The topic is parks and recreation assessment and fee study.

No public comment will be taken, and the council will take no formal action.

Let the record show that Councillor Falkner, Martinez, Schemel, Council President Valenzuela, Councillor Marshall, Councillor Gutison, and Parks and Rec Director, Parks and Recreation Director Ann Lane, Jesse Vanderzanden are present at the table.

And then there are various members of city staff and community members in the audience.

And I'm going to turn it over to Ann.

So thank you for your time this evening, Mayor and Council.

Tonight's work session is focused on the parks and recreation assessment and fee study.

This topic is complex and uncomfortable.

We're going to take it one piece at a time.

After each piece, we'll pause to check in, answer questions, and discuss the information.

The recently adopted 2040 Vision Plan includes a goal for a healthy and active community.

An intended outcome for the goal is an increase in safe and accessible recreation opportunities.

A few actions needed to reach the goal include the identification and reduction of barriers to participation, and increasing access to recreation opportunities.

Additionally, this project has been identified in the adopted city council goals and values for both 2024 and 2025.

The expressed goal to enhance recreation opportunities for all with an objective to complete the parks and recreation cost recovery plan is intended to see outcomes that increase quality of life for a happy and healthy community, fiscal sustainability for maintenance and operations, and accessible recreation opportunities for all ages and abilities.

Lastly, we are required to do this work as directed by City Code Section 3401.

Shown here fully, the yellow highlighted section states the philosophy is to base user fees on cost of service.

So the city will be able to recover the costs associated with delivering a service to an individual or group.

By recovering the cost of providing a service, the rest of the community is not subsidizing services benefiting individuals.

It is also important to note that City Code 3402B states we are required to complete a cost of service study every five years.

In 2023, a solicitation of a request for quotes for the project was completed.

A consultant was hired, and the fee study portion of the project was completed.

In 2024, time was spent soliciting input through two joint work sessions with the Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council, as well as a community stakeholder workshop and a partner network workshop.

After that, a draft recommended cost recovery model provided by the consultant was presented to City Council and the Parks and Recreation Commission.

Later that year, the commission held a work session to explore ideas and discuss options to address concerns raised about the rentals category.

Consensus was reached that they were at an impasse on a recommendation regarding the rentals category, but voted to recommend approval of the rest of the plan.

Next, an athletic club and organization stakeholder meeting was held.

Based on their comments, consistent themes emerged of affordability, maximizing opportunity for participation, and recognition that these organizations provide a benefit to the community.

Since the last stakeholder meeting, there have now been two city council work sessions, and that counts tonight's.

Okay, we'll move on.

One of the steps along the way in developing the plan was to develop service categories.

What's shown here is an excerpt from the final report provided by the consultant.

In essence, the purpose of organizing all parks and recreation services into categories is to discourage attempts to determine fees and charges, and therefore cost recovery decisions based upon special interests, age-based services, or individual values.

Ten service categories have been developed, and their definitions are written out here.

This too is an excerpt from the final report provided by the consultant.

These 10 categories represent only the services offered by Forest Grove Parks and Recreation.

And every service offered by Parks and Recreation is assigned a category.

In addition to the service categories, there are common goods services and exclusive benefit services.

A common good service has a greater subsidy investment.

Lower cost recovery expectation is seen as community building, provides accessibility to marginalized underrepresented populations, has broad appeal to a wide audience, and the services contribute to greater equity, cultural awareness, and make everyone in Forest Grove's life better.

An exclusive benefit service has a greater cost recovery expectation, lower subsidy investment is individualized, of special interest, requires higher competency or ability level to participate, are specialized activities and are often accessible outside of the Forest Grove Parks and Recreation System.

Common goods services and exclusive benefit services are identified on the cost recovery continuum as the X axis across the bottom.

High subsidy, low cost recovery, and low subsidy, high cost recovery are identified on the cost recovery continuum as the Y access along the side.

The 10 service categories are listed in order on the continuum from those perceived to be common good services to those seen as providing a more exclusive benefit.

Feedback and engagement through a collection of meetings with the Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council representatives, as well as department staff and stakeholders resulted in the draft recommended cost recovery model shown here.

This recommendation was provided by the consultant and presented to city council in August 2024 during the work session.

The result of the work session was consensus by City Council on the three components of the draft cost recovery model.

Those three components included the order of the categories along the continuum, the cost recovery goals for each of the categories, and the overall approach of the cost recovery continuum.

Shown here and provided in your packet are images of the draft cost recovery plan and the final report document as provided by the consultant.

This is a proposed plan, not a policy.

Once the plan is finalized, a policy reflective of that plan will be drafted for your review and consideration.

Next check-in.

Does anyone else have a question?

Okay, I have one question.

So you said there was consensus for the categories.

Correct.

Can we there's still time to change?

Correct.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yes.

Oh, Counselor Schummel.

Oh, microphone.

Thanks.

Do you mind repeating what you're saying about what comes before policy?

Where you're saying the cost recovery comes before forming the policy?

So I said this is a proposed plan.

And until this plan is approved, then we move on and we'll write policy that's reflective of that plan.

And then the presentation, or are you gonna get into the um lack of better phrase at attribution of of the categories to some of our existing uh activities, whether city or non-city run?

So this uh cost recovery plan is 100% focused on forest grove parks and recreation services only.

Those are just the services that we develop and we offer through our department.

Okay, we'll move on.

All right.

Shown here is a revenue and expense report for the parks and recreation department that was generated using the final figures from fiscal year 2023-24.

Along the bottom, from left to right are each of the 10 categories in order as they appear on the cost recovery continuum.

The Navy blue bars represent total expense for each category, and the rust colored bars represent total revenue for each category.

Dollar amounts have been included adjacent to each of the bars, as well as across the bottom.

Shown here is an actual cost recovery and target cost recovery report for the parks and recreation department that was also generated using those same final figures from fiscal year 2023-24.

Again, along the bottom from left to right are each of the 10 categories in order as they appear on the cost recovery continuum.

Navy blue bars represent the midpoint of the determined target cost recovery for each category, and the rust colored bars represent the actual cost recovery for each category.

Percentage amounts have been included on each of the bars as well as across the bottom.

Currently, the bulk of all parks and recreation services are landing within the categories of drop-in activities, beginner activities, education and enrichment, and intermediate and advanced activities.

We have very few, if any, services developed for categories like community events, special events, personalized services, and food and beverage and merchandise sales.

These are areas of potential future growth.

There are also categories, these are also categories that because of the limited number of current services developed in those categories, expenses are also low.

Good to go.

All right.

One of the deliverables we required from the consultant was a tool that parks and recreation staff could use to determine fees for services.

The worksheet shown here is that tool.

Most of the fields auto-populate from data that was collected during the fee study portion of this project.

It's quite comprehensive and consists of four different parts that are linked together.

This worksheet will be used for every service provided by parks and recreation.

Part A is where general activity information is input.

