We go to City Hall.

Before we begin our meeting this evening, we're going to have a swearing in ceremony for our new municipal court judge Amy Lindgren.

And to kick us off, I'd like to invite Clackamas County Circuit Court judge Colleen Gilmarton to come forward.

Who's going to be swearing in?

Judge Lindgren.

Judge Go Martin.

Thank you, Mayor Buck.

Good evening, everyone.

Before I do the oath, I um do have some remarks that I would like to share.

I am just deeply honored to be here this evening.

Amy is a dear friend to me.

And we met in 1999.

Yes, the 1900s.

And I remember we were in law school together, and I remember meeting Amy and being immediately struck by her character, her outgoing personality, and um her genuine kindness.

And one thing I'll never forget is how hard she worked.

Amy and I were friends through law school.

Amy and I, our paths diverged, I guess, after law school.

Um, but we eventually met back up again at the Clackamas County DA's office where together we served um for years, and our friendship just continued, I think, to blossom and grow.

Um I was again um part of Amy's family.

I was honored to be um at the wedding.

I was um not there, but obviously when her children were born was part of her life at that time.

I'm not certain who the applicants for this position were, but I am certain that there could not have been a better choice.

Um as I said, Amy is one of the most hardest working people you'll ever meet.

Her genuineness is um probably something she got from her parents, who I believe are here today.

Um she is kind, she is sincere, and she follows through with everything she says she'll do.

She is one of the best people I think you could ever meet professionally and definitely personally.

When she called me for today, a little couple little tears, um, because I was just really, really honored to be here.

I know the people of Lake Oswego will be well served by her being a judicial officer for the city.

Um I know she's experienced, as I said, incredibly hardworking, but also one of the smartest, just genuinely smartest people you'll ever meet.

So with that, Amy, why don't you come up and we'll do the swearing in.

If you could raise your right hand.

I, Amy Lindgren.

Do solemnly swear.

You solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And I will faithfully and honorably conduct myself.

And I will faithfully and honorably conduct myself in the office of municipal judge.

In the office of municipal judge.

So help me God.

So help me God.

Congratulations.

Thank you, um, everyone for the opportunity.

Thank you, Judge Go Martin, for your kind words.

And um for coming today to do this.

It's funny when I'm in court, I don't get nervous.

Um, perhaps because I'm ordering people around.

But um, in all seriousness, um, I get more nervous when um it's with friends and family here and important people like the city council.

Um but I just first want to say thank you uh for trusting me with this position.

Um I take it very seriously and I'm humbled by um the honor you have imposed on me.

Although I do not live in Lake Oswego, I am feel like I'm already part of the community here.

Um the staff has been amazing.

I um just I have loved walking around and going on my lunch breaks and just meeting the citizens as they come into court um on their traffic offenses or more serious ones.

Um I want you to know that um I am just really honored by the opportunity.

So thank you.

And I just wanted to say thank you to my family and friends who were here to support me as well.

I want to make a few introductions really quick.

My husband Doug, who has supported me through all of this, my kids, James and Greta, and my mom, Molly.

Uh, who you who isn't here is uh my father, uh Mike, who was a um superior court judge in Orange County uh for 30 years.

Um he passed away last year.

Um, and he came has come to my swearing-ins before.

And so this it's sad he's not here, but I know that he would be very proud of me now.

Um, my sister and brother-in-law, Joel Nicole are here from California as well.

St.

Mary's graduate here, Councillor Verdick.

Um, she'll talk to you about that later.

Um, and my in-laws, John and Marilyn Lindgren, um, Doug's parents, and my good friends uh here, and I have some old co-workers here, my old boss, Greg Horner, Jen Brown, and Steve My Grant.

Um, so thank you all for coming.

I really appreciate your support.

Um that's it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And now, everyone, we invite you to stay for a little uh reception for uh Judge Lincoln.

Congratulations, we're glad to have you in the community.

Thank you.

Okay.

Uh we'll uh for those of you watching on TV, we'll return to the regular meeting at around six o'clock.

Thank you.

So evening again, everyone.

This Tuesday, uh, October 7th, 2025, meeting of the Lake Oswego City Council is now called to order.

Uh Ms.

Hawkins, will you please call the roll?

Here.

Councillor Afkin is on Zoom.

Mayor Maboop.

Yeah.

Mayor, sorry, Mayor.

Councillor Wenlin.

You're promoted.

Counselor Verdick here.

Counselor Corrigan.

Here.

And Councillor Raf is on Zoom as well.

Did we tell you, Joe?

The last could be seven mayors.

Yes, yes.

Yes.

Yeah, really.

Uh thank you.

Now, everyone, will you uh please uh stand, remove your uh hats and join us in the pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the play of the United States of America.

Thank you to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Okay.

Well, we have to uh start us off tonight.

We have a couple proclamations we'll be uh making.

The first is Meals on Wheels Month.

And if you'd raise your hands, we have members of Lake Oswego Meals on Wheels board here, Judy and company.

Thank you all for being here.

We appreciate it.

Uh since 1972, Meals on Wheels has been providing healthy meals, vital support and social connection to seniors, those who are housebound, and people with disabilities in Lake Oswego.

Um as I mentioned, we're joined tonight by by the board, who are also uh volunteers, and they represent some of the 150 dedicated volunteers that serve the community every day.

During October, um, we the city of Lake Oswego joins in the celebration of older adults and the Meals on Wheels program that supports healthy aging in Lake Oswego.

And so that proclamation that we make for Meals on Wheels Month will be uh listed on the city website, and we invite everyone to uh, if they can participate in the program, be a meals on wheels volunteer and help connect uh with homebound residents in the community.

They also will take your money, yes.

And then they give it back to us.

Our other proclamation relates to Indigenous Peoples Day, which is October 13th.

Indigenous Peoples Day offers an opportunity to reflect on the resilience, sovereignty, and invaluable contributions of Indigenous peoples.

The city of Lake Oswego recognizes the historical, cultural, ecological, and contemporary significance of Indigenous peoples and their lasting contributions to our community.

Let this October 13th serve as a reminder of our shared responsibility to acknowledge the truths of the past, honor the presence and leadership of Indigenous peoples today, and commit ourselves to building a more inclusive, respectful, and equitable future for all.

So you'll find that proclamation as well on the city's website.

And now is the time set on our agenda for public comment.

If you are here and would like to provide public comment and haven't already done so, there's these little white uh slips on the back table.

Go ahead and fill one out and hand it to Miss Hawkins.

But Becky Owens and Sabrina Trembling.

And you both signed up to come together.

It's great to have you both here.

Good evening.

No, no, just make yourselves right at home.

You good, you could have a seat.

We'll make sure your microphones are on how do you do that?

No, you're good.

You're good.

I can tell.

Yes.

Oh my god, right here.

Please.

We go ahead and go ahead and introduce yourselves.

All right.

Well, um, Mayor Buck and members of council.

My name is Sabrina Tremblay, and I am the co-founder of Young Employment Success Lake Oswego.

So, Yes LO is a growing group of local parents, educators, and professionals who have something in common.

Um, we love the city.

Um, we know that we live probably in one of the best cities on the West Coast, and we thank you for everything that you do.

Um, there is one area in Lake Oswego that is falling short.

Uh, life after high school for young adults with disabilities.

When these students turn 21 in age out of the school district's community transition program, opportunities in the city disappear.

Parents describe this to us as a cliff where their children suddenly have nowhere to go, no work options, and no sense of purpose.

For many families, this cliff is not just a metaphor, it represents lost progress, isolation, and deep concerns for the future of their children.

Over the past 10 months, our team has been laying the groundwork for YesLO to fill that gap.

Um, our mission is simple, um, but it's it's powerful.

Um, we want to curate employment and volunteer opportunities for young adults with disabilities and helping them build fulfilling lives right here in their own hometown.

Um, our first concept is a culinary and barista training program that will evolve into a community space that we have affectionately named the living room of Lake Oswego.

It's conceived as a third space, and it will serve as a welcoming hub where young adults will learn practical skills, build their resume, and serve their community.

Um, our nonprofit will unfold in phases, and we have a strategic plan to sustain and grow this model.

Um, tonight you will see um some of our supporters here in the audience.

And it's important.

It matters.

Um, we're here tonight because um we anticipate that this journey will present many challenges.

Um, this is where your support becomes invaluable to us.

