound like affordable housing to me.

Uh and we are looking at almost like urban sprawl.

You know, you're very concerned with affordable housing, but you're also not looking at the picture of what we are here in Bend as far as why you've moved here, not to have everything and not to have just every open lot be called a blight, which I find very you know, every little piece of land doesn't need to be built on.

That's all.

Just for sharing.

All right, that is it for our public testimony, unless anybody else is there anyone online.

No.

All right, I will close the public hearing and we can deliberate or here on motion.

I move for the first reading of the ordinance uh adopting the umblem tax increment finance plan and establishing the tax emblem tax increment finance area.

Second.

All right.

So I'd like to just say before we cast our votes.

Uh the reason why I will not be supporting this is one, I I do disagree that the land is stagnant and unproductive, and I know that it may meet the legal definition of blight, but new construction has begun in that area.

Um I I have doubts about whether this is really the right tool to get that project moving or whether it's really necessary.

And secondly, I have questions about whether this is really the right tool.

And I I acknowledge that when we um first considered this program, um, I believe it was about a year ago or more even.

Um we may not have had the awareness to um contemplate additional tools.

I think that we're gonna get those tools uh and thanks in part to the home committee.

Um but I I can't get over the 22,102,251 dollar benefit for what feels like an insufficient amount in return.

Um I feel like it's just it's too much for what should be um a more a bigger benefit.

Um so I'm gonna I'm not gonna be supporting this one.

Okay.

Um the motion was moved by councilor Riley, seconded by Councillor Norris, all those in favor.

Mayor Mayor.

Oh, sorry, maybe Mayor, you had something to say?

Yeah, just again, as um a Southeast Bend person, I think it's really important to um remember that we want investment and we want this type of housing available across the city.

I also want to note that this is part of a Southeast Area plan that's been in place for many years now.

Um, and other than sort of the master plan neighborhoods that big developers have put in, we haven't seen a lot of this multifamily come in.

And multi-family really serves an important purpose in our community, and yes, even the one bedrooms serve an important purpose in our community, providing um different types of housing that are available to different types of families and and um people that need housing and cannot afford to buy a single family house in a master plan neighborhood built by Polish.

This some of us can.

Um, so I also want to say that there is an aspect here of helping things move forward more quickly that is a positive.

You could say we don't think this is bite, we'll wait for it to develop, and I would question how long do we wait?

Do it three years or five years or ten years, or how long do we wait for someone to take a risk and invest the money to create housing that I also will point out is right next to a commercial corner in the Southeast area.

And one of the things commercial corners you need to develop, which will be a continuing conversation we're having with the community, is you need a lot of people living right nearby.

As many people as you can have living nearby, um, including dense housing can help commercial become viable because those are customers that can return to those businesses that are very hard to maintain, especially groceries, which I've told folks before.

But so for me, this is a really important project for the area.

Um, and I think it is an incredible investment for us to get the type of um affordability that we're gonna get and just the numbers of housing that are gonna be appearing on the site.

Um, and I appreciate the comment about how we don't have to develop every little piece of land, but when we do develop land, we need to do it efficiently to meet our housing numbers, and this is a really important way to do that.

So I'm very supportive of this particular project.

I agree we continue to we can continue to refine this policy and we can change our policy goals with the site specific tech going forward, but it doesn't feel fair to say, well, I no longer like the policy that we set up, and so I don't think this project meets a policy that I want to implement in the future.

We we made the policy.

This project meets the policy, and I think it is a good investment for the area.

So I just wanted to give my support.

Yeah, we're flying.

Sure.

Uh thank you for that, Mayor.

I I do appreciate those comments, and I think that uh I actually there's a lot to like about this project.

They there was uh a new report recently released that showed that new apartments have fewer bedrooms, and about six percent of apartments have three bedroom uh or more.

Uh this one has nine percent of them have three bedrooms or more.

So I I like that.

I think that it is it is uh it's doing better than the national average in terms of supporting families.

Um and it's not necessarily the policy per se that I think I have an issue with or the project.

It's it's 26% of the construction costs are in the form of a direct subsidy, and that that just seems so uh I I have a hard time getting over that.

I think that's more generous than any of our other uh tax increment finance projects, and and because of the magnitude of it, it's it's such a large amount.

So I um I think that the project is is actually good, and I don't think that the program necessarily is bad, but the it's the magnitude for what I feel like we get in return.

Um, so I just wanted to clarify that.

I just wanted to write, I mean it's already been said, but to remind all of us that we um we've sort of taken the first pass at this, right?

With a number of projects we put it on hold or getting review, home committees talking about it tomorrow.

Um, we're going to have the opportunity to also weigh in on what we think needs to be tweaked going forward, and some of the concerns that are being raised are the kinds of things we could talk about.

So I think um as borough chair, I will make a commitment to kind of reach out to everybody one on one and see what you know if there are three to five three things that you think maybe we need to think about.

Five might be too many, but uh three three things you think we need to think about and see what kind of consensus there might be as we get into the discussion about that and watch how they line up or not with what we're hearing from home.

But um, because you know we committed to this policy and give it a trial.

I'm I'm comfortable um moving forward with the ones that have come forward before us, knowing that the whole point was to learn, pause, and reevaluate, and we're gonna have a chance to do that shortly.

Thank you, Council.

Any other comments before we vote?

No, I just appreciate the 70% too.

You know, you have the 80 to 90 percent, and then going above and beyond and having that 70, I know is challenging to make a pencil project.

So a project pencil.

So thanks, Val.

All right, we have a motion and a second on the floor.

Um, I'll call the vote.

Um, all those in favor?

Aye.

Aye, all those opposed, all right.