Here's a zoomed-in look at that.

Part B is where activity details are added.

Zoom in on that.

Part C is where direct expense totals auto-populate based on the inputs from each of the parts.

Zoom in on that.

And Part D is the final part of the worksheet and displays the auto-generated cost recovery and fee planning figures.

We'll zoom in on that.

Okay.

Check in.

Like if we were to make another category, or you know, if we would give staff direction to make another category.

Would you still be able to use that worksheet, or would you we'll need to we'll need to actually go back with the consultant and work with them to get that piece added into the worksheet?

If we had the same percentage for cost recovery, would you still have to go back to the consultant?

I'm not sure.

You see what I'm saying?

Like drop-in activity, I think is 40, 20 to 40% cost recovery.

If we said that for something else, anyways, just a question.

If we can one of the categories I think in on the worksheet was the percentage of cost recovery.

So I think what you would do is just plug in whatever that cost recovery percentage is for that category.

And yeah, that's going to change.

So the worksheet is adaptable to the model.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Okay.

Okay.

The adopted fee schedule and the cost recovery continuum have a direct correlation.

Shown here on the left is the current adopted fee schedule for parks and recreation.

On the right is the draft cost recovery continuum.

The bright pink lines identify and connect the drop-in activities on both the fee schedule and the continuum.

When we look at the actual cost recovery to target cost recovery data, the drop-in activities category shows the actual cost recovery rate for those activities is much higher than the target cost recovery rate.

This is an indication that drop-in activities are high performing services.

Various factors may influence this result and should be examined.

Those factors may include activity frequency, duration, fee, participation, demand, and more.

Again, shown here on the left is the current adopted fee schedule for parks and recreation.

On the right is the draft cost recovery continuum.

The bright pink lines identify and connect the rental services on both the fee schedule and the continuum.

When we look at the actual cost recovery to target cost recovery data, the rentals category shows that the actual cost recovery rate for those activities is much lower than the target cost recovery rate.

This is an indication that rentals are low performing services.

Various factors may influence this result and should be examined.

Those factors may include rental frequency, duration, fee, participation, demand, and more.

One or more of those factors are out of alignment, staff should consider implementing strategies to reduce the delta between actual cost recovery and target cost recovery.

With the rentals, the thing that's out of line is that we had the moratorium, right?

That certainly did have an effect.

Yes.

Do we know the numbers for rentals prior to that?

So that would have been back in what 2021?

That was when we first implemented Civic Rec and started tracking all of that information.

I think we could we could go back and see.

It doesn't matter, but I just wanted to highlight that there that was the reason the rental is that we have not been charging rental fees for the last two to three, I think three years.

Yes.

Well, we've done this process.

So that's why I mean absolutely.

Okay.

Yes.

Thank you.

There might be some skew two because of the microphone.

Sure.

There might be some SKU too because of when COVID happened.

Okay, any other questions.

Okay, thanks.

So may can I just expand on that just a little bit.

Okay.

So athletic field rentals aren't the only rentals that go into that category.

It's also if the pool is rented for a birthday party or the spray park, picnic shelters, all of those things are rentals, and that's why in the bar graph you're seeing that some revenue was generated.

Okay.

All right.

The last time we had a work session on this topic, council directed staff to bring back two options to address concerns about the rentals category.

The definition for rentals as it is currently proposed is shown here in the upper right of the slide for reference.

In addition to the two options, we briefly explored the last work session.

We decided to add a third option for your consideration as well.

Those three options are shown here.

Option one, make no change to the current draft continuum model and manage reoccurring rentals outside of the continuum under individual agreements.

Option two would be to refine the definition of the rentals category as a one-time occurrence and add a reoccurring rentals category near the common good end of the continuum with an accompanying lower cost recovery target.

Option three is to add a nonprofit rentals category to the current draft continuum model near the common good end of the continuum with an accompanying lower cost recovery target.

Taking a closer look at option one, there are some things to consider if this is the desired choice.

First, the staff time necessary to manage reoccurring individual rental agreements and creating a system for individual rental agreements.

The decision will need to be made about assessing a fee, how that will be determined, and how much it will be.

Also determining what the reservation parameters are.

Things to consider for option two include determining what the cost recovery range would be for the new category, refining the definition of rentals, and defining reoccurring rentals.

A system will need to be created to manage reoccurring rentals.

And like option one, the decision will need to be made about assessing a fee, how that will be determined, and how much it will be.

Also determining what the reservation parameters are.

Considerations for option three are determining what the cost recovery range would be for the new category and defining nonprofit rentals, as well as adding the verification of nonprofit status to the existing reservation process.

At the last work session, council had also asked staff to bring back cost.

Shown here is the 100% total cost for one hour of an athletic field, shown here, circled in bright pink, $48.23.

Athletic field rentals are currently identified under the rentals category and assigned a cost recovery target of 85% to 110%.

If we take the one hour cost of an athletic field at 48.23 and apply the low end of the target at 85%, the total fee assessed to the renter is 41 dollars, or 85% of the total cost.

The remaining cost of the athletic field is $7.23, or 15% of the total expense.

This amount becomes subsidized and covered by the general fund.

Option two and option three both recommend creating and establishing a new category and locating it toward the common good end of the continuum.

Since a cost recovery target has not been set for either of those options, for this example, we are simply flipping the cost recovery percentages to illustrate what a 15% cost recovery rate looks like.

In this case, the one hour cost of an athletic field at 48.23 cents has a target cost recovery rate of 15% applied.

Then the total fee assessed to the renter is $7.23, or 15% of the total expense.

Then the remaining cost of the athletic field is 41 dollars or 85% of the total expense.

This then is the amount that becomes subsidized and covered by the general fund.

Another example, and my lines don't line up, I apologize.

Shown here is the 100% total cost for one hour of all six lap lanes of the main pool, shown here circled in bright pink, $74.52.

Aquatic facility rentals are currently identified under the rentals category and assigned a cost recovery target of 85% to 110%.

If we take the one hour cost of all six lap lanes of the main pool at 7452 and apply the low end of the target of 85%, the total fee assessed to the renter is 634 or 85% of the total expense.

The remaining cost of the six lap lanes of the main pool is 11 and 18 cents or 15%.

This amount becomes subsidized and covered by the general fund.

As stated on the prior slide, option two and option three both recommend creating and establishing a new category and locating it toward the common good end of the continuum.

And again, since a cost recovery target has not been set for either of those options for this example, we're slip simply flipping those percentages again.

And then in this case, a one-hour six-lane rental of the main pool, 7452 has a target cost recovery rate of 15% applied, then the total fee assessed to the renter is $11.18 or 15%.

The remaining 85% of that expense, which is $63.34, needs to be subsidized and covered by the general fund.

I have a few questions, but do any other counselors have questions?

Okay, I'm gonna start.

Um explain to me the difference between option two and option three.

So one was reoccurring rentals and the other one is nonprofit rentals.