Uh, we ask for your guidance, encouragement, and collaboration and helping us overcome future obstacles so that we can build a program that truly serves the young adults with disabilities in Lake Oswego.

Um, by working together, uh, we believe that we can make Lake Oswego a model of inclusion for the nation.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, everyone.

I'm sorry for three minutes.

I'm gonna speed raid.

Um, my name is Becky Owens.

I'm the proud parent of two amazing young men, Charlie 22 and Max 20, who have lived their entire lives in Lake Oswego and are products of the Lake Oswego School District and Lake Oswego community in general.

I am following my fellow co-founder for Yes LO tonight because I would like to give you the parent perspective.

And there are many of us, as you saw, as to why this nonprofit is so vital to our city.

In our society, work is more than a paycheck.

Employment is about dignity, independence, and a sense of belonging.

But for our young adults with disabilities, the path to meaningful work is often filled with obstacles, lack of accessible opportunities, and the unfortunate misconception that their contributions may be limited, as well as outright ableism and negative negativity from the employer.

Yes, LO stands as a beacon of hope, breaking down these barriers and redefining what's possible.

As I said, my youngest Max is a young adult with a rare genetic syndrome and is cognitively and physically impacted by that syndrome.

We are currently facing the end of school district services this June, and I can tell you this new chapter necessitates endurance, creativity, and unwavering love and support from parents to figure out a meaningful future for our kids.

It became clear to me very early on that there were minimal employment opportunities in the city of Lake Oswego, and many parents have likened the aging out of CTP to be a very loud thud.

CTP has provided Max with a sense of community, the predictability of a schedule, and a purpose.

What happens to him when that is no longer an option?

Well, my son Charlie had plenty of options to work in LO, close to home and around his friends, unless Max meets the criteria to work at a grocery store.

Meaningful paid employment opportunities are simply non-existent.

There's nothing wrong with working at a grocery store, but that is not a long-term solution for Max and many others.

I realize that if Max wants to get paid for doing something he loves, like baking or serving the public and talking with customers, we would need to look for we would need to look far outside Lake Oswego for any sort of meaningful opportunities for him.

That is unfair and to be blunt, unacceptable in a city like Lake Oswego.

We have inclusion in our school district, but we don't have inclusion in our city.

We have an amazing opportunity to be pioneers in our state.

Our goal is to build yes lo to be a beacon of hope and possibility, and Lake Oswego can be the model for other nearby communities.

When we first developed our mission statement and vision, I told Sabrina that it must include the phrase in their own hometown.

Because Max and his friends should have the exact same opportunity that Charlie and his friends had to work where they live, to be seen and appreciated for the unique people that they are, to contribute to the city and community that helps raise them, and to experience the simple delight of running into their friends and neighbors at work.

Yes, LO believes every adult deserves the chance to discover their strengths and to contribute to their community.

This is the first of many times we will be here to ask you for your support, and I hope you will join us in saying yes to opportunity, yes to empowerment, and yes to yes low.

Thank you.

Oh, thank you both very much.

So for no other reason, this organization will succeed due to the tenacity of those two right there.

You've both been dedicated for many years to your kids and all the kids in NLO.

We appreciate it.

Is there anyone else who would uh like to provide any public comment this evening?

Okay, thank you all.

Uh we're gonna move on to the consent uh agenda.

We have three items on the consent agenda.

One is ordinance 2968 uh annexing 2405 NAS Road.

One is the other is resolution 25-42, creating and approving appointments to the Foothills District Technical Advisory Committee.

And the third is an amendment to the IGA with Lake Oswego School District regarding use of the um Lake Oswego recreation and aquatic center.

Is there a motion to adopt the consent agenda?

I move to adopt the consent agenda.

All right, motion has been made by Councillor Corgan and seconded by Councillor Windland.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay.

That motion passes 7-0.

And then we have for uh counselor consideration only uh resolution 25-4-4.

Um this is appointing uh advisory uh board members.

These are some um alternate members being appointed to full members.

Is there a motion to adopt resolution 25-4 move to adopt resolution 25-44?

Motion been made by Councilor Verdick and seconded by Councillor Mboop.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Okay.

Any opposed?

No.

Okay, that motion passes 6-0.

The um mayor abstaining.

Okay, and now on to council business.

We're going to uh start with a uh presentation on a Lake Oswego public art project, a collaboration between the library, uh, the arts council, and respond to racism.

So I'd like to invite uh director Melissa Kelly of the public library, Bruce Poissette, Respond to Racism, and Nicole Nathan.

All three of you will get chairs for you all here.

Good evening to all of you.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and Counselors.

Thank you for your time today.

We're happy to be here to talk with you this evening about the response to racism and arts council uh public art project that is going to be cited at the Lake Oswego Public Library.

We're really excited about this project and to see the process move forward.

Um this collaboration between Responder Racism, the Arts Council, and the library and other city departments to get us where we are today has been a thoughtful and mindful process where each step has been planned and executed with integrity and intentionality.

We're grateful for the time and effort on behalf of all the partners and community members involved and excited to share with you where we are.

First, a quick recap of the overall timeline, which was included in the staff report.

The vision for this project really started in discussion in the city in 2020 when Respond to Racism Leaders held meetings with city leaders about the vision for the project.

The library was identified as the host site in 2021, and we began early visioning and planning meetings to talk about the site and the vision.

In 2022, Response to Racism applied for ARPA grant fund through the city for the project and received council approval.

Planning meetings continued through 2023.

And in 2024, Response Racism received a date extension for disbursement of grant funds, and we continued to work toward the project.

However, for a variety of reasons, we were not able to have an artist under contract before the end of 2024.

In January 2025, Council reallocated the ARPA funds to another project and awarded a general fund grant to the Response to Racism Art Project.

And then this year, more work ensued, and we'll talk more about that in the next few slides here, as well as the roles of each of the collaborators through the request for proposal stage in the selection process, bringing us up to today.

Good evening, Mayor and Counselors.

So in collaboration with the library and the arts council, we invited artists and artist teams living in Oregon to submit proposals for our site-specific public artwork that will be at the exterior of the Lake Oswego public library and is set to be unveiled in summer 2026.

We selected an artist this past month.

The theme for the project was historically relevant and accurate information regarding the history of racism in Lake Oswego and the city's aspiration to be free of racism, as well as embodying themes of hope and healing.

The budget for the project itself was 31,000 for interpretive panels and sidewalk stamps on the exterior of the library.

And the roles the different partners played were as follows.

The RTR was leading the project and sharing alignment with the community vision.

ACLO will be providing insights and guidance on the art collection and inclusivity, and will lead project management through the installation phase, as well as be Liaison between the city of Lake Oswego.

The library served as a site partner for art installations and is a community state community stakeholder with site expertise.

Our project manager was Emily Prado, who led the development and launch phases of the RFP.

And our panelists had the responsibility of reviewing, narrowing, and ultimately selecting the artists to execute this final project.

Our project was really based around a community-centered approach.

So this comprised of trust or our panel comprised of trusted stakeholders representing each organization, as well as community members with varied expertise and backgrounds, including local arts, activism, curation, arts education, public art, local history, social justice, andor community engagement.

This approach was essential for the project's success and relevance, actively engaging community members in the planning and implementation implementation phases, ensuring that the art reflected the diversity and identity of the community, and build stronger connections between the artist and local community.

A little bit about Respond to Racism.

So our mission is to educate and empower residents with the tools to combat racism in all its forms and make Lake Oswego, Clackmas County, and Oregon a better place for people of all races and ethnicities.

Our work is based on three pillars, which are learning, dialogue, and action.

Finally, the project goals.

So as mentioned before, this process began at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

We selected the library as an ideal partner because of our shared values, and because it's a high traffic destination for community members of all races, ages, and backgrounds.

I know for myself growing up here, it was a place of refuge.

So this project had seven goals, which I'll have to share now.

First, facilitate a sense of introspection, knowledge, and hope second, be engaging, informative, and inspiring to the public, especially youth and families.

Third, ADA accessibility in enhancing the atmosphere by exhibiting a variety of sensory elements.

Four, being grounded in knowledge about the local history, balancing information about the past, present, and future aspirations of Lake Oswego.

Five.

Our works are encouraged to be designed in such a way that allows for easy relocation or reproduction.

Six.