Item number six.

This is the second reading of an ordinance amending to bend municipal code title sixteen to update the city's requirements for post-construction site runoff control in compliance with the city's municipal separate store what stormwater sewer systems permit.

May I make a motion?

Yes, please.

I move for the second meeting and adoption by roll call vote of the ordinance amending Ben Municipal Code Title 16 to update the city's requirements for post-construction site runoff control and compliance with the city's municipal separate stormwater sewer system permit.

Councilor Francosa would give us one to council.

Um, it's a roll call vote.

Yes, sorry.

Counselor Francesa?

Yes.

Counselor Mendez.

Yes.

Councilor Riley.

Yes.

Mayor Proton Perkins.

Yes.

Councillor Norris.

Yes.

Counselor Platt.

I think Mayor Keybler.

Yes.

All right.

And under several is our our uh B team presidents manager's report.

Uh some of the Grayson, the honorable Russ Grayson.

So I'll I've got uh a couple just updates, so a couple fun things.

Fall fest is this weekend, just a reminder.

So there will be some closures downtown for that event.

Also, this weekend on Saturday, October 4th from 10 to 1 at the North Fire Station is then fire and rescue open house event where they're inviting the public to come and climb on the equipment and a lot of family-friendly activities going up there to to learn about all the things that the fire department does.

Uh looking forward uh November 3rd, we have an open house at the Larksburg Community Center for the remarket uh overcrossing project with the community.

So just marking that the calendars, and then also just so council's aware we're starting to see the neighborhood district annual meetings um start to appear, and staff's going to several of these to provide presentations and be there to be able to answer questions.

If you have any questions about what where they are or what's going on, you can reach out to myself or Renee, and we can get you connected.

But staff is planning to attend those.

Another just quick update.

There's some new economic development reports that you can view on our economic development uh webpage, including the uh a housing report, a state of the economy report, and target sectors report.

Um those just got uh put on.

So if you have you can see that if you have any questions, you can reach out to Jonathan or Katie Brooks.

Also, just so you know, we have the upcoming work session next week on the transportation funding priorities.

Um, in the material that we're gonna be writing, just so you know, there's gonna be a memo in there that is a joint memo between our between Ryan and our engineering group and our transportation group on just the status of where we are with all the transportation system plan programs and projects.

So if you've been through the what we call the TSP, there's a list of near mid and long-term projects as well as programs.

This is gonna give you an update on where we where we are.

Um, and it's actually I would say quite impressive of what what we've done to date and and everything we've got on the ground and and what's what's in the pipeline.

Um we will also have the a uh a joint letter from that TVC and cab meeting on their recommendation that'll be in the packet, as well as the current capital improvement program um plans for you to look at for those projects because we'll be talking about a couple of those things as we move through that.

Uh some other uh kind of this is this is a good good news program.

Um so in water services, we have that low income assistance program with our utility billing.

Um, there's a new program that was launched in October of 2023, uh, and it's open to all low-income households.

We also use that as a basis for the transportation fee reduction as well.

It's administered in partnership with neighbor impact.

Enrollment has increased significantly since we started that program.

So before that, and if you look back before two years before in 2022 and 2023, we had about 150 to 200 households that benefited from the old program.

We gave out about 60 to 70,000 per year in assistance in 2024.

We had over 400 households take advantage of that program and administered uh just around 120,000 worth of uh assistance, and we are on track to exceed both of those numbers in the calendar year of 2025.

As part of that, um, shutoffs have also decreased dramatically.

Uh 2023, we had 415 shutoffs.

2024, we had 231, and we're looking at less this year.

So that that there's benefits of those programs in terms of not only helping people maintain their bills, but also making sure that we don't have to shut water off, as it is a as everyone knows, a very critical part of everyday life.

And the last exciting news is around the public works campus up in Juniper Ridge.

So we are starting to move staff into that facility next week.

Um we're moving our our facility folks and our IT folks up there, and then uh our transportation mobility group and engineering group move up in mid-October.

The main reason for that is not only want to get people in the facility, but we also want to make sure David and his team are set up for winter operations because as you get towards the the end of October, snow could start flying at any time.

And as one who just bought my ski pass.

And then uh moves will continue through November with water services and fleet moving up there in November.

I just toured the site and went up there and took a look today.

It's a very impressive facility.

It is really nice to see a facility that is built for its intended purpose.

We've been to our current facilities you can see how we've kind of kind of used duct tape and billing wire to make sure they work well.

But it's very exciting.

We'll have events up there.

Um, we're planning to get uh council up there after the first of the year.

We're gonna let the teams kind of get adjusted in there in that new facility, but definitely looking to use that not only just for that but also for other public meetings and things like that.

And that's it.

Thanks, Ryan.

I have two questions.

One, what's the time for the November 3rd open house?

The time market one.

The read market one is from 5:30 to 7.30 at the Larksport Community Center.

And then are you able to give us a summary of what T Bach and CAB basic recognition?

Yeah, uh some of us kind of heard about this the other day, but I think yeah, at a at a high level, they are uh one when we had a conversation with them.

We we uh said you can have individual letters because you both represent different kind of you've been charged with different tasks by city council, so we want to make sure that you're looking through the appropriate lens of each of your committees through those discussions.

Are actually gonna they they both came to the same conclusion, so they'll be providing a joint letter from both committees on that, which basically highlights um the agree with you on kind of continuing to monitor Greenwood and leave it in its current state, continue the design of that that ODOT arts program to look at the second street crossing, knowing that we can come back and have later conversations on costs and timing around that and whether or not we want to pursue that.