So when you go to that to the graph of like how you would charge it, how how would that look on our cost recovery differently?

Oh, had it.

So there's options are we on the right slide for you?

Yeah, that'll be fine.

I'm just trying to figure out like if the reoccurring yes.

Could you and then you have nonprofit?

Like how how are those different?

Okay.

Or how would they look different on this?

If we went with the option to add a category and it's reoccurring.

Okay.

So somebody that wants to rent more than one time.

Um, we need to develop that category.

We need to figure out what the cost recovery range is, and then all the other components that go with it.

What does reoccurring mean?

How do we define that?

Yeah.

Um is anybody that makes a rental, do they have access to a reoccurring rental option?

Are we gonna what parameters are we gonna set for reoccurring rentals?

Is it uh every three months?

Is it once a year?

Right.

So there's a lot more questions that that come up that we'll have to answer together and figure out how how would we treat reoccurring rentals, and then what does that mean administratively to actually implement it?

And then the the go ahead, Jesse.

He won he really wants to say something.

So the reoccurring rentals, if you think of it like this, it would be anybody that has a reoccurring rental.

So unless the council would want to kind of clarify it, whether it was private, whether it was public, whether it was an individual, whether it was a collective, as long as it would be reoccurring, it would receive the lower rate, the lower cost recovery rate.

You could differentiate that with like nonprofits, which would mean that that lower cost recovery rate would only be eligible for nonprofits that receive it.

There's other layers that you can put into it.

The real kind of question becomes you know, what is the category for that lower rental rate if the council wants to do this option?

And it can be nonprofits with reoccurring rental rates, it could be all kinds of different layers, but I think that's the fundamental question.

Right.

So the fundamental question between those two is that is the common good value that we want to put nonprofit or some sort of like category like that, or do we think there is a value in the nonprofit providing a service to the community, or is there value of anybody?

Like reoccurring, like you see what I'm so I anyways.

I'll hold on that and we can discuss it later.

But the other question I have, and I think what I'm trying, I think what I'm getting at is I think there's two different things we're trying to do.

So reoccurring to me, or could be like shared use agreement.

Like I think, so I guess I'm gonna step it back.

If the school district for their swim team comes and says, hey, we want to use the pool for our high school swim team, or Pacific does, where would they fall on the cost recovery scale?

Right now, they would fall under the rentals category because we don't we don't have any other mechanism in place to manage those rentals.

So and then just I want to put it out there.

I think that in my brain, how what I would like to see happen is some sort of shared use agreement with our reoccurring partners, right?

Like the school district, the university, but uh that's just my opinion.

And then but we also need to address what the topic is today.

So I don't want to get off topic, but I just want to say that's uh no, that's really relevant.

I'm sorry, um and I I think I would like to, if we could implement the phrase of uh reciprocal use agreement.

There we go.

Because parks and recreation, as we're trying to develop and grow and expand, we uh don't have a place to do our programs.

And the school district and Pacific may be able to come to the table in that situation through a reciprocal use agreement.

What we can offer those two entities is use of the pool, which is what's been happening for a long time.

We would like in return some use of of indoor space, particularly in the off season, so we can continue to run awesome programs.

I totally agree with you.

And I wonder, and I'm wondering two things really quickly.

Just I think the data supports that, right?

Our drop-in activities are really high, and that's just at the pool.

So imagine if you had drop in basketball, drop in volleyball, drop in pickleball.

So I think I like that term reciprocal.

And I'm wondering, do we create that category as well on this, or do we not need to?

Because we're hoping that it's an exchange of services and facilities at a fair, you know, at an equal rate.

Do we think I'll have to put that on there?

I think a reciprocal use agreement doesn't need to appear on the category on the the continuum.

This is the services that we are offering the public.

Any other questions?

I don't want to dominate all my questions.

Counselor Schimmel.

Yeah, I wasn't sure I clearly understood that this distinction and the the options relative to actual circumstances uh and related to that with their two examples.

I I think I understood you to say those are actual scenarios.

What was the parks and rec deliberation on those scenarios relative to their exposure to sports teams?

So you want to like are you are you asking the about the parks and recreation commission and what's their feel on this?

Or yeah, well, just looking back to previous conversations, there was there was uh a reaction to numbers shared before.

So this uh I'm under what I'm understanding is this isn't could be an actual scenario for the use of a field or a pool.

Is it if I understand that right?

So then I I'm not I don't run a sports, a nonprofit sports team, so I don't know how like this scenario relates to what they've paid previously.

Where the commission ended up was um favorable for the whole plan with everything except the rentals category.

And there was a lot of deliberation both in regular meetings and in work sessions that we had, and um they're really struggled with it.

And and they want to make sure that the local um youth sports, I mean that was the thing that kept coming up, are recognized and you know, able to continue to offer their services to the community.

And so they ultimately were at an impasse, and but they their recommendation to council was to move forward with the rest of the plan as it is.

Um and then hopefully we can come to some resolution on rentals and with in this setting.

The question is specifically around the two scenarios, there's there's actual numbers in here.

So if a nonprofit sports team were to look at the athletic field number, would that would they be able to relate that to their current budget and and they tell us whether that is affordable?

Well, I think they have told us and they've told us no, it's not.

So this the specific number.

No.

No.

I don't think these I think we're this is just to illustrate how the model could work.

So that from a policy perspective, the council could consider different policy directions.

Currently, if you're looking at a field rental, there is no charge for the field rental.

There used to be a per hour facility charge for a field.

Um it was uh I guess inconsistently administered, if you will, and so a moratorium was put on it.

I don't remember what the per hour fee was for the fields, but there used to be a per hour fee.

Um and that is no longer that was revised in the latest um rate schedule uh adoption by the council.

Depending on if the council looks at this model and wants to implement a cost recovery plan, and depending on where you put the cost recovery for an athletic field rental.

In this particular case, if you put the cost recovery at 85%, it's 41 dollars an hour.

So if a nonprofit field would rent it for 40 hours, that'd be 200 or 4 hours, it'd be 204.

Conversely, if you set it at $7.23 and you rented it for four hours, it'd be about $3030 for four hours.

This schedule would still have to be approved.

The cost recovery plan, the percentages, and and also the fees would have to still be approved by the city council.

And to be clear, this is not a proposal.

This is just to illustrate how a model could work and to illustrate from a policy perspective, if and how the council may want to look at how to deal with either nonprofits, athletic groups that are not nonprofits, sports teams, basic, you know, the rental of the facilities, whether it's a field or whether it's a pool.

Does that answer your question, Counselor Schimmel?

It doesn't.

Okay.

What am I uh we're missing something?

I just I don't think, I mean, I'm gonna go.

I don't think these exact numbers were shown to the Parkinson Rec Commission.

I think that's what the question was.

We're right, is um maybe not.

No.

Okay.

Counsel council president, I think.

Do you want to elaborate, Councilor Schummel?

