OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Hillsboro City Council Meeting - May 5, 2026: Land Use Legislation, Data Center Tax Abatements, and Community Testimony

City Council — Tuesday, May 5, 2026
BodyHillsboro, Oregon
SessionCity Council
DateTuesday, May 5, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 2:58:24

Transcript — Verbatim
0:05

Tonight we'll be discussing land use legislation and upcoming housing amendments.

0:09

And our presenters today are Dan Dias, our economic and community development director and Rachel Marble, our economic and community development code and policy project manager.

0:17

Welcome to you both.

0:18

Thanks for being here.

0:19

And Robbie, did you want to say anything?

0:21

Yeah, thank you, Mayor.

0:22

Good evening, Council.

0:24

First, a big thanks to Rachel and Dan and all their staff.

0:27

The information we're going to be sharing tonight is quite complicated.

0:31

This is stuff that's come up in the legislature over the past couple of years as the legislature continues to push ways for helping there to be more housing, which is great, but it does on the local level create some challenges.

0:42

And so Rachel's going to walk us through tonight about what those things are so that the council could be prepared because some of these things are going to need to be adopted as is from the state.

0:49

So with that, I'll turn it over to Rachel.

0:54

Good evening, counselors.

0:55

My name's Rachel Marble.

0:57

I'm a code policy project manager in the economic and community development department.

1:02

As mentioned, I'm going to talk to you all about some legislative updates specific to housing this evening.

1:08

So this list is not conclusive.

1:11

It's not all of the legislation that's passed that's relative to land use, but as you can see, there's there's been a big focus on housing.

1:20

There's been a couple of other things that have been focused on by the legislature that are represented in that other category, which include child care facilities, residential treatment facilities, middle, middle housing and land divisions.

1:35

But I'm gonna focus on housing tonight because there's some big upcoming changes specific to housing applications.

1:43

So just first of all to go over the legislative intent of some of these bills.

1:49

They are aimed at reducing barriers to the land use process for housing production, and mostly focused on procedures for housing for land use applications, some of which we'll see tonight.

2:04

There's also been a focus on or a shift of focus on public involvement occurring earlier in the process, so at the community planning, comprehensive planning stage rather than on a case-by-case basis during the land use process for development.

2:22

So just a quick overview reminder of land use procedures, um, because like Robbie mentioned, it is very complicated.

2:30

Um there's four types of land use procedures ranging from a type one, which is like a fence permit, um, it's a ministerial permit, you get over the over the counter, um, all the way to a type uh four land use procedure, which is a legislative procedure, which is what a code amendment would be brought brought to you all as.

2:47

For this evening, the procedures that we're gonna be focusing on are uh both type two and type three procedures, which are administrative.

2:56

Uh type two is administrative, so those decisions are made at the staff level.

3:00

There's no public hearing.

3:02

Um you don't see those land use decisions unless there is an appeal which comes before you all.

3:08

Um those currently in our code have a 200-foot public notice radius.

3:14

Um, there's also been changes to type three of land use decisions, which are quasi-judicial decisions.

3:20

Um, those decisions do require a public hearing by statute, and they um in our our code require a 500-foot public notice radius.

3:30

Um, I will note that these there are land use procedures set in statute for both types of these applications.

3:38

And um they actually uh differ a little bit from our code in that the type two procedure in the statute requires a 100-foot public notice radius.

3:48

So we we extended that and we over notice those applications.

3:52

And then type three applications, similarly, they at minimum require a 100-foot notice radius for properties inside the urban growth boundary.

4:01

Um, that gets extended a little bit if you're noticing land use applications that involve properties outside of the urban growth boundary.

4:08

So, for example, an annexation.

4:10

Um, but we um have have typically overnoticed those land use applications to allow more properties surrounding the development application property to be aware of what's happening and an opportunity to comment.

4:26

And the last thing I'll say about these two procedure types in the statute is that um there are certain land use procedures in the statute that establish a floor for public notices, and there are certain ones that establish a ceiling.