They agreed to move forward with the additional transportation planning dollars around the Hawthorne Bridge to get that product to look at those, what what else needs to happen around there, and then have that conversation next year when we get the results of that and we know what the cost of the bridges the bridge is at um in terms of what additional work may we may want to do there.

And both groups really landed on stay of the course on Franklin.

Um they're basically going to recommend build it, build it as design, including the uphill bike lanes on both sides of the underpass.

So that will be what the recommendation is going to be.

There, um, there's versions of that letter going back and forth right now, but you should be getting that soon.

So it was a very I was saying it was a very good discussion.

Um, and I think both groups representing their their committees very well in that discussion.

Thank you.

Yep.

On that note, I will adjourn the city council uh meeting and pass the gavel to my first act is going to be to say let's take a very short break.

Yes, we can do that, sir.

So we'll be back here somewhere around uh 7.37 or so.

Renewal agency for October 1st, 2025.

Do we need to do a call for this meeting?

Okay, come start with you, Council.

Here Megan Norris, she her Megan Perkins, she her.

Mike Riley, heel Mendoz here.

Gina Franzosa, she her.

And there's the mayor.

Can you say that again, Melanie?

We couldn't hear.

Uh-oh.

We still don't have sound at our end.

Yeah.

Okay, well, okay.

Okay, well, we know you're here because you've nodded and I'll ask Juan to help us with that.

Um this is the public hearing and adoption of a resolution establishing program fees for fiscal year 2025 to 2026.

Okay, I'll open the public hearing and over time.

Uh good evening, Chair, members of the commission.

Um, there is no presentation because this is a simple fee resolution.

In August, you passed the affordable housing loan policy through the Bend Urban Renewal Agency.

This is only applying the one percent origination fee to those loan application documents.

The one percent loan, the one percent origination fee is to go into finance to help process those loans and also to set up the loan documents if we have an application.

Um, do we have any questions for staff on burn members?

So it's just the one that's the only thing that changes here.

Yes.

Yeah, that wasn't that totally clear on the document itself.

So I wanted to same question.

That's the only changes the decision for that.

Okay.

Anything else from council?

No.

Is there any public comment in person or online?

Nobody online.

Okay, and I'll close the public hearing.

Any further discussion from council or we'll take the motion.

I move to adopt the resolution updating the fees for fiscal year 2025-2026 as presented.

So Grant.

Move by um member forkins and seconds by member Norris.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Anybody opposed?

No.

Okay.

Pass it's mean and asked to adopt a resolution rescinding the core area business assistant program, establishing the core area revitalization effort grant program, and authorizing the core area board to make grant award decisions.

Take it away, John.

Good evening, Chair.

Uh, tonight, staff is presenting the core area revitalization effort program or more euphemism care for our core.

A little bit of background about where we have been and where we are going on April 5th of 2023.

A little bit of background about where we have been and where we are going on April 5th of 2023, the Bend Urban Renewal Agency adopted the core area business assistance program.

It was a program that provided matching grants for eligible projects inside the core area.

Some of those eligible projects can include both internal and external improvements.

Design assistance and construction assistance.

If the applicant chose construction assistance, most of the projects had to have a lifespan of 10 years or more, which is kind of the standard for transient lodging tax and urban renewal projects.

Borough approved 9 99,500 during the two 2023-2024 funding cycle for six businesses.

On June 26, 2025, CAB reviewed the existing program to determine its overall effectiveness.

What they found is that 83% of the funding went to internal improvements.

And through that policy update and conversation, CAB recommended that the program, this program should focus on external improvements to aid in the improving the visualization of the area.

The proposed update, there is a specific purpose regarding the program.

It's to improve, expand, or attract new customers or pedestrian facing traffic within the core area.

It does maintain the matching grant program as was under the core area business assistance program.

It changed the award methodology, so it's just a simple 50% matching grant with an award up to $50,000, which means a project could be a hundred thousand dollars and the project could be eligible for a $50,000 grant.

25% of that 50% match can be used for design assistance.

This can only be applied to capital upgrades or improvements to an existing building facade or some sort of customer-facing exterior.

CAB wanted a rolling application process just to keep the word on the street.

So if a business was ready to apply at any time, they didn't have to wait another quarter or another year.

We are proposing an innovative approach.

Would you like me to speak to that now?

Sure, that would be very important.

So the code provision that the commenter was reading from is um from 1.20005 subsection B.

And the sentence he read is in there.

The prior sentence in the sentence that starts this section says unless explicitly authorized by other formal action of the city council.

And we apply this section also to the actions of BURA.

So with the adoption of this policy by resolution, that will be the formal action of BURA that the code does allow you to take to delegate that authority.

AHAC, the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, was delegated the authority to make binding decisions on system development charge exemptions for affordable housing.

So this, while not exactly the same, it's a similar delegation that has been done in the past.

And it's within the adopted budget limits for the year, right?

Specific about that.

That's right.

The only funds that CAB will have available to award would be within the adopted budget.

Um as well, I'll also point out that the awards up to $50,000 are within the city manager's authority to spend without the approval of borough or city council, so long as those are also in the budget.

So we think this is in alignment with existing procurement authority as well, but is authorized under the code, provided you take the formal action today.

Yeah.

So I mean I appreciate the commenters' attention to oversight and accountability, but I think for the reasons you said it seems like this is a solid way to move forward.

And I think you know, part of the discussion of CAB was that really just wanting to for them to have a little bit more engagement, like you know, have a way to keep this rolling and not be dependent on counsel for something that is um got very um clear borders from the budget perspective.

I'll I'll also say a comment.

Um, I believe from the same gentleman came in about conflicts and potential and actual conflicts.