Or go ahead, go ahead.

Well, in light of what transpired over the last year, um I'm in in my mind, I'm starting with the end in mind.

You know, the the I I have an attribute I associate nonprofit uh programs as highly as any program the city would provide.

And I I want to understand what the policy or schedule is going to do.

Otherwise, I don't know, I don't understand what we're we're trying we're accomplishing today.

It's like I'm like I'm I'm trying to understand how this attributes to programs that that are existing, and um I'm seeing scenarios, it sounds like I can't lean on those scenarios when I'm having conversations with parents.

Um I you know, when we use language about subsidy the same taxpayers subsidizing a nonprofit program as they do a city program.

So I'm there's just there's just the the policy aspect of this and how we are attributing things that um I'm still struggling with from last time.

Um I I I did I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take away or what I'm supposed to contribute with with this message today.

Yeah.

So to me, the that is a I mean, I was looking at these numbers, and uh when you mentioned that it would it was just it to illustrate, right?

Uh these numbers 48, 23, that it was to illustrate, right?

Then um like stuck because I think what I what I would really like to see is the actual number that we're going to be working with.

I want to see how much the nonprofits or you know uh the swim club um how much of a difference is going to be for them.

So that's what I'm looking for.

I'm looking for a number that, you know, if you tell me, well, they're gonna have to pay 240 dollars for four hours, or you know, 36 for four hours.

Um that's what I'm I'm waiting for.

Um because then I can I cannot vote on anything if I don't have a number.

So uh maybe I can dissect this a little bit.

Uh option two and option three is to create a new category and put it on the continuum.

There's not been discussion among this group or anyone about what is that cost recovery range until we know that as staff, I can't give you numbers.

The 15% that you see up there is an example.

If you chose to establish a cost recovery range that had 15% in it, this is how much they would be charged for uh an athletic field at 15% cost recovery, they would be paying seven dollars and twenty-three cents for one hour.

For example, if you were to put the existing fee for field rentals into the cost recovery model, the cost recovery would be zero.

Because there's no fee for it.

It's free.

And you could look at the light fee essentially and say that is a hundred percent cost recovery.

So if it cost twenty dollars per hour for lights, we are recovering twenty dollars per hour for lighting that facility.

So in a way, if you look at athletic fields right now.

And for the actual field, it's at cost recovery zero.

It's it's at kind of the very far left end of the common good.

If you look at the lights for the field for the existing fee, that's 100%.

We're recovering all of those costs 100%.

Does that kind of help out?

I think the policy question we're trying to kind of see if we can talk about here today is like where would the council from a policy perspective like it to fall within that paradigm and then the fee will be adjusted accordingly based on that.

So I know it's kind of uh a back and forth or chicken and egg, if you will, but we're just trying to see if we can get an idea.

Does that help counselor?

I think we we're running into the issue of if it's five percent.

What are we gonna base it off of still?

So I mean it could be we could say five percent, and it's still seven dollars and twenty-three cents.

No, it's forty-eight twenty three.

And that's that's that an indirect is that indirect usage of the all in costs, one hour of an athletic field.

Like, and that's just and that's the indirect cost of mowing the field, everything like that, or is it just full cost.

Okay, so even if they don't use a field, we're still mowing the field.

Correct, because then it is an open space.

Okay, which is a hundred percent subsidized.

Just if we're using like the seven dollars and twenty-three cents.

I mean, I know from just working with all the other organizations, just baseball in particular for the fields they use would be for just a fall ball season would be about thirty, five hundred dollars extra on top of what these kids are already paying.

So that's where we're running into the issue of the community that's that's a lot of money for that's at the 15.

It's if that's if you use this specific number here at $7.23.

And that's between using the two fields 20 hours a week on like Joe Gale and 20 hours a week on Thatcher.

And that's using that's four uh three teams that are gonna be dividing that cost of thirty-five hundred dollars for that season.

There's there's three teams, three it's usually three teams, and it's probably about twelve twelve to thirteen kids per team.

So that's affecting a lot of kids.

And that's gonna be the that's gonna be the difference of being able to give scholarships for a couple of kids to be able to play.

Um they can't afford it.

So that's what we're running into.

I mean, they are willing to I know a lot of the organizations are willing to work and do some services around and do that type of stuff, but until we actually know what the I mean that's the hard part is knowing what the actual cost would be with the percentage and what we get.

So I mean we can listen, but as far as communities not wanting to have to spend any extra to easiest fields because they're already um charging uh they're not turning a profit on any of these kids.

They're actually a lot of times they're losing money and they have to make up that money by fundraising.

So that's what we're running into the issue with the community and trying to add fees to it.

So I think let's try to I think the first question, are we done with questions about this section?

I mean I think this is the end.

This is the end.

No pets.

I mean what is that?

Somebody online I don't know, okay.

I'm gonna go for it.

Um always.

I'm so sorry.

I wonder if it was on Zoom.

Like, do we have any maids?

There's nobody even on.

We could zoom off.

Who knows?

Okay.

Um if we can go back to sorry, Brias, thank you.

Still here.

I still hear this one's on, but it's on the tickets.

Mine's on, but I just turned it on.

Okay, I think the discussion items are let's go back to the options to start our discussion.

So option one was to not change anything and keep rentals at a hundred percent, like not add a category.

Is there any consensus or anybody that wants to do that?

Counselor Falconer has a question.

Uh we don't have a mic quite yet.

Uh on my understanding was that we might actually see one that was sort of a combination of a couple that I see here.

Um I thought we had entertain I thought we had talked about having agreements with nonprofits um and come and putting them at the spectrum so that there would be direction on um the fee, but that there would be an agreement with the nonprofit or the group as well to define some of the questions that you have on your slide about well, you know, these are things to consider about you know the recurring um, you know, some of the questions considerations under that would be defined by a use agreement.

So I'm actually maybe putting out there that we have a combination of option one and well, not one.

I guess it's actually one, two, and three because it's recurring nonprofit use agreements.

Right.

So it so the questions would be answered by the use agreement itself.

So not exactly one, because one would be no change, but take adding a category and blending option two and option three together to have nonprofit reoccurring is that am I articulating that?

Because I think that's really what the teams are anyway.

I mean, we're we're do we've defined them primarily as it's the youth sports that I mean I think we're all sort of but but it's also important sorry to interrupt.

It's okay.

It's also important that's because I was thinking about like do we want to include in that marker that it is youth sports?

Because then I can think of the companion program who offers unified sports to people over the age of 18.

And so, and I and I think that they're a nonprofit and provide a good service.

So to me, I think the nonprofit re I I agree with what you're saying, and that's what I was trying to unpack a little bit earlier.

Yeah.

Is that an option as far as local nonprofits?

Yeah, we have you need a microphone.

We only have two.

And did you want to answer the local version?

In city, out city.

So we operate um with every single service that we charge for pays 30% more if they're an out of city limit program.