4:39

So there are certain ones we can extend and certain ones we cannot extend.

4:45

So there are two of them.

4:48

Thank you.

4:48

Um so the types are also determined.

4:52

It's uh it's part of this statute.

4:56

The yes.

5:00

So in the statute, right more previously, um, the the land use procedures were tied to what type of decision you were making, not necessarily the type of application.

5:09

Um, this has been a bit of a shift because the statute is now very specific to certain types of applications, not certain um procedure types.

5:18

So the statute talks about limited land use decisions, which are made at staff level.

5:22

It talks about quasi-judicial decisions, but it doesn't talk about what specific land use applications they are talking about when they talk about those procedures.

5:30

Um the shift I'll talk about this evening.

5:34

Um, the statute does have changes that focus more on types of applications versus just procedure types.

5:41

Okay.

5:42

So sorry, so so the statute just does say type one, type two, type three, type four.

5:49

Um it it it calls them by their um by their it didn't know.

5:55

Um so quasi judicial procedures are labeled in statute as quasi-judicial procedures.

6:01

Okay, okay.

6:01

So these types are just this is our goals.

6:04

It is, and that's it's consistent with other jurisdictions how those are how those are labeled.

6:10

Yeah.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Community Engagement████████████████16%
Data Center Regulation████████████████16%
Public Engagement█████████████13%
Procedural█████████████13%
Affordable Housing███████████11%
Youth Programs████████8%
Economic Development█████5%
Racial Equity████4%
Historic Preservation████4%
Summary of Proceedings

Hillsboro City Council Meeting - May 5, 2026

The May 5, 2026 Hillsboro City Council meeting included an HEDC (Hillsboro Economic Development Council) meeting followed by the regular City Council meeting. Key topics included a presentation on recent state land use legislation (SB 974 and HB 4037) affecting housing applications, public hearing and noticing requirements, extensive public testimony on data center tax abatements, a street naming policy request, and several ordinance adoptions. The meeting featured the Youth Advisory Council (YAC) shadowing and a proclamation for Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month.

Consent Calendar

  • HEDC Meeting: The council approved the HEDC minutes from September 2025 and adopted Resolution 94-26 authorizing the sale of real property in the Jackson East North area to the City of Hillsboro (unanimous).
  • City Council Consent Agenda: Approved a single consent agenda item (unanimous).

Public Comments & Testimony

Nearly 20 community members provided testimony, predominantly opposing data center tax abatements and raising concerns about transparency.

  • Destin Brown (Exec. Director, Hillsboro Farmers Markets) thanked the city for financial support, noting $2.14 million in sales and over 200,000 annual visitors.
  • Denise Van Domlin requested an exception to the street naming policy to add names "Wally" (after her father) and "Beaver" to the database, citing family history and community significance.
  • Leif Eckles opposed data centers, stating they create few jobs (9–22 per facility) while receiving three years of zero property tax, and cited contamination risks (Amazon settlement in NE Oregon).
  • Simone Campbell expressed concerns about data centers, criticized Mayor Pace’s endorsement of a senator, and raised a potential conflict of interest due to the mayor’s spouse being a police department commander.
  • Paige Mendocino called for a halt to data center tax abatements, stating that one center received $5.5 million in breaks for 11 jobs ($500,000 per job). Demanded all pending agreements go through a public hearing.
  • Dirk Knutsen urged immediate code changes to restrict data centers, imposition of a privilege tax on large energy users (e.g., 1.5% on users over 20 MW), and transparency in agreements. He also criticized Economic Development Director Dan Diaz for approving deals without council oversight.
  • Jacob Roloff expressed anger over 13 new enterprise zone agreements signed before a June moratorium, stating that schools lose revenue, and called for the removal of Dan Diaz and City Manager Robbie Hammond.
  • Vern discussed European Union water usage efficiency (WUE) standards and urged Hillsboro to set performance standards for data centers.
  • Martin Lemmon presented a draft "Commercial Resource Impact Surcharge Ordinance" targeting large data centers, with exemptions for manufacturing, healthcare, and high-job-creators, to fund residential utility relief.
  • Karen Jocelyn asked questions about Hillsboro Airport expansion, noise, and prohibited use of airport structures for housing, seeking clearer avenues for community input.
  • Yadira criticized state land use changes as benefiting wealthy interests, questioned who benefits from eliminating public hearings, and referenced the city's newsletter lacking prior data center information.
  • Mr. Brown Wildfire demanded a complete halt to data centers, criticized police funding, and questioned the mayor’s conflict of interest due to his spouse’s police role.
  • Denise Kerr alleged disinformation in city communications about data centers and questioned why a KGW news segment was pulled after a request for equal time.
  • Myrna Munoz cited that top data centers average 26 employees and receive $7.6 million annually in tax breaks ($294,000 per job), calling it corporate welfare.
  • Elijah Radford noted 25 data center addresses with $6 billion real market value, taxed at $1.5 billion, and referenced a Georgia audit finding 70% of data centers would have located there without subsidies.
  • Antonia Lopez accused city leaders of selling land before a moratorium, and criticized the mayor’s marital conflict of interest.