So with the adoption of this and delegation of the authority to CAB, um, typically all of our bodies just have uh potential conflicts if they have any at all because they are making recommendations on this matter.

This could involve actual conflicts.

Um, so the actual conflicts rule from state law will apply.

The policy addresses this, and both with this and the prior program that's being rescinded tonight.

CAB went one step further than I think is the minimum requirements of state law and said both if the CAB member or their family or a business they're associated with is an applicant, or if you're adjacent to an applicant, you're uh recused and not able to participate in the decision making process.

So that's in the policy.

Um and if there's nothing we could do to exempt anyone from the actual conflicts rules of the state, they would apply whether the policy said it or not.

Uh but we want it to be clear they do apply.

So physically adjacent if the bill that's yes, yeah, okay.

Right.

Well, I guess the I mean I think I'm comfortable with it because of the $50,000 cap.

But I guess I would ask it is that the reason why we wouldn't just say make a recommendation in the same way that the affordable housing advisory committee does, and then borough would in this case um approve of it, but we would have uh it would be you know uh the borough's final discretion or prerogative to make changes if it wanted to.

Well a hack is delegated for STC exemptions without having to come.

Yes, but I mean in their grant making capacity, they make recommendations that council then approves of, and I I mean I think that works.

The amounts are higher, more than 50,000, and so it's you know, there's maybe there's a reason to say fifty thousand dollars is within it's you know, it's similar to it's the same level that the city manager is is uh already uh uh capable of uh acting unilaterally on and without council consent.

So but is there a reason why you wouldn't want to say make a recommendation that this body would then approve of?

Is it you just feel like it's well that I mean this policy proposal is coming with a lot of input from Borough, I mean from CAV, excuse me.

Um and I think they would like to just make sure that we can keep these things really rolling on a regular basis.

And I think we have a group of people who's very focused on the core area and looking out for the best interests of it.

Um I'm comfortable just given the sideboards we have on the amount of money here.

I think some of those other awards are talking about bigger numbers, generally speaking, that are recommendations from how may hack.

I believe that's correct.

Yeah, and I'll just I'll just clarify the city manager's spending authority under the procurement code is 250,000.

So this is limited to 50,000 grants.

Thank you.

So I think it's real, you know, partly just to keep just really kind of keep it rolling and have another group of people can that can assist.

We also have a person of one over here who's doing a lot, right?

And so I to some extent it kind of just reduces the overall workload and can kind of keep these proposals moving forward.

Yeah, I feel I feel comfortable with this.

Um, and I trust in their judgment.

Um, and um these are people that on on CAB that have um real experience um in this area are deeply um ingrained in in the core area and um want it to succeed, and so I I'm I'm fine with this.

I think it's it's actually a really good idea.

I mean, we could ask CAP to come back and report to us after the first year or so and say how many projects was involved, were there conflicts, what were the you know, what do we get out of it?

Well, I guess what I'm worried about is not necessarily this current body, but in the future, thinking about if if the views of of the members of this body diverged from Borough, it's you know, there would be an awkward position for this body to say, well, it's our prerogative to spend this money however we want.

You don't get to say it now.

Granted, it's only $50,000 per project, but having seen this happen in Portland, where the views of an urban renewal agency were pretty divergent from the views of a of the city council, it seems like this is a step down that direction.

And so I feel like I would be more comfortable just saying give us the recommendation, we can look at it and make sure that you know we've we're doing our due diligence and then say, okay, I don't see that we don't, you know, it's I don't see it as that burdensome, and I don't see it as slowing things down necessarily.

It's you know a matter of a couple of weeks or something.

But that you know, I I don't think it's unreasonable either way.

So I think I I see support amongst everybody in the room.

Sounds like you have some concerns, and assuming that support from the mayor as well.

Um we have a couple options.

We can just take a straight up vote, or you can try to and you would propose to amend this a little bit.

Um I would just yeah.

Um that question for Jonathan, in case this is helpful.

Um, with the other grant program, were there any applicants that were denied the grant?

And so no.

I mean, how in demand is the program well now that it's a contentious, you know, if it's like really like uh competitive, I guess, is the word, then you know, maybe there that would be a really good argument for you know, tough decisions to come before the elected body.

Um so I cannot say they won't be competitive because there is now generated interest because they've been calling the office and asking like when is the quarterly business assistance program coming on back online, and that expressed to those business owners, as well as CAB members that are out there uh meeting with businesses, getting to know the area that I can't for like I can't forecast that it won't be competitive as a staff person representing Borough and Urban Rolle Agency.

I hope it is competitive that would generate a lot of interest.

But in terms of staff capacity and also what CAB has been talking about during their investment strategy, it is hard to get on the schedule of city council slash borough to do minor awards.

Um you do have a lot coming before you over the next year, and this was just an attempt not only to kind of empower one of your advisory boards but also to free up some of the the minor investments.

We're not proposing at this time to not bring back major site development assistance or loans or anything like that, not to this body, but this is just general grant awards just to improve the visualization of the area.

We did, oh I did, and so I think Elizabeth you can always request a full report at the end of every year on money spent.

It is budgeted in your adopted uh biennium budget for 200,000 for this particular grant award.

So I'm telling CAB 100,000 this year, 100,000 this year, don't spend all the kitty in one year, but um you can always ask for that, or you can make policy recommendations or changes on the dais.

Um mayor keybler, yeah, you yeah.

Let me just make sure my mic is working now.

Yep, we can hear you.

Okay.

Yeah, I'm I am comfortable with it as um as proposed here, and one of the things Jonathan already said, but there is a there is a barrier in getting front of Borough Board again.

Um, and with these amounts of money and with these sideboards, I'm comfortable having the the CAB make the decisions.