So that is how we would address uh out of city, it's 30% more.

Um, whatever to any all of the categories.

That is the current fee schedule.

So if you're in city, you receive a 30% discount, if you will, then if you are out of city, whether it's a drop-in activity, whether it's a rental, whether you're running the pool, whether you're running well, we don't have an athletic field rental, but but yeah.

Um couldn't we say though that in city, I mean, we could we could just we could just decide that the this policy would only apply to nonprofits that exist within the city limits.

Is that what you were getting after, Counselor Marshall?

Yeah, essentially something along the lines of um like local nonprofits would go with a discounted rate of both like well under what um out of city nonprofits.

I think I want to go back to what was said in slide eight on the purpose of this approach is that it we make decisions that are based up aren't based upon special interests, age-based services, or individual values.

We serve everyone, and we can serve everyone fairly if we administer policy fairly.

And if I'm hearing what you're saying, and that is that local youth sports should pay less than any other nonprofit, that puts us in an awkward position, a risky position if we're approached by Special Olympics.

We want to come and they want to rent our fields for competition.

Why would I not give them the lower rate?

So I think open for discussion right now that we need to come to consensus either one way or the other, is this new category?

Is it nonprofit or is it youth nonprofit?

And I'm saying I would I would feel comfortable with nonprofit reoccurring without the youth.

Yeah, but I'd like to hear from the rest of the so for everyone.

All the nonprofits.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And yeah, and and just the answer uh Anne.

Um special Olympics uh comes and ask for that.

Why wouldn't you give them you know a higher rate?

You wouldn't give them a higher rate.

It would just not be, you know, appropriate.

And I think so.

Counselor Marshall asked the question like local, but I think we've addressed that.

We have a in-city fee, and then we have a consistent out of city fee, and that's 30% more.

So I personally I don't think we need to say local.

I think that it's it's based on, and there's already a policy and a process for that.

Yeah.

Yes.

But we would need to specify though, you know, nonprofits like local nonprofits.

So right now the 30% difference between local and out in city and out of city is across all of our rates.

So no matter what service we provide, it's 30% more if you are outside of the city.

Whether it's a drop-in swim, whether it's um lights at the field, whatever service or thing that we do now is 30% more expensive if you are not within the city.

Is there any more discussion on the category?

I'm hearing nonprofit reoccurring rentals or usage.

Okay, can you go to the there's a slide that had all the definitions of open access education, like drop-ins.

Because now we need to figure out where we're gonna put it on the continuum, correct, Ann?

Okay.

So I think keep going that that one.

So does anyone have an idea?

I when I read when I read the packet and I was trying to think of this, and I've been trying to think of this.

I think if you look at the definition of drop-in activities, self-directed activities, which may or may not require registration and or a membership, drop-in activities include supervision by staff or volunteers and may or may not require specific instruction.

I think that is closest to nonprofit because it's using the space, it might be volunteers leading it.

To me, that's where I think it should fall.

And then the next one is beginning beginner level skill-based activities, classes, clinics.

So based on the definitions and the cost that that's where I feel, but I'm not uh number three, drop-in activities.

Go ahead.

Sorry.

Yeah, my attribution of some of these categories, I'd I'd say number five is strongest, because I I know local nonprofit programs provide socialization interaction, life skills development, so forth.

That they also create community for the parents themselves.

Um so that to me, that's that's an important association that I that I put toward those uh nonprofit programs.

Um I just generally worry about the how the attribution of external programs is gonna how that's gonna land with this.

And I I still empathize with the and because I'm I'm catching up to uh 18 months of uh laborious work you you and your team have done.

I I also see uh an important economic development intersection, both in terms of enterprise zone tax abatement, sunsetting, and uh snowball of tax revenue coming in and leveraging that, but that's years out that's gonna require a lot of patience.

Uh the other piece is um knowing that um counselor marshall's business does a nice job of leveraging events and other things or other coaches coming into town to get you know businesses intersecting or their food out into the hands of of kids who are coming into town.

So that I think is is an important benefit that um that nonprofit uh competitive events uh can stir up in terms of economic development.

So between those the intersections and the attribution pieces I I worry that we're you know, when things when in implemented how this lands, it it's um difficult to see apart from what Counselor Marshall was saying that was probably the most applicable.

I could I could attribute it to Can I just orient myself?

Um, and maybe this is helpful to others, but it'll be helpful to me.

I it's you know the numbers, the the the categories align with the continuum from left to right.

And so as we're talking through the numbers, Counselor Schimmel, I you know one, so the number one is all the way down at the bottom.

And so as we go higher up the numbers, the categories from that other page go higher up in the cost recovery continuum.

And so what I was hearing is that I thought we all sort of had consensus that you know the programs that we were hearing from were most concerned with being categorized high with a higher number and therefore a higher cost recovery percentage.

Um, and so I don't think you know, maybe we just need to, I mean, maybe we we need to add some language to our categories, but I don't think that at least I wasn't hearing, and I and I'm not, I don't think I'm willing to go higher up on the scale than maybe what the mayor was suggesting.

Thank you, Counselor Falconer.

Anyone else with where this category should fall on the scale?

Okay, Councilor Martinez, yeah.

Uh I'm with Counselor Falconer.

I agree that we we want to be careful about the cost, and Counselor Marshall already expressed that seven even 735 an hour is quite expensive for the little league teams because they aren't making a profit.

So that's a concern.

Councilor Govson?

Any any words?

No.

Okay, well.

Uh I guess I'm gonna throw out.

Well, does any I mean how do we feel about putting it in between either do we want it between community events and drop-in events, or do we want it between drop in events and beginner level events?

So I'm hearing Council President Valence Vela say she would like the category to be placed between community events and drop-in activities.

Counselor Falconer, you want something I because the illustration I think is what is going to um people are gonna remember that.

And so I think that it's worth revisiting what you know the the current schedule, the current fee schedule that is not being implemented.

It's not actually being uh received from the the sports programs.

We do have those fees, those I mean we do have a fee schedule that that illustrate tells us what those fees are.

And the illustration that I think is helpful um is because the one the program that I'm more familiar with than say the little league soccer for I'm looking at the swim club.

And if we go to that slide, I think that would be helpful to me.

Last slide or last slide.

This one.

So if I'm understanding that correctly, that would be the and you know, I mean so the the swim club practices I think about six days a week, probably about three hours combined three hours a day or more, maybe it's actually longer than that, probably if you count the morning swims too.

Um and I think they take about four weeks off.

Is that right?

And so they're renting, I think about 18 hours per week for 48 weeks at that rate is um tens of thousands of dollars a year.

So both.

So the example that's shown here is somebody that's renting all six lanes.

We have it broken down per lane per hour.

So if the swim club is only needing two lanes, then we have a rate for two lanes for one hour that's less than that.

If they are renting the entire facility for a swim meet, we have a rate for that.