Discussion Items

Land Use Legislation Update (Rachel Marble, Dan Dias)

  • SB 974 and HB 4037: Effective July 1, 2026, these bills prohibit public hearings for certain housing applications (e.g., residential PUDs, major modifications, zone changes) and limit initial decisions to staff level. Appeals still allow hearings.
  • Public Notice Changes: Required notice radius reduced to 100 feet for some applications (floor), with no option to extend for subdivisions; for others (e.g., zone changes) the city may extend to 200 or 500 feet if submitted concurrently with a Type III application.
  • Appeal Rights: Public appeal rights eliminated for housing applications subject to clear and objective standards; only the applicant may appeal locally or to LUBA.
  • Council discussion revealed concerns about loss of community engagement. Councilor Salgado emphasized transparency and community outreach; Councilor Harris questioned staff discretion vs. council authority. Staff noted that map changes still require council approval due to charter requirements.
  • Staff presented two options for noticing (follow statute vs. use greater notice). Council indicated preference for Option Two (greater notice where allowed), though no formal vote was taken.
  • Upcoming code amendments in fall 2026 will address HB 2138 (detached plexes, cottage clusters, density bonuses) and housing production strategy actions.

Naming Policy Request

  • The council debated a request to add street names "Wally" and "Beaver." After an amendment to approve only "Beaver" failed (2-2-1, with mayor breaking tie to oppose), the motion to decline both names passed 4-1 (Councilor Salgado abstained). The request was declined.

Other Business

  • Proclamations: Recognized Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Heritage Month (May 2026) and Public Works Week (May 17-23, 2026).
  • Youth Advisory Council Presentation: YAC delegates shared experiences from the National League of Cities Conference in Washington, D.C., highlighting networking, sessions, and a Capitol Hill visit.
  • Appointments: Bridget Harrington and Paul Vonday appointed to the Public Engagement Committee (unanimous).
  • Ordinances:
    • Ordinance 6514 (Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan Update): first reading approved.
    • Ordinance 6516 (Child Care, Residential Treatment, MHLD Code Update): first reading approved.
    • Ordinance 6515 (Transportation Systems Plan Update): adopted.
  • Resolutions:
    • Resolution 2917 (Grant application for Griffin Oaks Park playground): adopted.
    • Resolution 2918 (2024 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan): adopted.
    • Resolution 2919 (Property purchase from HEDC): adopted (Councilor Alcare voted no).

Key Outcomes

  • Approved all consent items and most agenda items, with the exception of the street naming request (declined).
  • Council directed staff to explore options for enhanced public notices where state law allows.
  • Council expressed support for Councilor Salgado’s proposal to partner with a Spanish-language radio station for downtown revitalization; staff will scope the idea.
  • Councilor Alcare raised a future discussion topic: removing barriers for renters to run for city council.
  • Staff will update data center FAQs and provide a follow-up report on land use changes after sufficient project examples have been processed.
  • The post-council work session was postponed to a future date.