I think we could also um give direction after the first hundred thousand goes out that we receive a report.

And I I don't think that would be hard for us to do, even if it's out of meeting or not, but that we just get a rundown of what went out and um were there any conflicts, and then that could make if there is a need to change the policy, we would see it at that point.

But I think I'd be comfortable with moving forward right now.

And I was gonna suggest the same thing that we can just um uh put that I guess in our minutes and convey it to CAD that after the first hundred thousand dollars, we'd like some kind of summary report on what the projects were and what the out you know the projected outcomes are gonna be if they're not complete yet, and if there were any conflicts.

And there's no sunset provision here, but I guess the mechanism would be through the the biannual budget to fund the program.

So if for example we lost confidence in their program, you know, just zeroed out or something like that.

You have control through the budget process, and then you can also amend the policy if you want to run a time.

Okay, okay.

I moved to adopt the road.

Jonathan has more presentation or were you done?

No, I was just gonna kind of give you an idea of what uh you did approve last year.

You approved uh $18,000 for Dogwood, which is part of that whole second street revitalization, which obviously this is what it looks like today, which we we thank Borough for investing in second street.

Um, and then in addition, uh, because we also know that a child care is important to the city council, uh Borough for CAB recommended $7,250 for Timber Kitties Preschool, $13,000 for Growing Tree Children's Center, and then we provided um Colima Market 24,000.

Uh uh Marcos with Daisy property management, 17,000.

Open space studios did apply and received 18,000, but they have um some site plans and project changes they rescinded their application, so that $18,000 didn't go out.

So it was a wide variety.

Uh one uh concern that has been expressed is what about the internal improvements moving forward?

Because a lot of those built buildings in the core area need some internal improvements.

That is a part of CAB's work plan that you've charged them with for next year's quarter one.

Is what are other incentives can you provide to help prevent displacement, revitalization not only of the exterior, but making the interior worthy of being in business and being up to code.

So that's part of their broader work plan, but this is just kind of that visualization ribbon cutting, making the area feel good.

So we're not essentially losing potentially we're not losing that business assistance piece that's just gonna come up next.

Correct.

And that'll be a part of the investment uh investment strategy on December 3rd.

But we can give you a preview on October 15th.

I move to adopt the resolution.

We're sending the core area business assistance program, establishing the core area revitalization effort grant program, authorizing the core area advisory board to make grant award decisions and authorizing the city manager and staff to implement the program without further borough action, including signing grant agreements and related documents.

Second, so move by um member Mendez and seconded by member.

All those in favor, aye, anybody closed?

Anybody posed?

Okay, great.

Stay up here for a minute.

Yeah.

Okay.

So other than Matt, who's been uh all about Juniper Ridge, I want to provide a little bit of background of the Juniper Ridge Urban or Null strategy and plan.

Uh, because we haven't done a lot up there through Urban and Null this year or last year.

Uh it was established in 2005.

It has a 30-year plan horizon.

The current maximum indemnity is 41,500,000.

The goals of the area is to support development of high quality employment within the area that includes uh commercial, flight industrial, mixed use development, as well as housing, which will bring back a potential minor amendment in the future.

Preserve and enhance the area's natural assets, improve traffic and transportation, and provide public utilities.

Some of the major projects that BURA has funded was Cooley and Talus extensions all the way across the urban or old area.

100,000 in development assistance under this actual program approved in 2023, and approximately 3 million dollars to ODOT improvements on US 97 interchange.

A little bit about about the background of Juniper Ridge development assistance.

It was adopted on August 31st, 2020 by Borough.

It provides annual reimbursements up to 75% of the property tax generated on the new projects within the area, but it also has a cap of 10% of the total development project.

The program supports eligible eligible activities associated with commercial and industrial projects, including construction, property acquisition, and site preparation and improvements.

This policy is intended to advance and support the planned area's goals.

And like I said just a slide ago, the program has awarded 100,000 to two businesses in 2023.

A little bit about the project.

If you do have questions, the applicant is here tonight.

This is where the area is.

It's along Cooley and Talus Road.

Um it is by Taylor Brooks, 29.1 million dollars for the total project cost.

It is in an employment sub-district of the Juniper Ridge Overlay.

It's an eight-acre site, more commonly known as lot six.

It is a phase development of a six-building campus that will provide light industrial and commercial spaces.

They are improving Northeast Andesite and Northeast Triton Place.

The proposed end users are expected to be in the advanced manufacturing and pharmaceutical distribution industries, and the project employment is expected to add about 300 to 500 jobs.

How does this relate to the furthering development of Juniper Ridge?

As you see, there is a phase land sale and development of Juniper Ridge.

It will assist with the continued improvement of the area's transportation system.

It continues to utilize large tract land of existing green fields.

The construction of Andesite and Triton will expand access to additional parcels for the affordable housing and employment, and it will assist with the rebranding of the area for future development.

In the recommended development assistance agreement, the terms of the agreement are for the developer to complete the project as phased project within five years.

Submit final invoices to certified total development cost.

They must pay property taxes annually and on time.

Borough will award 4.3 million in a total rebate of that 4.3 million.

They will only receive 75% of those taxes annually, and no assistance will be provided if the project is completed with within five years.

Do we have any questions for staff from Borough?

Okay, Jonathan, could you share a little bit more specifically about what the 4 million 315,977 supports in terms of on-site and off-site improvements?

Yes.

So it will be a reimbursement for the construction of the full and a site because they were only they would have only been required to do three-fourths of the road.

They have completed the entire road of the project, which opens up the adjacent parcel on the other side for potential SB 8 affordable housing, so it'll lower the cost for that.

In addition, it's the entire road, just to be clear is like from the edge of the sidewalk.