The art should harmonize with the mission of RTR, the library's values and architectural design, and the city of Lake Oswego's public art guidelines.

And finally, strong consideration was given to proposals that were led by artists who are BIPOC.

Thank you.

Can you hear me okay?

Well, yeah, okay.

We can hear you, but so they can hear you at home.

Exactly.

Perfect.

So looking at the last few months, we see the process since May of this year, which was focused on the memorandum of understanding, which was signed between the city, respond to racism, and ACLO, laying out roles and responsibilities of each.

And a call for applicants for selection committee panelists all happened in May.

In June, the call for panelists was open, and there was an orientation for those folks at the end of June.

Then during July and August, the RFP was open to applicants.

As you see here on this slide, um here we see the review process for the submitted applications.

The applications were scored by the panelists, and a little bit about the panelists.

There were nine total.

It was an odd number to avoid ties.

And the representation, the goal was at least to be 51% BIPOC, and that was met.

The composition consisted of four total stakeholder representatives, two from Respond to Racism, two board members, and two representing the city.

One was on the library advisory board, and the other is from the ACLO board.

And then five total open applicants, which represented the areas which Bruce just talked about.

So the artist recommendation came out of a rigorous equity-centered request for proposal, which was jointly administered by Respond ACLO and the Lake Oswego Public Library.

The process was designed to ensure transparency, diverse community input, adherence to the city public art guidelines, and a fair evaluation of the proposals.

So what you see here is kind of a timeline of how things progressed.

So panelists scored the nine applications that were received.

They were all looked at by three different panelists.

So they narrowed the six semifinalists to three ranked finalists.

Those folks then came to those applications, then came to the public art committee meeting on September 15th, where Melissa and Lake Oswego public library representatives we went through, looked at the public art guidelines, made sure that everything was being adhered to in terms of selection criteria, and then further narrowed that selection of three down to two.

Those two then went to the respond board for a final recommendation, and that's what brings us here today.

So in terms of a panelist process, um, they were really crucial in reviewing, narrowing, and ultimately recommending the artists for this project.

So it really made sure that diverse perspectives were represented, community voices were centered, and selection was based on a transparent and rigorous rubric.

Emily Prado, who Bruce mentioned before was the project manager on behalf of Respond, and she really designed a great way of being able to bring this to fruition.

So in terms of the RFP scoring guide, which you um see before you the ACLO public art guidelines are noted in orange, and those directly reference the criteria, which is part of 5.1.2 of the public art guidelines.

So each aspect of the criteria were incorporated into the rubric.

So quality, creativity, artistic excellence, innovation, original works of art being considered, evaluating how well and accurately the project engages with Lake Oswego's history, examines the proposals' appropriateness for the collection, how the artist understands the vision of the artwork, responds to the site with consideration to accessibility of diverse populations, including people with disabilities, youth, elder, local residents in the neighborhood, and more.

And again, feasibility and longevity.

Is this proposal thorough?

Is there a realistic budget, timeline, and resource management?

Can this artist execute this project?

And is the artwork structurally sound?

Is it something that's going to last?

And is it something where they have helped us out with maintenance provisions as to what we do with this piece in the future?

So, with all of that, through the review process, Sahara Ailana Defries, her application rose to the top.

And this is a quote from her application.

My name is Sahara Defrize, and I'm a biracial black queer woman who's an artist, designer, and joyful disruptor who believes healing and art belong to everyone.

Creating art is a generative act of resistance and healing that can shift culture, educate, heal communities, and amplify voices.

The name of her project at the library is called Echoes of Belonging.

Emily Prado summed it up really well.

We had a pretty swift and unanimous meeting with the respond board in favor of Sahara DeFries.

We're reflecting back on the conversations that have happened from the community panelists to the public art committee and the public libraries review to the respond board review.

Her proposal is the clear lead biologshot.

So a little bit about her proposal.

So you see here that there are again the two aspects of the proposal.

They are a sidewalk treatment and then some interpretive panels, which were called out specifically in the in the RFP.

So the first installation, again with the four panels, which you see in the bottom right corner there.

It um the four panels talk about four different aspects.

So sundown, the first panel abstracts a fading sunset into a starry night with black folks admiring the sunset.

It symbolizes Lake Oswego's history as a sundown town, yet imagines a new future as well.

The second panel, red lines and covenants, layers grids and boundaries to reference restrictive covenants and redlining that has shaped housing and wealth.

However, a white hand holds the key and a pair of brown hands holds a home representing the city's effort to amend racist covenants.

Tumwada honors Willamette Falls as a cultural hub for indigenous peoples whose stewardship was disrupted by settler violence, yet whose presence continues today.

And the final panel, communities in color, forms a mosaic of diverse faces representing immigrant, diasporic, and black communities who enrich Lake Oswego.

The words you belong are translated into many languages.

So to route this work in community, Sahara will host public paint by number events at the library where participants can contribute to the panels after attending talks on the histories of which each design represents.

So this really takes the painting into a collective ritual of learning, repair, and joy.

In terms of the sidewalk treatment, she proposes a piece called Rain Speaks, and it's a series of sidewalk stamps with words from black feminist authors, Audra Lorde, Alice Walker, Octavia Butler, Angela Davis, Maya Angelou, Tony Morrison, and Belle Hooks, all who are included in our library's collection.

Each of the stamps sparks reflection, and when rain falls, which is very familiar, an illustration which you see in the blue semicircles that appears across all the whole length of the sidewalk, symbolizing resilience and renewal.

So our next steps moving forward.

This is as Bruce mentioned, this is where ACLO comes in to help with this portion.

So we will be working with the artist and Lake Oswego Public Library.

Once the artist is notified of the selection, we have a meeting scheduled to work on a contract with Ellen on Friday.

Have that contract executed by the end of the month, and then start meeting with the artist to discuss project specifics, including site plan, parameters, placement materials, ADA considerations, community engagement plans, and the timeline.

One of the areas we'll work with the artist on is the specific placement of both the panels and the sidewalk treatments at the library.

The placement of the interpretive panels as presented by Sahara needs some adjustment due to site constraints.

These include the landscaping, uh, the gallery without wall sculpture, the guardian that's on the right side of the photo here, as well as irrigation, right-of-way, ADA accessibility, use and traffic on the sidewalk.

The pink line in the image represents where the library and ACLO are suggesting the panels be placed.

The sidewalk treatment will extend further than that pink line and will be planned around the established trees planted along the sidewalk.

We will also strategize with the artist and stakeholders on final materials, how the panels will be installed, for example, on a concrete footing, their placement.

One idea could be two two-sided panels to be more appropriate for the size of the site and the constraints of the grounds of the library, as well as proximity and connection to the sidewalk treatment.

So, in terms of the community engagement aspect of the project, we will assist with that as well.

Um, and work with the library to host those, get those out into the community and participation.

Um Sahara talks about this in her application, and this is actually an image from another community event that she led.

Um she has experience with leading, quote, youth workshops, community projects, and public art celebrating blackness, nature, and joy by combining collective creation, education, and daily encounters.

This project fosters dialogue across ages and backgrounds.

In past projects, I co-created with residents, ensuring participants felt ownership for Lake Oswego.

This process will surface difficult histories while offering healing and belonging.

So as we talked about a little bit, the painting of the panels is also part of the proposals, so we can have community engagement that way.

Um the paint by number events at the library where participants will be able to contribute to the panels.

Um neighbors of all ages and backgrounds will then gather outside the library, paintbushes, paintbrushes in hand, filling in vibrant paint by number panels after hearing the histories each design represents.

What begins as art making becomes a collective ritual of learning, repair, and joy, where past injustices are acknowledged and a future and a shared future is imagined together.

And this is really amazing placemaking in action.

History and hope alive in the hands of the community, transforming paint on a surface into a permanent symbol of inclusion and belonging.

By looking back, we can collectively look forward painting and bringing to life the future we want together.

This is history in the making, is a quote from the artist.

An important consideration is how will respond to racism, the arts council and the artist ensure that the uh final artwork aligns with the mission of the library and is welcoming to everyone in the community.

And a primary goal of the installation is to uplift BIPOC communities and help BIPOC individuals and families feel a greater sense of belonging and connection in Lake Oswego.

Another primary goal is to engage with our aspirations as a city to be a welcoming community that cultivates well-being and exceptional quality of life for all.