And the cost recovery range that's selected here would be applied to all of those scenarios.

This is just one.

Okay.

I I think it's helpful though, um, when we come back to this before we adopt.

I think we need to actually plug in the numbers and know exactly what fee we would be imposing on a nonprofit youth sports club.

But cost recovery range.

So we can we can give some specific estimated costs.

What I'm also hearing, Councillor Falconer potentially is to try and arrive at what what is being paid currently.

And in the case of the athletic fields, I think that's pretty clear.

There is no fee associated with the athletic field rental.

In the case of the uh aquatic center, it's a little bit different.

There are fees being paid.

In some cases the fees whether it's a membership fee or whether it's um a rental fee, but we can get that information so that there's a clear picture of what a potential fee could be and what's being paid now.

It's clearer with the athletic fields than it is with the aquatic center.

But it's still the same potential category because it's still either a nonprofit rental or nonprofit reoccurring rental, it's still in the same category.

So that is an important distinction.

Is there a way to get um uh a percentage if we do come to consensus between like open access and community event and community event and drop-in and drop in and beginner lessons?

Is there a way to get those specific ones there so that we can have more of a uh more insight to what we're gonna be voting on?

If you can determine a cost recovery range, we can give you the numbers.

So is there is there any way if we say can we get the price breakdown between with those three different prices, we would be able to know and be able to vote on something like that.

So we could we don't have to necessarily come with this is exactly what we want, but we would get more options of what we would be looking at by the different categories.

Yes, absolutely.

We I I just need direction on what is the cost recovery range I'm doing the calculations to anyone to have a range they would.

I mean, I I don't well, given what counselor uh Falconer said.

I mean, this looks like a spreadsheet that gives you every possible percentage, and it's comparing it to what they can are paying today and what they can afford.

Um it doesn't feel complicated to come up with a spreadsheet.

Um I understand we're being asked to determine a policy.

I'm still back at the last meeting when nobody wanted to circle back to just the philosophical stuff.

I I'd still feel like we're just miles apart on just the philosophical.

Yeah, there's just philosophical differences that that um I'm I'm still um cap, you know, sensing and I worry about how this gets implemented if we're just throwing out a percent not knowing how it lands.

Um I'm I'm trying to I think that counselor Schimmel, I think either I mean, I don't think you and I can meet one-on-one quite yet, but if there's do is there a work session to address that that you think needs to happen before we move.

I know.

Well, that's what I think hang on, really quick.

I think with we have another work, we're butting up to our we're actually over time with our other work session.

So what I'm hearing the consensus is, and I want to make sure I'm getting it correct, is that the council would like parks and rec to come with a an additional category of nonprofit reoccurring usage or rentals or uh what's what's the word?

Is it I think just nonprofit rentals?

Um if you want to put the term reoccurring in there, I that's gonna need a little further examination of what it what are we talking about?

You want reoccurring.

Yes, to be defined by an agreement.

I think that the the protection, and I think you know, we might need like another subheading, but if there's a nonprofit that's using, I mean, look at the swim club, like there has there has to be some sort of rates or agreement that someone's consistently using it.

That's different than a one-off rental.

And I I think what we're hearing is that we want that to be recognized.

Um then what I was hearing about the cost recovery percentage was that we wanted um comparables between open access and community events and community events and drop-ins.

Do we need to go higher than that?

Because the drop-in, I'm just playing the drop-in cost recovery goes to 40%.

And for me, I'm gonna be real honest.

I'm I'm not feeling going over 40%.

So I'd also don't want staff to do more work that we're not gonna support.

So does anyone think we should recover more than 40% for nonprofit?

The only thing I'm I'm hearing no.

So in all reality, we don't want to recover anything.

We want them to be able to do the sports for free.

That's what we're gonna come to.

That's where the N pass is going to be.

And that's what we have to figure out.

Because I mean, I I can look around here and I see nodding heads because you guys agree with me.

We shouldn't be charging youth sports to use fields in the city.

I mean, hey, that's gonna rub some of the things.

Well, we probably that's where we're at, and that's what we're gonna do.

Yeah, but we have to factor if if that's a if that's a policy consensus that we want to go in, then we have to also be financially responsible with our levy and with our public dollars, right?

We have to budget that in to our next levy.

That's what we I mean, so that's what the the deal is that at right now we that's you know, we can take steps in that direction if the council wants to, but I think that's I think that's the direction the council wants to go.

I maybe speaking out of turn, but that would be what I'm seeing the council.

That's why we're having such an issue with this, is because we know what the city and what the nonprofits are doing for the community and the community members and the youth, and charging them anything it just is it's it's a hard pill to swallow.

And that's where we're running into the issue.

And I think that's what we need to figure out.

So matter what number you put up there, it's not going to sit well with anybody.

And that's where we're running into it.

And so that's what we need to figure out.

Um I know the the open access is zero percent cost recovery, and then the community events is zero to 20%.

So personally, whether it's zero percent still, um, and it's it's open access.

Um, I would want it between open access and community events.

But then I had a question with I know we have 30% difference between in-city and out of city.

Um, if there's reoccurring, and we decide what that means, um, can there just be something baked in for reoccurring, which qualifies under this thing here, you get a 20% discount or increase, whatever it is that we're thinking that should be.

Can that be baked in the same as the inner city versus outer city charges?

So it doesn't have its own category as recurring, but Jesse.

So I I think you can you can do a lot of different things with rates.

You can put an annual cap on it.

You can put um economies of scale type rates.

Uh, I think some of the questions that come in for staff or the administration of it.

Um, but we can look at those different options.

Uh, and uh there's all kinds of different ways to kind of structure rates around the service that you're offering and all kinds of different ways to charge for those services, or in some cases not charge for those services.

Um, and and I think getting this feedback from the council will help us put together a next increment about what could potentially be there and for what services.

And so this, yeah.

So the answer your short answer is yes, we can do something like that.

And yeah, that's here.

Um just so you know, where you're you're feeling what I'm feeling or hearing what I'm feeling.

I'm I'm with counselor marshall because having the kids be out and active, it increases their physical and mental well-being, uh, their education, their ability to socialize, and it does decrease the the issues of kids being bored and getting into trouble.

This entire thing is going to benefit not just the kids but our future and how we do pay for you know, fire department and police and how many calls there are and and all of that.

So I I it's so important for me for the kids to be able to go out there and play.

Okay, we are 15 minutes over.

So are there any do you and do you have what you need from the council to move forward on this?

Or can you help clarify anything else you need?

So you want a nonprofit rental category added to the continuum, kind of off to the side right now on the lower half.

Uh you want a spreadsheet with 0% to 40% and every percentage in between and a calculation for every item that we rent.

I think that's what I was understanding.

Do we need every I mean, I don't know.

I how can I ask an honest question of staff?

How many hours do you think that will take you?

And and I'm I'm being like pretty pointed, like for council, I don't need all of that.