It's the north-south route.

Yeah.

Yeah, yeah.

But it's both like one side, both sides of the road.

Yeah, both sides of the road.

Matt has something to add.

Yeah, I'll let Matt is the this is this area.

Good evening, Borough.

That's the real estate facilities.

Uh, under this, they built curb to curve asphalt sidewalk on one side and actually a low stress network on the west side that intentionally will be built up and the site all the way to the park eventually as that road continues to grow.

And Matt, while you're up here, could you describe um what potential restrictions on building this area that might prevent us from getting the best and highest use, you know, in terms of density, for example.

Yes, so this area has um C C and Rs, June Purge C C and Rs, which has height limitations in it, as we're granted a Leshwab and we encourage Les Schwab to develop in 2010, 2011.

So they're height restrictions on this property that limit the general building height, I think it is about 35 feet.

So they really can't go above 35 feet uh pretty much for this entire portion here west of Les Schwab.

So that inhibits the buildings building to kind of maximize the site, so they really have kind of maximize that they can with the property.

And how extensive of an area do those C C and Rs apply to extend pretty much everything west of Les Schwab.

So the area where the star is, the lot just to the north, and if you just take that green line where the slots are, go all the way to the through the purple.

And does it also include the affordable housing?

It will.

Yes.

Okay.

So we'll be the highest point will be about 36 feet.

So if it if if the if that restriction wasn't there, we could we could conceivably fit more affordable housing in.

We could probably reserve more open space and still achieve the same number of homes.

Correct.

The height limit for the employment set you have is either 50 or 60 feet.

IL I believe is 50 feet.

Yeah, but we would do it.

It can go up higher to 60 depending on your setbacks.

We would default back to the standard setbacks in the code, but this wasn't as Matt mentioned when that Les Schwab headquarters went in.

This was one of the things as part of that land sale of that was it was basically protecting view corridors to the mountains to the west on those adjacent properties, and it was just a decision made at that time with the sale of that property.

Correct.

And I understand that it would be difficult to say the least to change those C C and R restrictions.

Yes, they're a entitlement recorded with the property, and Les Schwab has specific language within those C C N Rs that gives them the final say on whether they that height limitation is removed or not.

So we would have to negotiate directly with them as a right as a property owner.

And being discussions with not only this property but adjacent properties, Lesh Schwab is very interested in maintaining that.

I don't think they want to give they would give up that right easily.

Thank you, Matt.

Where's the last Schwab again?

They are uh right next to the other side of the other side.

North East Corner.

There we go.

They were the first development that occurred at Juniper Ridge.

Yep.

Thank you.

Um, did other folks have questions?

Um I have one.

Can we talk a little bit about the prevailing wage?

So when reviewing the policy today, uh, we got a lot of little concern about the pro that prevailing wage language that's in the policy, but I think I understand it, but just so that everybody in the room does.

Sure, absolutely.

Yeah, and we have actually had this question of the policy before, so we understand um the confusion that has arisen.

So the policy says um the the language means if your project is subject to prevailing wage under the prevailing wage laws of Oregon, you have to comply and pay prevailing wage.

It's not um an independent application of prevailing wage, two projects, all projects funded under this policy.

Um we do have Bowley's issued at least one opinion that includes um the language that attacks rebate would not trigger prevailing wage.

So we don't believe it's applicable uh to this project.

It's uh the responsibility of the developer to comply with the prevailing wage law as if independently of this policy, those rules apply.

Okay.

All right.

Will we have the opportunity to do anything about addressing uh how hard it is to cross Cooley Road?

That'll be a less question.

Yeah, I mean, we are kind of that would go into the kind of the bucket of everything going on in the city.

That's one of the things, and if there's interest in that, that's one of the things we can look at future um projects within the urban renewal district if that is of interest to council.

It is a double-lane roundabout out there, so it does have those kind of concerns that have been brought up before around pedestrian crossings at that.

Um but if there's interest in that, Matt, I don't know if you could we could look at that because there is there is potential funding up there to make improvements.

The road itself more than a three-lane road with the middle term lane, or is it no?

It's a three-lane.

There is a turn lane, usually designated.

Why is it a four lanes for the roundabout?

So it's just it's just a double lane roundabout.

It's two lane entries on all four legs.

Um double in the middle.

We've as part of the low stress network, we are trying to make connections.

So on the very south property where the light blue property is, if you continue all the way, we are as we go through the UGB process.

We have a piece of property there that's actually technically not in city limits.

That's it ideally where we'd like to put the low stress network to make that connection to eventually get all the way up to the canal.

That would actually go continue west in between the school site, because that I don't even want to try to point because I can't do it, but right back here.

And then ideally we would create a new crossing that would tie into the low stress network that goes up to North Point Park, which is up here.

So I think as we continue to develop and build out that low stress network, I think we'll see improved crossings on 18th and cooling this section to have uh much less interrupted crossings for those folks that try to make that loop and connection.

And with a lot of areas will continue to monitor.

The good thing is Juniper Ridge is seeing a lot of development now, which is a very positive sign is that it's that is set for a while.

So as these issues come up, um we're more than well to continue to have conversations and work through the issues.

Is there is there an opportunity for us tonight to use any of this money for traffic calming?

I've heard people have overheard people boast that they've driven on uh Northeast 18th Street and hit 80 miles an hour, and they they use it as a drag racing strip, and it's it feels like that's what it should be when when you look at how long and straight it is, but I think this is outside the bounds.

So this would be outside the bounds, but however, part of your investment strategy also for Juniper Rich can incorporate a lot of this.