Art also provides an educational opportunity to help build cross-cultural understanding, appreciation, and respect.

Each panel will integrate QR codes, linking to written as well as audio descriptions in multiple languages, ensuring accessibility, and offering residents and visitors entry points to learn more.

In addition, as Nicole, as Nicole noted, the library collection features books by all of the black women authors who will be quoted in the sidewalk stamps.

Well, thank you all so much for both the presentation, but also just this running this whole process.

Um I know it's involved doing the RFP, taking the time to talk to folks about the RFP, you know, before they submit and go in through inviting all of you and all the community members who have participated on the selection panel, um, the members of the public art committee.

Um, just I know there's been already up to this point a lot of community engagement on this, and um so thank you all for this process.

This this piece, and it's a long time coming, yeah.

Five years in the making.

So thank you.

Well, it's great, you know, collaboration.

Um, and just looks like there's some final, you know, details to work out in terms of the the siding.

That's kind of a big, you know, or an important one, so we don't crowd out the front of the library too much, you know.

But you have a good handle on on that.

Definitely want to have make sure that there's aesthetic feel with with where it's placed, and um yeah, I think we can accomplish that.

They're all over it.

Yeah.

Um so the what are the panels?

So I I saw in the some of the materials that like it's uh it's like a core 10 wrapped what are the panels.

How she has proposed it, and again, this is a proposal, so we can work with her on um final material selection.

She has proposed that it would be painted, um, that acrylic outdoor paint would be used on um actually some uh some wood panels, which I would steer her probably away from toward more like a metal panel or something that um could be then uh coated with an anti-graffiti coating and then put in a she is also looking at a uh metal frame for each of them.

So they would be a lot more durable materials, again, suitable for outside.

Okay, painted.

Yeah, yeah.

She's a painter, yeah.

I saw so, yeah.

Okay.

Um has um uh so this kind of unique work of art.

I just was looking, I couldn't like uh we don't have an example to point to of another one of these panels, it's unique.

No, no, not at this time.

But you feel good about it.

Um you're in it, okay, obviously.

Yeah, yeah, I do.

Um, I think you know, this is what we do with a lot of our public art projects is that you know you work with the artist to figure out okay, what's the best material, what's the best application of this, and what's gonna work best at the site?

You know, the site does really dictate a lot of what happens there.

So yes, I feel very confident that we can figure out something that will last, um, be easy to maintain and look great in front of the library.

Great.

I know we have a lot of trust in you and your team.

You guys are the experts.

Colleagues, questions?

Counselor Williams.

Who's going to on the maintenance part?

Will it just be encaptured in the rest of the pack?

Sort of other art pieces in town so we can make sure that it's taken care of over the years.

That would then, yeah, it would then fall under the arts council and and public art committee.

Yes.

Okay, great.

Great, wonderful.

Thanks.

Councilor Burr.

There we go.

Um, so thank you all for this work.

Um, this is very exciting.

Um, I do have a question for kind of the written in the audio.

Who's doing that work?

That would be also a collaborative community effort, and that we would um all contribute to that and come to uh an understanding of what that would be.

Um where it would be hosted.

I think we need to still figure that out, but that would be part of that conversation as well.

Okay, great.

And then I'm hoping that in this too that we're focusing, you know, we're talking about um, you know, the redlining, the sundown, and that was more than just black people who were impacted by that.

So I just want to make sure that we're you know, give the full picture of what that was and the history of that and who is included, so that it it that's we represent everyone as we're telling the story.

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Councilor Corgan.

Yeah, I think that um the rain actuated paint is absolutely fascinating, especially in our climate our climate.

It's like so appropriate.

But is there a history to that?

Do we know how that will weather?

What will happen?

Do we or is that the first time?

It's the first time that we would have it within the city's collection, although there are um instances of it throughout like the metro area.

It does require some repainting every couple years to be able to make sure that it still is staying, you know, true to its original design.

Um, but again, that's pretty typical upkeep.

And she actually um the artist talks about it in her um in her proposal of that she is prepared to either train folks to be able to do that, or she would come back and do the the maintenance as well.

Great, thank you.

Thank you.

Councilor Booth.

Thank you.

I just uh wanted to acknowledge the role of the art council and me being with Councillor Corrigan representing the city there and the great work you're doing.

You know, uh quite frankly, you know, I always that person who always want to do things that unite the people, not you know, to divide them.

And art is that form, you know, art as Andre Malro, a philosopher, Frankfurt said that it's an untied destiny.

It's uh it's what gives shapes their styles.

And when I read this artist, I I'm very happy.

And what counselor uh verdict is saying is just you know, we tell the I talk to Melissa about that that we have to tell the story, but we always can say things in a way that's the truth, but that makes everybody comfortable.

And when we work on art on public things, it has to be something that unite us.

No one can hide the history of Lake Oswego of Oregon for that matter.

And it's great to, as a person of color, I'm very proud to live in a city that recognize my people that they can go do their artwork in public.

And where on my city hall, we have a mirror that represents those folks.

It's it's something that showed that Lake Coswego is moving forward, and it's wonderful that the what we're doing should show that the redlining were for the Asian, were for us, and it has, and I'm so proud to hear folks that I love, like Audrey Lorde, who is wonderful for me in terms of, you know, like, yeah, she's a wonderful woman that people should know more about.

And uh Belle Hooks, who in even in Paris, there is a street named Belle Hooks.

So, you know, to see those people in our street, and the because all those people, they were fighters.

Angela Davis is still alive.

They fight for justice, for social justice, but they also fight for the union for America to be one.

And that has always to be that thing we never forget, because they're folks who are against what we're doing.

We should never lower our guard.

And that was my concern.

I talked to some people on public art and stuff, and I'm very proud of the work you were doing.

I'm also proud of response to racism, what they're doing in the city, and I hope everybody will be proud to see the rendition of that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Brook.

Yeah, good uh comments all around.

And we just I uh concur with Councilor Verde.

We want to just make sure it's we don't want to inadvertently uh offend members of the groups that we're trying to like, you know, um feel welcome, you know, at the you know um it's a tough one.

We ask a lot of this art.

We're asking a lot of this art.

Um would someone like to make a motion to approve this selection?

Oh, one more uh oh one second, Councillor Verde.

I'm really curious.

How is that about the paint by numbers?

It sounds really cool, but is that them actually painting on the panels themselves, and that becomes like the panel, or does she do that panel work?

I I'm confused.

How I understand how her proposal was written is that um that community members would paint portions of the actual physical panels.

She probably lays it out and you know, here point this portion this color.

That's how I would kind of assume that that would go.

Um, but again, I'm not gonna speak directly for her.

But yeah.

Yeah, okay.

Yeah, it sounded really neat.

I was just wanting to make sure I was reading and interpreting what her thoughts were, because I think that's a really um wonderful way to bring everything together and bring every you know people together.

Um and then I would just say my only um you guys sound like you're on top of this already, but I just want to say I agree with you in terms of the placement of the panels.

The sidewalk sounds absolutely so cool.

I can't wait to see it.

Um but the panels, I think we just want to be really careful that they're highlighted so people see them, but at the same time it doesn't detract from the other artwork that's already there.

And it sounds like you guys are already on top of that and kind of maybe coming up with some different solutions, but I don't want the panels to suddenly look like billboards.

You know, we want them to maintain the artistic and and the um you know everything that you've talked about in terms of hope, healing, knowledge.

So we really want them to look fabulous.

So um, but again, sounds like you're on top of it, but just want to reiterate that I support uh you you know continuing to work with the artists and work with the site and so forth.

Thank you.

Okay, uh counselor.

So move to approve the selection of Sahara Aylana de Fries to be the artist for phase one of the response racism and as council of Lake Osico Public Art Project at the Lake Oswego Public Library.

Second.

All right.

Uh motion was made by Councilman Boop and seconded by Councillor Corgan.

Any further discussion of the our gentleman on Zoom phone?

Okay.

Uh all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All right, any opposed?

Okay.

Motion passes 70.

Director.

Thank you all very much.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Do we have a completion date?

Summer summer.

Yes, summer.

June 26th.

Okay.

Right in line with the North Anchor.

We'll celebrate them at one time.

Uh okay.

Next, we're going to have a double public hearings.

Um, a couple annexations.

Uh, and we will invite Mr.

SB, annexation expert, associate planner.