I need to know how much how it's gonna affect the swim club, how it's gonna affect a soccer team, how it's gonna affect a baseball team.

Like I need to look at some of the key at both and at both ends of the spectrum from rentals and swim clubs are a little funny because they they use the facility in lots of different ways.

They'll have a small practice, they'll only use a couple lanes.

They'll have and that ranges all the way up to uh a three-day swim meet where they take over the entire facility.

Those are very different calculations and and and very different impacts.

So whereas a baseball game or practice is uh just is a set number of hours, one location.

We can give you an hourly breakdown of what is it at 17% cost recovery versus 32.

Um we'll have to put together a lot of different scenarios to be able to demonstrate how does this impact swim club.

Well, and the cost of operating the pool is much more.

That's all but that that is calculated into this 100%.

What what is one hour for six lanes?

Okay.

Go ahead, Jesse.

What I'm hearing, and I is I'm I'm hearing potentially a consensus that the council wants to see what are the nonprofits paying now, and what does that fee look like and how is it structured?

And how could it potentially look like under this fee model?

And to run through some various scenarios about what from anywhere from zero to forty percent, how that fee may be applicable to that particular nonprofit.

Is that generally speaking what I'm hearing?

Yes.

And do you think we want to go up to 40%?

Was that or do we want to stay below 30?

I yeah, I said I was not gonna say the drop-in activities, is that's where the 40% got.

This goes up to 40 because of the continuum where it's based on that.

And so with the drop-ins, it does go up to 40.

So that's where it's gonna be based on 40 funding.

So if we do it before the drop-in activities, then it would go to 25%.

We'd go zero.

I I'm I'm hearing and seeing more of zero to twenty-five.

Okay, we can adjust.

Okay.

And perhaps increments of five or ten just to give us some sort of basis.

So it's not every number in between.

I think 10 is good.

Okay.

I'm gonna are you good, Ann?

I'm sorry that we're I feel like we're rushing through it and over time.

So I'm gonna adjourn.

Is Council good before I adjourn this?

Can I ask just one last clarification?

I'm sorry.

Jesse, it's not.

There's also a consensus to have another work session to talk about what we just were talking about, correct?

Correct.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm gonna adjourn this work session of the Force Grove City Council.

And I'm gonna ask the city manager, would you like to move forward?

Okay, cool.

I can start it off if you want.

Okay, I'm gonna this work session of the Force Grove City Council at 6 48.

The topic is tourism program.

Um no public comment will be taken, and the council will take no formal action.

Council is at the table with the community development director and economic development coordinator.

There's community members and the audience and city staff.

And I'm gonna turn it over to Jesse or to Biles.

I'm turning it to Jesse.

Okay.

So if you can go to the next slide, please.

So I think what we were hoping to have a work session about was just the overall direction of the tourism program.

That involves a recap of the existing program and then some discussion about where we may want to go in the future.

So if you can go to the next slide, I'm gonna turn it over to Miles now.

We'll probably be able to get through some background and then maybe kind of firm up what we're doing right now, but hopefully that will contextualize potential next steps.

So with that.

Um, as you can see on for Vision 2040, the 2040 outcome is to foster a community and sense of place.

If you go to the next slide, these are the action items we think that um TLT and tourism touches.

And there's quite a few.

Um next slide, please.

I'll briefly go over the history in 2018.

The in 2017 council passed uh 2.5% TLT effective in 2018.

Um the city did some work on a brand and a logo, and then in 2023, we developed three programs: the tourism event sponsorship program, the tourism capital grant program, and the tourism art program.

And then following that, we um refine those programs.

And then we had uh work session and came to a consensus to raise the TLT rate in 2025, and then in 2027, the TLT will sunset unless it's extended by council.

We wanted to reaffirm the consensus of council on the current tourism programs, um, see consensus on our marketing promotional efforts, reaffirm and clarify consensus on the TLT increase, and gain insight on potential future projects that uh TLT revenues could be used for.

Currently, we have about 100,000 in revenue from the TLT, and it's split up among these four um buckets.

40% goes to our tourism sponsorship program, uh 10,000 or 10% goes to the capital grant program, 10% to the tourism art program, and then 40% for our tourism marketing program.

We'd like to keep these programs unchanged: the tourism sponsorship program, the capital grant program, and the art program.

And so we're seeking consensus tonight from the council if we can continue with those programs.

Miles, a quick question.

Um the tourism art program, has that been subscribed at all by the PAC?

It has.

Yes.

Okay.

That was what the mural and uh Lincoln Park was came from this program.

Okay, thank you.

Is there can I curious if there are some examples you can share of the capital grant program?

Um yes, I believe one of the purchases recently was spider boxes for events.

So we we have all those great new power outlets, the high power outlets, the spider boxes allow multiple plugins to those.

And so those are now available for events um through some of the nonprofits.

I get a head nod if we're in agreement to keep these programs.

I'm seeing consensus, yes.

Great.

Okay, thank you.

Um our tourism marketing program is currently composed of two parts.

We have the chamber who's overseeing the website, Discover Forest Grove.

Um they also do with the tourism committee and reporting, and that contract is through 331 of 26.

And then we had a marketing firm doing professional marketing services through June of uh this year, and that contract has expired.

And so currently we're um we just have the chamber of commerce uh contract active.

What we'd like to do um going forward is combine the two contracts into one.

So they would manage the discovery whoever is selected through an RFP process would manage the Discover Force Grove website, um, do the social media marketing.

We're also proposing that they do a tourism internship program with Pacific University and reports to a city council.

And so we're seeking consensus if this is the right direction for the marketing portion of the tourism program.

Uh does anyone have just curious that right now, as I understand it, there's no social media activity through the end of the year unless we were to activate something in its place.

Yeah, and we're working with the chamber to activate the social media um interim.

Through the interim.

Okay.

Yep.

Just a little bit of clarification.

That contract that was led was that Miles explained it was kind of two contracts.

When the campaign was done, it cost a certain amount of money.

And so when we did the RFP, it was X amount of funds.

And then when those when the campaign is over and that money is spent, so it it wasn't as though you can kind of keep you just have to add money to it if you want to do more of a campaign.

The campaign is a campaign.

You spend money on the campaign when it's over, it's done, and that's why that contract ended.

The one with the chamber, it continues because it's it's all year.

It's the website, it's updating, it's that sort of thing.

So I just wanted to clarify because there was a difference when they expired, and that was because the funds ran out on the campaign.

So it's there with the RFP.

I mean, or I would like to see those two contracts together, but then also expire at the same time and be aligned.

Is that the okay?

Go ahead, Kit.

I agree, they need to be combined.

Um, it seems like it would be difficult to manage, also having two different contracts.

But with all of that combined and bandwidth, are we able as a city to um have our marketing department help them if they need that help?

Like if they if they need a little bit of backup or somebody to help with certain marketing aspects just to take some of the load off if there is a tight bandwidth with the chamber.