We've only expanded about 7.9% of our maximum indebtedness, so there is there is a lot of capacity and room to incorporate a lot of uh boroughs goals for the area development.

Just not with this development, just not with this development system.

Yeah, this development this development is not required to do anything on 18th uh or any improvements down there, so it's kind of outside the bounds of what's required for development.

And and Borough would be limited to uh projects within the boundaries of the urban renewal area.

I think much of the straight section.

So coolie is in the outside of the 18th of the same.

Some of Cooley is in, yes.

This is the whole boundary.

Yeah, yeah.

So south of this 18th is outside of the boundary.

Okay.

So the next time we're we're gonna be talking about uh potential expansion of this or options or different things.

Yeah, that's coming.

We're starting that conversation later this year.

On December 3rd, we'll bring back an option for you to consider regarding overall Juniper Ridge management and terms.

We also have that, and then also just with the transportation funding that we have now available, that kind of programmatically we can look at the different different ways to look at that issue.

I guess that was my point is if that meeting is there's some opportunity to talk a little bit about uh the investment strategy a little bit and you know some of the safety concerns that counselor mendez is bringing up not necessarily answering all the questions that night, but at least getting clarity about what they are and what some options might be some conversation what what can be included and kind of what what what can't be included in and when when you look at doing any modifications or changes to that area?

Definitely do that.

So thank you.

I I have a I have a couple questions.

Um this one's geeky, but the maximum indebtedness does that take into account the four point whatever or 40 million.

Does that take into account the um publicly owned land now in Juniper Ridge?

Yeah, so the the 41 million is for the entire existing district.

So um but then it's like the public works campus yes isn't generating increments but it wasn't generating increment prior to that either.

Because it was publicly owned land, so all publicly owned land in the Juniper Ridge area does not generate any taxes.

It is within the urban district, but it just doesn't generate taxes.

So to do the calculation of maximum indebtedness took that into account.

Yes.

Okay.

Yeah.

That's the set value that that the urban district has the ability to spend up to.

Isn't that based?

But isn't that based on the increment?

And so there wouldn't be increment from the property.

Correct.

Right.

So if you're not going to be able to do it because it's all greenfield, so it's based on the frozen base of pretty much 300 acres in 2005.

That was just basically raw green-filled land.

Um this is common with urban rural districts that are trying to spur industrial development on undeveloped land.

Because you have to base it on the frozen base associated with now on December 3rd, we will bring back options even regarding the true maximum indebtedness plan expansion, all those type of things on December 3rd to have you work through that uh for your investment strategy.

But the 41.5 million is just the the established base.

I think the frozen base in those calculations would have assumed some sale of land by the city into private hands since most of it has been publicly owned since the prior to this.

At one point in time, there's consideration of of a four-year university up in this area as well.

So there was that that was and we can we can bring some history back on kind of how they got to that number if there's interest.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um and so the program that we're using here is um up to 75% of property tax increment generated from new projects.

So that would be a huge number, right?

Up to 10% of the total development cost.

So it looks like the application is just for the 10%, like basically up to the maximum.

Correct.

Um so when I look at the application and the kind of the pro forma, so like the infrastructure cost is like three million.

Um I guess I'm just wondering.

I feel like there should be a little bit more of a basis for awarding um the maximum allowable.

Um, because there might be, I mean, we're theoretically, there are gonna be a lot of other projects that come forward for development assistance.

Um, so I don't know.

I mean, if it's if it's not a risk of like maximizing the available development assistance, I guess for the URA, then maybe it's not an issue, but you know so if I if I think I'm understanding your question, the the rebate will be based on the value of the assessment at the time by the assessor.

So the the max is 4.3, but it could take them uh I think I have 17 years in the uh exhibit.

If the value is lower, it will take longer, but there is a term limit currently on Juniper Ridge.

If it's higher, it would get that rebate quicker.

It's only 75% of what the assessor assesses that year at their value.

So if it was a hundred thousand dollars, the maximum they can get paid out that one year 75.

Yes.

So that doesn't change 25 left for Borough to use for the purposes.

And and when the program was created, that was also kind of like we want to spur development, which we still do, but we do need additional increment in order to further like major transportation projects.

So if we said no to this, they would still be responsible for building these these street improvements.

It would just be an exaction in what made when they move forward with the project.

Correct.

But in our conversations with the applicant, the you know, they're a local-based company with cash-based systems, so that 4.3 million more than likely will be reinvested back into Juniper Ridge.

And by the work that they have done that was a little above and beyond what was required.

Um, where it just helps us facilitate getting that port that that long rectangle that's on the media western boundary to move forward towards affordable housing there.

We have some more policy work to do in terms of being able to use um urban renewal resources from this urban renewal area to support affordable housing.

Yes, um, but um it does kind of help us move there a little bit faster.

That was, I think, staff's interest in this was just trying to get that site ready and look at the overall cost to develop if that turns into a housing site.

Yeah, okay.

So I think we're ready for some mission.

Oh, go ahead, Mayor.

Thanks.

Um, just from this discussion, you know, I just want to note with the timeline on this.

This was this policy was implemented when literally nobody on the dice was on council.

Yeah.

Um, and so I would like to revisit it a little bit, and I'm wondering if it can maybe come in that December 3rd meeting um just to look at this and making sure that it's aligned with what we're gonna be doing in this area.

Um, and I'm just gonna note that like we we've done this sort of thing with our housing policies in TIFF where we're very we're very much almost constantly re-evaluating, pausing, trying to look at them again.

I think we should do that with this as well.

I think it's fair to say let's look at this um now that it's been in place for five years and see if there's anything we need to do.

It sounds like we needed to just clean up some language too that's confusing.