Um, up here.

Uh we have ordinance two nine six nine.

So we have uh two uh two annexations here.

We have uh two ten birds hill road, including public right-of-way, and thirteen zero nine two amber place in public right-away.

So uh we will start with a review of the hearing procedures by Ms.

Osnack.

Thank you, Mayor Buck, members of the council.

Now at the time set for public hearing on ordinance two nine six nine annexing property at 2110 Birds Hill Road.

Uh, for the purposes of our record and for the city recorder, the uh script that I'm about to read applies equally to uh item 11.2.

The procedures are exactly the same.

That's ordinance two nine seven zero, which annexes property and the public right-of-way 13092 Amber Place for both of those ordinances.

Uh they involve an application of the criteria and standards listed in Mr.

SB's comprehensive staff report.

Uh that's available at the back of the room if anyone like it.

Testimony and evidence, uh, if any is going to be received, should be directed towards the applicable criteria, um, including the comp plan or other um land use regulations, uh, failure to read any issues uh that are directed to the criteria uh that are would be sufficient to afford the city council or any party an opportunity to respond to that issue would preclude an appeal to the land use board of appeals.

Uh the public hearing process is as follows.

We're gonna have a presentation by staff, uh testimony uh by the applicant if the applicant so chooses, individuals are allowed up to five minutes, recognized neighborhood associations, homeowner associations, government or government agencies or other incorporated public interest organizations are allowed up to 10 minutes.

If the applicant chose to testify, they also have five minutes to rebut.

Time limits don't include time spent responding to the questions from city council, and any person in attendance can cede his or her time to another person, but no one's testimony shall exceed 10 minutes.

Uh prior to the closing of a hearing, a party, if any who testifies for the city council can present, uh can ask for an opportunity to present additional evidence, um, and that will be granted.

Um, and the record would remain open for seven days.

Um at this point, I'll ask um for both uh 11 item 11.1 and 11.2, whether or not um there are any ex-party contacts, including a site visit, any bias that any counselor has on this application or any financial conflict of interest.

And I will pause briefly to allow those who are online and in the um here in the room to make any of those declarations.

Hearing none, uh we are uh ready to move on, Mayor.

Thank you.

Okay, thanks, Ms.

Ostack.

Thank you, Ellen.

Okay.

Uh Mayor Buck, members of the council, good evening.

Um, I will go ahead and run through both presentations for both annexations, and then we can separate those and we can review those under separate public hearings uh after that.

Perfect.

So our first step is um 210 Birds Hill Road.

The plan and zone designation um is currently under Clackham's County's jurisdiction and is owned low density residential R 30.

And it's designated R10 in the city's comprehensive plan and will be uh zoned R 10 upon annexation.

Sanitary sewer service uh can be made available from an existing eight-inch public uh sewer line uh that is owned by the city of Portland in um in To Williger Boulevard, and then we are allowed to use that sewer through an intergovernmental agreement.

And then we are allowed to use that sewer through an intergovernmental agreement.

And the property owner wishes to connect to this sewer because they have a failing septic system, and I believe that they're going to do some minor remodeling to the single family dwelling.

Water is available from the Palatine Hills Water District and will remain in this district after annexation.

So 13092 Amber Place.

The plan and zone designation are currently under Clackmas County's jurisdiction and zoned low density R20.

They are designated R 10.

They're also designated R10 in the comprehensive plan and will be zoned R 10 upon annexation.

Sanitary sewer is available in an eight-inch line in Amber Place, and it terminates at the south boundary.

And as the property develops, the line would need to be extended far enough to serve the homes on the site as well as the future connections for 13079 and 13101 Amber Place right across the street.

So they would need to serve all of the uphill residents as well.

Water is available from a six-inch city water main located in Amber Place along the site frontage.

And then finally, we find that these properties are within the urban services boundary.

Public services can be provided in a timely and orderly and efficient manner.

The proposed annex annexations are timely with regards to public facilities and recommends approval of those annexations.

I have open for any questions.

Thank you, Mr.

SP.

Any questions from Mr.

SP.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

We are going to open the public hearing on ordinance 2969 for the 210 Birds Hill Road property.

It'll ask Is there anyone here who would like to testify on this ordinance?

All right.

Seeing no one, I'm going to then close the public hearing and to entertain a motion to enact ordinance 2969.

Move to enact ordinance 2969.

All right.

Motion made by Councillor Winland and seconded by Councillor Moo.

Is there any discussion?

No.

Okay.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay.

Motion passes 70.

And now we'll open the public hearing on ordinance 2970 for 13092 Amber Place.

Is there anyone here who would like to testify on ordinance 2970?

All right.

See no one.

And then close the public hearing.

Um entertain a motion.

Move to enact ordinance 2970.

Second.

All right, motion made by Councillor Wind, then seconded by Councillor Verdict.

Any discussion?

No.

Okay.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

No.

Okay.

Motion passes 70.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr.

Espy.

You're welcome.

Good to see you.

Welcome to Lake Us We Go.

Yes.

All right.

We are now going to hold two study sessions.

The first is a uh a review of our our annual review of solid waste and recycling rates.

And we have our sustainability program manager, Amanda Watson here to talk to us about this with Lindsay Waldrum from Bell and Associates.

Good to have you both here.

Good evening, Mayor and Councillors.

My name is Amanda Watson, and I'm here with Lindsay Waldrum, senior associate from Bell and Associates.

We're going to present to you our the findings of our Republic Services annual rate review.

Sorry, I'm is your microphone on?

Just want to make sure.

All right, I'll set a little closer.

Okay, perfect.

Um we are gonna present to you the findings of our Republic Services annual rate review.

Um we also have um representatives from Republic Services.

Our partners are here in the audience.

Um we have Cindy and Travis as well.

Um as a reminder, Republic Services has an exclusive franchise for the collection of solid waste in Lake Oswego through ordinance 2901.

Um and the company has three lines of business in Lake Oswego.

Um for residential and commercial services.

You see up on the screen here.

Um it's very comprehensive.

Um rates for residential and commercial services are both bundled.

Um so there is just as a reminder, there's one rate that residents pay based on the size of their garbage container, and that includes recycling and mixed organics collection as well.

And for commercial customers, again, they pay one rate based on the size of their cart or container, um, and that includes garbage recycling and organics.

Um yard derby is actually separate, but um organics to comply with Metro's food scraps separation policy.

Sorry, touchy screen there.

Um so our solid-based franchise ordinance provides for an annual renewal uh review of our public services financial reports and an annual service rate adjustment to provide the franchisee with a target rate of return of 10% within that allowable 8 to 12 percent return.

Up on the screen here are what our ordinance provides for for city council when when considering whether or not a rate adjustment is necessary.

Again, this is familiar, these are the criteria that we use every year.

And we contracted with the consulting firm, Bell and Associates to conduct a review of Republic Services 2024 annual financial report and provide recommendations on rate adjustments.

So I'm going to turn it over now to Lindsay Waldrum to share the findings of their review.

Thanks, Amanda.

Can you guys hear me?

Okay.

Excellent.

So just to kind of go over our methodology a little bit, the results reported by Republic were analyzed and the following tests were completed.

First, we compared it reported route collection hours to the reported customer counts for each line of business.

We used a predictive test of revenue for each line of business to ensure the reported revenues were reasonable.

We conducted a predictive test of disposal to determine if the reported disposal expense was reasonable.

We also reviewed other direct cost line items and determined if the expense was reasonable in relation to the customer and operational data provided in the detail cost report.

We did something similar for the administrative line items.

We determined if it was reasonable based on operational data entered.

And we reviewed the costs between the city and republic's other franchise collection operations to determine if the allocations used were reasonable.

Next, we consolidated the financial data by service showing the total revenues and expenses of collection systems, which you can see on the screen now.

This slide outlines the returns for each collection service provided under the Lake Oswego franchise collection system.

The overall adjusted return on revenues was 13.9%, broken down as 11.2% for roll cart, 21.4% for container, and 9.4% for Dropbox.

Once the adjusted franchise results were calculated, we determined the expected increase for collection services by applying known and measurable cost changes to each line item expense.

These included a 3.9% increase in driver wages based on the labor contract with Clackamas County Sanitary Truck Drivers Association, an estimated 5% increase in administrative wages, a 5.5% increase in the metro waste disposal rate effective that became effective July 2025.