Can our marketing department help with that?

Do you mean currently or in the future?

In the future.

Okay.

Well, this is an RFP, so I don't know who will get the contract, if the if the chamber will apply for it or not.

Um, and then as far as bandwidth, that would be a Jesse question.

I think tentatively what we were proposing was approximately 40,000.

Because the other programs that were affirmed were about 60,000.

This one under the current auspices was about 40,000, and that comprises the TLT funds at about 100,000 a year.

So if you did an RFP and it was about 40,000, you could do it over two years, three years.

You could do two plus one additional year or something like that, however you want to structure it.

The bigger picture would be that it would be for that full spectrum of kind of marketing plus website management.

We're not proposing to rebrand.

We're not proposing to do any of that.

That's kind of big.

We're just proposing to get the word out there to continue marketing.

And for about 40,000, that's probably about what you're gonna get.

Uh campaigns can cost a lot of money.

They just can.

So okay.

Any other questions about I'm just so I want to be like, I know Counselor Schimmel already asked this, but I'm concerned that we have a gap in some marketing because the contract expired.

So the chamber is gonna take that on until this new for sure.

Because otherwise, I would advocate that we do the RFP sooner and like get that social media.

I mean, that's a huge part of where people get their information.

So that's my feeling on that.

Um I'm in discussions with the chamber to do the marketing through then.

So we don't know.

I don't know for sure.

Yeah.

I mean, what's so I guess if I could maybe clarify there's only we can we can amend a contract to a certain amount, but once you get beyond that amount, then you have to redo the contract.

You have to issue a new RFP.

Our contract with the chamber is for the website.

It's for updating the website.

You might be able to get a little bit of social media here, a little something, but you're not going to be able to get creative content and a campaign per se, where you actively kind of you know, create um uh where you come on scene, you can you know, create a buzz, you can get an influencer, those types of things.

It would not include that mayor.

And so if the council wants to look at doing that sooner, we can certainly do that.

Um it would require us um ending the other contract early and then starting the RFP process sooner, and we can do that.

I think it just depends on what the council would like to do.

At present, we were proposing to do an RFP sometime in the late fall.

Probably in that November, December time frame, I think, December, yeah.

And then and then it would become effective April 1st, but we can move that up if the council would like.

Well, well, we know what happens when we rush RFP, so I don't advocate that, but I would rather identify some budgetary remedy that the council can authorize some something incremental to get us through the year.

I I would caution not to ask the chamber to do anything more that we're not gonna compensate them for.

And that true for any any institution.

But um, but I wonder if there's some you know maneuver we budgetary maneuver we as a council can provide you that some allowance to get something going um until the RFP can we can see it through its normal cycle.

Councilor Martinez So is there any way this could have been mitigated ahead of time so we didn't have this drop?

Because this is a concern for our business community.

So we did have the campaign campaign um budgeted, and in that contract, we had a month-to-month um clause that could continue marketing efforts.

The marketing firm did not want to continue on a month-to-month basis.

And um frankly was caught a little flat-footed.

Maybe I did.

Go ahead, go ahead.

I think some of it depends on the budget.

If you want to have a sustained long-term campaign, that's gonna cost you quite a bit more than if you just have an episodic campaign that's once every six weeks.

It really depends on the scope of what you would wanting to achieve.

We were trying to work within the budget of 40,000.

And so that that was um what we were paying the creative marketing firm, and then also the chamber had a portion of that as well for the website.

And so in terms of kind of sustained advertising, you know, uh obviously if you place 50 ads, it's gonna be different than if you place five.

Um, and so I think Counselor Martinez, that also comes back to kind of a budgetary question and how much you want to allocate toward that.

A lot of times what you'll see in tourism destinations is you'll see a campaign that will be in a certain duration to try and attract a lot of visitors during a certain season.

And then they may not advertise near as much during the actual tourism season and then wait and do that advertising in the off season to try and attract that.

So it really just depends on kind of who your target market is, what destination you're marketing, what your attributes are.

There's a lot of things that kind of factor into that.

I hope that helps.

Yeah.

Can I just I'll just add in our tourism strategic plan?

It calls for that um kind of focus separate on the shoulder seasons.

And that's what the RP called for too was the shoulder season focus.

Um in the summertime, our hotels and motels are doing better business than the shoulder seasons, of course.

If the if the firm that was doing the marketing, if they had opted to go to the month to month, what would we have, what would we be spending now?

I don't know.

But we would have been spending something because they had that option.

We would have come back and had a conversation about it, I think.

It would have been more than what was budgeted.

So I mean maybe that's sort of like a I mean that I mean that to me says then that there isn't there room then for some sort of a supplement or an like an addendum.

Um or I uh is it not for that small for that difference.

So if the council would like, I I this may be a question for Miles.

If the request is to go back to the existing firm and to see if the contract is actually canceled and if we can buy a couple more months, we may be able to do that.

And if the council would like, then we could offer a supplement to the council and we can put them back on contract.

I don't know that the council has the contract been officially canceled with them, or did they just stop performing the service?

They just stopped performing the service.

So why don't we go look?

As there's a consensus with the council, we can see if we can reinvigorate that contract.

We would have to come back to the council, however, and ask for some additional funding to bridge the gap until March.

I I think that sounds good.

And I'm just wondering if in order to help like set the stage for the next work session, we can move ahead to like the TLT, and then we can also include on the next work session if we if there's consensus to increase our TLT, like what we want to like give you some direction of things we want you to bring back to look at of where we can invest that increased revenue.

So if can we switch Mireia to the TLT slide?

The percentage.

So there was a consensus, I believe, earlier to increase our TLT.

This is our transit lodging tax revenue that we use to fund these programs.

And so um, does anyone want to?

So right now we're at 2.5.

If we every half percent is 25,000.

So I mean, for me, I think we should do three or three and a half.

But I'm like open to what other counselors think.

Well, we had we had said, but they like that's why I asked Jesse, but we had not like officially so we said three.

Do we want to go any higher than three or stay at three?

I mean, my feelings on it is that we people who come, I think, to visit Forest Grove come because of the university or a specific reason.

So it's not like there's I mean, maybe they'll stay in Hillsborough, but I guess Hillsboro is our neighbor, they're at three percent.

I think anywhere from three to three and a half is fine.

And at this point, I would just raise it to three and a half and not have to raise it for a little bit.

But that's just my take.

Yes, I would support that.

Yeah, I would support that too, because I mean it's it's 0.5, you know, but going up one percent isn't gonna be really a problem, like a visual problem for for people who are traveling.

Counselor Marshall Falcon or Martinez, what are your thoughts?

I guess we have consensus.

Okay, 3.5.

Okay, there's consensus to go 3.5.

And then if you could bring back some lists and ideas of what we can use that revenue to increase uh tourism in the growth and economic development, that would be great.

Okay, I'm gonna adjourn this work session.

I'm gonna give you guys about yeah, a bio.