Meeting Transcript

Tonight we'll be discussing land use legislation and upcoming housing amendments. And our presenters today are Dan Dias, our economic and community development director and Rachel Marble, our economic and community development code and policy project manager. Welcome to you both. Thanks for being here. And Robbie, did you want to say anything? Yeah, thank you, Mayor. Good evening, Council. First, a big thanks to Rachel and Dan and all their staff. The information we're going to be sharing tonight is quite complicated. This is stuff that's come up in the legislature over the past couple of years as the legislature continues to push ways for helping there to be more housing, which is great, but it does on the local level create some challenges. And so Rachel's going to walk us through tonight about what those things are so that the council could be prepared because some of these things are going to need to be adopted as is from the state. So with that, I'll turn it over to Rachel. Good evening, counselors. My name's Rachel Marble. I'm a code policy project manager in the economic and community development department. As mentioned, I'm going to talk to you all about some legislative updates specific to housing this evening. So this list is not conclusive. It's not all of the legislation that's passed that's relative to land use, but as you can see, there's there's been a big focus on housing. There's been a couple of other things that have been focused on by the legislature that are represented in that other category, which include child care facilities, residential treatment facilities, middle, middle housing and land divisions. But I'm gonna focus on housing tonight because there's some big upcoming changes specific to housing applications. So just first of all to go over the legislative intent of some of these bills. They are aimed at reducing barriers to the land use process for housing production, and mostly focused on procedures for housing for land use applications, some of which we'll see tonight. There's also been a focus on or a shift of focus on public involvement occurring earlier in the process, so at the community planning, comprehensive planning stage rather than on a case-by-case basis during the land use process for development. So just a quick overview reminder of land use procedures, um, because like Robbie mentioned, it is very complicated. Um there's four types of land use procedures ranging from a type one, which is like a fence permit, um, it's a ministerial permit, you get over the over the counter, um, all the way to a type uh four land use procedure, which is a legislative procedure, which is what a code amendment would be brought brought to you all as. For this evening, the procedures that we're gonna be focusing on are uh both type two and type three procedures, which are administrative. Uh type two is administrative, so those decisions are made at the staff level. There's no public hearing. Um you don't see those land use decisions unless there is an appeal which comes before you all. Um those currently in our code have a 200-foot public notice radius. Um, there's also been changes to type three of land use decisions, which are quasi-judicial decisions. Um, those decisions do require a public hearing by statute, and they um in our our code require a 500-foot public notice radius. Um, I will note that these there are land use procedures set in statute for both types of these applications. And um they actually uh differ a little bit from our code in that the type two procedure in the statute requires a 100-foot public notice radius. So we we extended that and we over notice those applications. And then type three applications, similarly, they at minimum require a 100-foot notice radius for properties inside the urban growth boundary. Um, that gets extended a little bit if you're noticing land use applications that involve properties outside of the urban growth boundary. So, for example, an annexation. Um, but we um have have typically overnoticed those land use applications to allow more properties surrounding the development application property to be aware of what's happening and an opportunity to comment. And the last thing I'll say about these two procedure types in the statute is that um there are certain land use procedures in the statute that establish a floor for public notices, and there are certain ones that establish a ceiling. So there are certain ones we can extend and certain ones we cannot extend. So there are two of them. Thank you. Um so the types are also determined. It's uh it's part of this statute. The yes. So in the statute, right more previously, um, the the land use procedures were tied to what type of decision you were making, not necessarily the type of application. Um, this has been a bit of a shift because the statute is now very specific to certain types of applications, not certain um procedure types. So the statute talks about limited land use decisions, which are made at staff level. It talks about quasi-judicial decisions, but it doesn't talk about what specific land use applications they are talking about when they talk about those procedures.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com