A 2.35% inflation adjustment based on CPI West size class A, all items, and a 61.6% increase in fuel costs due to the expired CNG tax credit.

This table shows the results after those adjustments.

So as you can see, overall the return on revenues was 13.65%, and it's broken down here, roll card at 11.8, container at 20.39, Dropbox at 7.38.

I should mention, I apologize, I missed this on the previous slide.

We also did adjust revenues, so that's why the sum of this is showing this.

We adjusted revenues based on the rates that were approved in February 2025.

So you will see a change for that.

The higher, oh sorry, the higher overall profit compared to the previous year's expected results is primarily due to a 14% increase in commercial revenue.

We believe the current projected return is sufficient to maintain existing rates through December 2026.

So no rate adjustment is proposed at this time.

And I'll turn it back over to Amanda who will share some additional recommendations.

Thank you.

So although we're not recommending an overall rate of adjustment to rates this year, there's a few updates to the rate schedule that we'd like to recommend that the city council consider.

The first of those is to restructure our bulky waste rates.

And you may remember that we actually did restructure them last year.

For a number of years, we had a structure where residents who had big bulky items that couldn't fit in their garbage container.

Those were collected based on a or those were collected separately and charged based on a yardage fee, which was difficult for people to understand.

Even myself, like I don't know, it's hard to apply yardage to a refrigerator, for example.

So we updated them last year to be an itemized list of fees with a different price for a number of different items, mostly individual items, some grouped together.

We got some feedback both from education and outreach that Clackamas County was doing with multifamily buildings in Lake Oswego, but also from Republic Services, that that itemized fee still was a challenge for people to understand the exact costs that they would be charged.

Part of it is that Republic Services call center couldn't couldn't really handle a list that was that long when we're providing information for like Oswego customers.

And so Republic's request for us was that we adjust, we uh update our fee structure again, and rather than have a bunch of different uh rates for each individual item, use some simple categories.

So small, medium, large, extra large, a category for items with free-on, which need to be disposed of separately, and electronic waste.

Um, and so that seems, you know, again, you know, straightforward, easy for customers to understand, and easier for republic services to implement through their customer service system.

Um, so we pass this along to Bellin Associates and had them make a recommendation.

They recommended that we adopt the same fees and same fee structure as Washington County.

Washington County and Portland actually both adopted this type of rate structure in the past year.

And so Washington County had recently done a review to understand, you know, how the cost of disposal for items, what the cost of disposal for items was and build in the labor costs for those to make rates that according to Bell and Associates are a reasonable and fair, and we feel are easier for like Oswego customers to understand.

So the staff recommendation is that we adopt as recommended that new structure that is is the same in Washington County.

Another advantage there is that Republic Services operates in Washington County, and so you know, again, those are rates that they're already operating under a structure they're already familiar with.

Um the second uh proposed update to the rate schedule is to pause recycling contamination fees.

So, as part of the statewide um law to modernize our recycling system called the Plastic Pollution and Recycling Modernization Act, local governments are receiving funding to implement contamination reduction plans.

Basically, a plan to help make our recycling stream cleaner by educating customers about what goes in the bin and what doesn't, by having a feedback loop when there is contamination and recycling, and then having some type of a penalty, be a service penalty or a fee.

So local governments are supposed to be developing these plans.

Um Clackamas County is going to be working on developing a plan for the county, including Lake Oswego and all the cities within it.

Um so this pause the recommendation to pause recycling contamination fees is so that we can be consistent with what the county recommends in terms of fees.

Right now, Lake Oswego has contamination fees for carts and containers for recycling, um, but not all cities, actually, most cities in Clackamas County, including Clackham's County themselves, don't have those fees.

And so the staff recommendation here is to wait until we have that direction from the county and we can roll out fees paired with education and feedback.

Um, I do want to share that you know, in talk in discussing this with Republic Services, they're not uh supportive of that approach and they would prefer that we keep the contamination fees and and just kind of update them when we have the information from Clackamas County.

And the reasons for this is that they're concerned with the optics of um, so right now in jurisdictions that don't have contamination fees, typically what happens is that if uh let's say it's a commercial business, if there is a lot of garbage in their recycling and the hauler observes that, they will let that customer know, hey, we found you know, recycling or we found garbage in your recycling, you know, please correct this.

And if you don't correct it, we will need to dump that as garbage and charge you as such.

And so Republic Services is concerned about the optics of having to dump contaminated recycling as garbage.

The other concern is that you know, they point out that when individual customers aren't charged for the contamination that they are you know personally or you know, company-wide responsible for, the cost of dealing with that contamination are spread across all customers.

So they had a fairness argument as well.

Um so I did want to share that.

This is you know, a decision point I'd like to get council's feedback on is whether or not you would prefer to pause recycling contamination fees for until we have that countywide plan and approach and and really the the educational piece alongside the fees.

Um the next recommended update to the rate schedule is to restrict the extra yardage fee to garbage containers only.

This is a little bit wonky, so I'll explain what this is.

Um so right now we have on our rate sheet an extra yardage fee that's charged to commercial customers when the um there's excess material that they are disposing of that that's beyond the capacity of the container.

Um it has been um we actually asked uh Bell and Associates to look into some of these additional service charges that were charged for commercial customers in Lake Oswego, because we saw that additional that um so much of the additional revenue was coming from commercial customers, we wanted to kind of look into that.

One of the things that we picked up was that extra yardage fees were charged to commercial customers quite frequently, more than we expected, and found that that was being charged both to in instances where there were overflowing garbage containers and in instances where there was extra yardage in recycling.

And you know, in talking to our rate consultants and in talking to uh Clackham's County, that is not standard practice across our region.

For my understanding, we're the only jurisdiction where this fee is being applied to recycling.

Um so the recommendation is that we restrict that just to garbage, we make it clear on our rate sheet that that charge is just for garbage containers.

And really the real reason behind this is that as I mentioned in the beginning, our rates are based on the size of the garbage container.

And so if a customer consistently has more recycling, the expectation is that Republic Services works with that customer to adjust their service for recycling so that they don't have that overflow, right?

Because it's it's additional work for Republic Services when there's material that's beyond the container, it takes more time, you know, that's that's a problem for them.

Um, but rather than charge them more, they should be working with that customer to increase the size of their recycling container if needed, or come more frequently, pick up three times a week instead of twice a week.

Um, but that you know, the argument is that the um there should not be a fee for additional recycling.

Um should be a fee for different garbage because you're being you're the customers are being charged based on that garbage container.

So we talk about residential.

No, this is for commercial, excuse me.

Yep, just for commercial, yes.

So containers, thinking dumpsters basically, like a big container.

Yeah, things are okay.

Okay, so when they're yes, a large overflowing recycling container.

I see.

Yeah.

All right, I'm sorry, and the contamination fee was that also just commercial?

That the recommendation is to pause for both.

Um to be consistent.

I think we did.

So last year we actually added commercial recycling or commercial contamination fees where we only used to have residential, and that was in anticipation of this plan.

And it actually took DEQ longer than we expected to put out guidance to guide those plans.

We're basically behind where we expected to be.

So we sort of prematurely adopted those commercial contamination rates last year.

We already had it for the residents.

We already had residential.

I think for consistency, it makes sense to pause both, but one option would be to just pause the commercial ones since those were people being charged the residential commercial.

My understanding is for both, yes.

Oh, they are, yeah.

And uh just like when we say contamination, are we talking they threw like the wrong size yogurt container in the no?

No, it it it varies, but it could be something like um people in the residential side, you might see something like people putting their recycling in plastic bags in their cart.

That's contamination.

Um commercial side, it could be a uh bag of garbage on top of recycling.

And I think it really depends.

Um recyclable materials.

I put the wrong numbered item.

And how does the driver, how do they know?

I mean, yeah.

Sometimes um it can be visual.

So I've I've kind of followed up on things, and um, you know, they'll they'll be like, here's the picture of what you know, they had they had plastic milk jugs in their glass container, right?

You can see that.

But there's also um more and more of the trucks now have um cameras.

Um so when they're dumping a big commercial container, they can see that contamination as it's being dumped into the truck.

So kind of coup a couple different methods.

But you know, the point being I think we want to move towards a more consistent process in which they're you know recognizing the recycling, the contamination, the customer is notified.