So if that's possible for staff to wrap this into December 3rd, that's what I um would recommend or ask for, but otherwise I'm I'm fine going forward with what we have in front of us today, too.

I I appreciate you bringing that up because I have some concerns and would like to see some clarity about purpose and the why behind why the policy exists.

I don't think it's uh very transparent.

You have to maybe dig through some other places if you're just a member of the public and even just makes it frankly easier for council um to remind ourselves about that.

So I I support that at least having a clear pathway on December 3rd of when we're gonna get to that uh review um pretty quickly, if not then.

Yeah, I think we when we come in December 3rd, there's gonna be a series of questions that we're gonna be asking council around the urban rural districts, which will lead to further conversations, including potentially this.

So one more question.

Um about timeline.

Uh so construction on the infrastructure has already begun.

Is that is that what I see in the application?

Thanks, Jalen.

And you trees about construction of the your overall construction timeline, horizontal and vertical.

Uh Jade Mayor of the CFO of Brooks Resources Corporation here on behalf of TV Bend, uh the landowner here.

Um the infrastructure is completed, both and decide and uh Talus.

Um, three of the six buildings are currently under construction.

The other three are in various states of uh of planning and getting approval through the city of Bend.

Um we're very excited about this project.

Uh it's uh it's a very significant investment in Juniper Ridge.

When you look at that map that uh Jonathan had up earlier, we view ourselves very much as partners with you folks.

You have significantly more land holdings in the area.

Uh we've recently closed on about 95 acres of that land from you folks.

Um, and we have big plans to continue the development and try to bring more like industrial land into that area.

So specifically with NOCO with with uh lot six, yeah.

We hope to have that construction completed in the next uh 18 months, roughly.

Are we required to only ask about this project?

Because it's rare that we have it is what's before us.

So I'm gonna be a little careful about not going too far afield from a time perspective.

I'm sure Jade would make time for you if you want to know about it.

I would say if there's interest when we come back in that december when there's interest about the overall policy and kind of direction of what's going on in Juniper Ridge, we are more than happy to provide some some additional information on that.

Okay.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

I move to approve a development assistance agreement and substantially the form presented with Taylor Brooks LLC for reimbursement of site development costs for junior per ridge lot six in an amount not to exceed $4,315,977.

Second.

Okay, move by member Perkins and seconded by member Norris.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Anybody posed?

Okay.

Last item on our agenda.

Thank you all.

Yep.

Thanks.

For tax increment assistance related to the development of 24 residential units within the core area tax increment finance area.

Do you need a brief rest or a stool, maybe?

No, I'm myself, so we don't have a pad there for you.

Again, good evening, Chair, members of the agency.

Uh, this is the culmination of the first site-specific program that's actually entering into a development agreement.

Your staff packet and also the presentation was a lot more than what we normally put on this, but we wanted to be very transparent and open what the terms are and what the project is.

Where the project is located is at 17 Northwest Irving Street.

It is in the core area.

It is the first kind of major.

Actually, it is the first multifamily unit development.

Um, in addition to jack straw that is occurring in the core area.

So that's a significant milestone.

Uh, it is near the future Hawthorne Bridge crossing.

Um, just a recap of what the project is.

It is a 5.4 million dollar uh 24 unit multifamily product.

The average market rate rent was $1,800.

Uh the occupancy of the certificate of occupancy is expected in 2027.

This particular project is going to be owned and operated uh in a long-term holding by an individual that lives locally.

Um they did qualify for the extended rebate.

They have dedicated 50% of all units at 80 and 90 percent, roughly 10 percent 80, 10 percent 90 for 24 years.

The reduced rent average is around 1,500.

And in addition, they also are providing local contractors, but then in the conversation since July 16, they're also doing uh multifamily market solutions energy efficiency as well.

This is the breakdown, six units studio 80 percent at 80 percent AMI and six units at 90 percent AMI well the terms of the agreement.

Uh the owner has to restrict 12 units at um the 90 percent and below, with specifically six at 80 percent and six at 90 percent.

They have to maintain um rent increases below the statutory maximums.

They also have to obtain the energy trust multifamily market solutions good.

They are going to use at least 30 percent of local contractors in construction.

They have to maintain all of these elements, both the rent restrictions and then also the rent increases for the preceding 12 months prior, and they have to annually certify compliance and pay property taxes.

Burr's terms of the agreement are as such 1.2 million dollars is the total assistance that was approved.

They have elected to use partial uh of that at 490,000 490,000 for system development charge payments to the city of Bend.

They will receive the remaining as an additional rebate of 742,000 dollars uh reversed over 23 years.

The anticipated start date for collection as well as annual certification for affordability is 2028, and the termination date will be 2050, which is in correspondence with the TIFF plans termination date.

Remedies for non-compliance.

There is a clawback provision in your development agreement.

No rebate if the project is not in compliance, no rebate if the property taxes are not paid, and then BURRA has the option to claw back prior year rebates for non-compliance.

It'll be cool to see.

This is the Redman Builder.

Am I remembering right?

The Redman Builder, right out of Redmond, I think.

Does anybody have any questions for Jonathan?

May I agree to uh project that's come all the way through the whole process, you know.

Um in the core area.

So further discussion about anything, anybody that comments.

I'm ready to make a motion.

I move to approve a tax increment assistance agreement in substantially the form presented with Parkway Studios LLC for the government or for payment of City of Bend, system development charges and annual reimbursement of tax increment and amount not to exceed 1,232,943 over 23 years.

Second.

So move by counselor Platt, seconded by councillor Perkins, and I will see all those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

No opposed.

Okay, great.

Um with that, we are adjourned.

Seven minutes ahead of my prediction.

Very impressive.