There's some education that the county can provide, you know, that it's kind of it's holistic and it's not just so right now they just get the fee.

They there's no follow-up line not even know.

Yeah, Republic does where they have the information, they do contact the customer.

Um, and so and again, you know, tell the customer if there's contamination.

I know it it varies, they may not catch it, you know, in time, and but they are supposed to be consistently contacting customers before the fee is charged to let them.

Do they get a warning?

I don't know if you want to look at public services folks.

One warning.

Yeah.

Okay.

So like a tag on your cart.

That's good.

Yeah, I don't know.

I kind of think that the fee is.

Yeah, I mean, people should not be putting trash in the recycling pit.

I mean, and I think the fee is helpful.

If I got the fee, I I would be like, okay, you know, I'm not, I mean, I wouldn't do that to begin with, but hypothetically.

You know, on the commercial side too.

I mean, I kind of feel like they should be even better.

Are we talking about the colour?

Yeah, it includes multi-family.

That's the big challenge, right?

Because I think, you know, the there's this split challenge where the person who's paying the bill, the property owner is not responsible, not fully responsible for and controlling resident behavior.

So that's where that education piece comes into play, where I think we need a really strong educational program paired with right consequences, right?

These things go together.

But maybe we keep the residential in place and and delay on the commercial.

The recommendation is just for one year as well, just so we can be consistent with Clackamas County.

So, you know, you'll you will see me again next year for the next rate review, and we can you know continue the conversation too.

So okay.

Okay.

So I might see over yellow.

Is there consensus on that?

Fine.

Okay, no one's that interested.

And then what about the extra yardage fee on the um on the on the garbage, yeah?

Yes.

Oh, yeah, we like that.

Yeah.

Yes.

Okay, to restrict that to just garbage.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

I just had one more the the general cleanup.

Um, so there's a there's just a few rates, um, basically unnecessary rates on our rate sheet that are no longer used that we need to remove, and then a couple that were missing.

And so um the unnecessary rates are um we used to have uh separate set of rates called for summary billing accounts, um, where uh, for example, HOAs paid for yard debris service um on behalf of residents, and so they were on a different rate schedule.

We have bundled rates where um HOAs can still choose to do that, but all residents are on the same rate.

So we're removing that separate summary billing service rate.

Um we also had a reinstatement fee on our rate sheet that's duplicative of a cart redelivery fee.

So if it was if someone's service needed to be paused, or if it was, you know, rental or someone wasn't renting for a long time, didn't need garbage service.

There was a basically it was two fees that were the same amount that would have hit this person and so or this customer, and so we will just um proposing to remove the duplicative fee.

Um, and then what was missing was a late payment fee, which is in Republic Services billing policy, but I just wanted to make sure it's listed on our rate sheet.

Um, if someone is more than 45 days past do their account.

Um, and then a standard industry lock fee for containers, which was previously on our rate sheet, but was just missed last year, and so we're gonna make sure that that shows up again.

Um the reason why we we try to be really thorough with this is that Republic Services can only charge those fees and um rates that are on our approved rate sheet.

And so we just want to make sure that everything that they need and you know charge customers are on there, and again, that they're all um you know reasonable and just so a little bit of just clean up um with those those four rates that I mentioned.

So I'm sorry, can I uh is there in this?

I'm sorry, I'm gonna go back to the recycling contamination and the uh uh recycling contamination.

Is there now in this in this intervening year outreach being done to multifamily to help with the education?

Now that nothing, nothing's happening.

We're just waiting on the county.

There, I mean, Clackamas County does do education and outreach.

Um that they've always done that on behalf of us as part of the recycling partnership that we have with the county.

Um, but with this new statewide law, they're gonna be getting additional funding so that they can increase that.

Because typically right now it's generally um if we get a complaint from a resident, I escalate that to the county and say, hey, can you you know work with this community?

Or they may get direct requests.

So it's sort of um as problems arise, and they are gonna have additional resources to be more proactive.

So there is education happening, there's just a lot more need that there's capacity right now, and they'll be um developing this plan with more resources to do more of that.

Do we I mean are there if there's a property that's having an issue, do we see them taking like a proactive action, the property manager being like, okay, we need to install some signage, or they absolutely that's exactly what happens.

But if they're aware of the issue, and I think that's the challenge is that you know they have they have a pretty small team, they have very hardworking team, but they they aren't able to kind of proactively drive around the community and look at containers, they're gonna be regularly checking in and you know, through newsletters and things like that.

But it's really um when issues are are escalated when they hear of an issue, then they come, they do a site visit, they do signage, they do education where they need to.

The county the county.

I was thinking I mean I really think the owner should be on the the property owner to and that's why I do like the fee thing because I mean they're raking in a lot of rent, you know.

I mean, they should be signing, especially if it's a problem and they know it's a problem.

I mean, there is some duty to make sure their residents are complying with it.

I mean, I don't think it's the county's I mean, it's great that the county helps, but I don't think it's the government's job to make sure people put the trash in the right bin, you know.

I mean, that's crazy.

We don't have the resources to do that.

But the private equity firms that own the multifamily complexes, yeah, they have the resources.

So anyway, but I'm fine with the pods, but I do think ultimately, yeah, I think it's a good policy to have fees going on to the property, and then they'll start installing the signage.

The county shouldn't be doing it.

They do receive some funding, that's basically why they do it.

They receive dedicated funding for it, but yeah, you know, and we do we do what we can within the scope of of our work, but they do the bulk of that for us.

Those fees, those fees they change on council well.

Uh can we just ask general questions on the whole thing, or do we have to stick to the yeah?

I I think I just had um general yes, general questions as well.

Okay.

Um, first uh after reading the report, I just want to make one comment that I think pertains to the wonderful job that Republic is doing for our city.

Um they got 40 positive comments and 40, you might say not as positive comments.

And in a business, you usually get a 10 to one ratio, 10 bad for every one good kind of a lot of people that do good don't really chime in all the time.

Right.

So I think that's fabulous, and I think that is um one part of the good relationship that we have with Republic and our city, and I appreciate very much the partnership uh with trying to get all of the little, I mean, you would not think that garbage and recycling and everything is so complicated, but after you look at everything, it is actually complicated.

My concern is that it's an uncontrollable cost, but what do you see of the metro disposal rate increases in the future because they've been going up higher than healthcare um uh or college tuition?

I mean, and I'm sorry, but what are we doing differently that is causing increases?

Yeah, uh it's a complicated question.

I and I'm not an expert on kind of all the cost drivers for them.

I do know we expect it to continue going up.

They did a cap.

Um, they established a cap a couple years ago, and actually, this is we didn't reach that cap this year, was it nine percent?

I think um uh but they metro did a process to look at their rate setting and kind of review it in the past year.

Um they I mean separately they have uh a solid waste system facilities plan process um where they're looking at you know uh solid the solid waste services that are available to the public across the region and have a plan for new facilities and for changing facilities and for potentially um changing their role in transfer stations, and so I do think we are gonna see some um some changes.

I I don't know in which direction, but um I think we can we can expect yes, I think it's gonna continue to come a little bit high.

You have more insight on that, but I don't I so it's kind of interesting looking at the report because it kind of shows it slowed a little bit this year.

I think that's what you're mentioning at 5.5%.

It was double digits the two years prior, but I really don't know what it's gonna look like next year.

I would also assume though it's gonna continue to go up.

I just don't have any solid information yet.

So then I'll say that you know, um Metro has a budget process every year and provides um opportunities for local governments, um, you know, at the staff level, but you know, at the also at the regional waste advisory council level to provide input, and there is consistent um communication and feedback through that about the impact of um metro disposal fees on local governments, and I think we will continue to raise that in that venue, and so um we will see you know how that's taken into uh effect in the future as well.

Well, I um I don't know.

I guess um it's not quite as uh a subject like tolling is, but I do think this could be something that the mayors could all just write a joint letter because when you look at it, I mean 2021 was 15.7, 22 was 8.5, 23 was 11.2, 24 was 11.9.

I mean, that is just ridiculous.

I mean, that that's a compounding I for the finance people, you're doubling your money in five years, and that's just not uh that's not acceptable for the the people that live in in homes that that everything else is going up, and um, it's just one additional expense.

Now, they don't see it as a direct payback, but they do through the rates that republic has to charge us um to fit our criteria.

And I I do think that it wouldn't be a bad idea if we got a letter off to Metro uh as a because I that's just is um unless they're putting more onus on the consumer so that they can take money and spend it elsewhere that's not on garbage, and I don't know how that works.

Um, but I would bet that money is going elsewhere that um it wasn't before.

Uh last thing is I do support the the rate structure.

Um Republic came and had a bad 22, was it or 23, whatever year it was.

Um and sometimes when you see these returns, you have to look at the history, and we've we have uh we do the give and take over the course of the years, and it all equals out.

Um and I know they were good to come to us and and compromised on their rates uh a couple years ago.

Um and so this year, I mean if you're okay with the rates, I mean if it's fair, is everything fair, Republic?

Is that fair?

Okay, good.

And you're all good with this decisions we've made tonight.

Yeah, absolutely.

And thank you for the direction.

Um I I also I didn't have the information on the metro disposal fees with me tonight, but I'm happy to follow up too with some more context on why that's increased, and you know, we do have that information from them, so I'll bring that or I'll send you an email.

Okay, yeah.

I you know, Metro's out of our control to a certain extent, but it can be under our control.

Hey, we stopped tolling.

I mean, I think that's that was uh now.

Um but I think in an equal sense, it's the the average person um just gets dinged by this stuff.

And I don't know.

I'm just not I'm not okay with that.

So yeah.

Um not as bad as PGE.

Well, that's yeah, but that's mandated by the legislature legislative stuff that they put into place.

Big one.

Even the New York Times put out a thing that said we want to see your utility bills nationwide.

They're like these things are going up higher than anything else.

But it's are they is Metro spending some of the increased fee on on the capital uh plan?

Yeah, for is that part of it?

So I feel like I know too much about this.

Metro's uh fees have three pieces.

The first is the actual uh regional system fee, which is paid on every ton of garbage.

Right, and that's used to operate the the transfer station system and send your stuff to um to Arlington to be disposed of.

That probably is where they've built in.

Remember you had um you had Marisa here, not Marisa, you had um Marta McGuire here talking about the regional system plan and their their uh desire to build a new facilities, including one on the west side to deal with Metro South.

That's probably where that is.

It's also all the costs they have for actually operating the um the bigger system, so the educational programs, compliance with the regional uh the recycling modernization act, so all the overhead costs they go.

They also have their actual tip fee, which is what happens if you go to the if you go to Metro South or Metro South uh Central and you tip a ton of garbage at their transfer stations, you pay their tip fee.

That tends to set the floor for everybody else's tip fee.

So even if our garbage goes to a different transfer station, very often the private haulers charge uh an equivalent or slightly higher fee.

And then the other piece of Metro Solid Waste charges is they have an excise tax, which is how they put pay for their general fund.

Um a hundred percent of Metro's property tax revenue goes to pay for the zoo.

So the there is an excise tax.

So again, it has three pieces.

Oh the system fee, the actual tip fee, and then the excise tax, which is all folded.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Now we're probably because we're going to Republic's transfer station, right?

The regional.

We're not paying the we're not paying the metro tip fee here in Lake Aswego.

We're paying the regional system fee and the excise tax.

Does that make sense?

Yeah, but they're also going to be collecting tonnage.

Right.

Yeah.

On the tone.

Well, and on the dollars collect, I mean the excise taxes.

There's a very complicated formula that is tied.

I don't want to get into it, but they have a essentially negotiated deal with industry where they get us uh basically a guaranteed rate of return on the excise tax.

So that can go up and down depending on how much garbage is being disposed of.

Right.

And now people are going to be paying for every package that you buy because there's a new tax that is put on to the producers that's going to go right into your what?

That's the recycling modernization act.

So that's the upstream payment for the c I mean it all costs something.

The question is when do we pay it in our in our use of stuff, right?

Yeah, vendors are adding the RMA tax.

Just like we're getting tariff fees charged on top of things that we buy as an early.

I don't I mean it's I don't know why they don't fold it into the price, but you know, they want to let you know.

Like okay.

Uh so yes, everyone else?

Yes.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you both.

Thank you.

And thank you, Republic.

And your drivers are absolutely wonderful.

That's all I hear about is how wonderful your drivers are.

So and the um uh this new alert system, too.

I don't know if that's relatively where the email with the when the when the drivers come in, the pickups on the way.

I mean, the communication really has improved greatly.

Yeah, that's awesome.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Of course, I'm getting trash picked up so much I'm emailing console.

Um, uh Counselor Ref.

Oh, you're uh somehow we can't hold on, hold on.

We don't have audio on you.

Let's see.

You're not muted, but we did it.

No, but well, Allie's not it's counselor.

Okay.

Can you try it again?

Well, you you want to talk about the garbage.

Oh.

Yes.

Thumbs up.

Garbage.

Okay.

Okay, hold on.

No.

Can you check the microphone on your end, Councilor App?

Yeah.

Can you maybe we'll then why don't we just we'll just take can we maybe we'll take a five minute recess and we'll troubleshoot the he's in, but I want to take a recess anyway.

Five minutes, just five minutes.

He's fine.

Oh well, he doesn't want to say anything, but we're taking okay.

We're back in order.

All right, so we have the last uh study session of the evening is uh on uh home occupation standards, and we have associate planner Michael McNamy and Director Numalu here with us.

So great to have you both.

Good evening.

Um this is a follow-up study session to discuss a proposal to update the city's specific use requirements regarding home occupations.

The council previously discussed this at a study session in April.

Um just as a quick refresher, home occupations are a business conducted from a residential unit that do require a business license to operate.

As of January 1st of this year, there were about 570 of them operating in Lake Uswigo.

Most involve a business owner or owners working alone out of their home, but some do have clients or customers coming to the home.

In the previous study session, we discussed the primary purpose of the project, which is to replace one of the existing use specific standards for home occupations.

Currently, home occupations must comply with a standard that says the use cannot alter the residential character of the surrounding neighborhood or infringe upon the rights of residents in the vicinity to the peaceful enjoyment of the neighborhood.

The standard is nebulous, open to a wide amount of interpretation.

So the city is proposing to replace it with a set of new standards that capture the intent of the existing standard while being clearer and more measurable.

We discussed several concepts to replace the existing standard at the previous study session.

After further research, two more work sessions with the planning commission and analyzing the results of a survey staff sent to home occupation owners, which we also talked about at the last study session.

Many of these concepts have been refined, replaced, or removed.

This is reflected in the draft code amendments that were attached to the staff memo.

And I would be happy to discuss any of those changes if the council has questions today.

Otherwise, uh we'll plan on discussing each of the concepts in more depth at the public hearing.

Uh staff is looking for direction today on how to handle one of the concepts, uh placing limits on or prohibiting outdoor activity associated with the home occupation.

At the previous study session, we also talked about creating a new agricultural use category that could cover uses such as a winery.

Uh after feedback in the survey that demonstrated these uses might be too intense to meet the proposed new requirements under the home occupation ordinance.

And these ideas have been fleshed out a bit uh more since April.

And staff is looking for input from the council about the proposed specific use standards and changes to the land use tables.

Starting with outdoor activity, uh, this is probably the area of biggest disagreement uh between the planning commission and council.

In the April study session, the council indicated they thought uh no outdoor activity associated with home occupations should be permitted.

Uh this is aligned with existing internal policy, uh which the city mostly feels has been working.

However, feedback from the planning commission, the public, and some home occupation owners in the survey was that some lower impact outdoor activities should be allowed.

Um staff has developed two options for how to handle outdoor activity that reflects this feedback.

Option one would permit small instructional classes outside with a limit of eight participants, and option two would not permit any outdoor activity.

Under option one, no more than two sessions would be allowed per day with a maximum of six per week, and hours would be limited to between 9 a.m.

and 7 p.m.

No classes would be allowed on public holidays.

Business use of outdoor space for events, rentals, parties, weddings, performances, markets, or other commercial gatherings associated with the business would be expressly prohibited.

Under either option, a business owner would be permitted to work alone outside to do things like paint, work on a computer, or make things.

The reason for this change is partly based on uh the planning department receiving inquiries from people in residential areas interested in having a farm stand, uh prompting the question internally about whether to permit them as home occupations.

Um instead, staff believes it would be more appropriate to regulate them under the existing uh specific use standards for farm stands.

Farm stands as defined in the community development code are a temporary or permanent structure used for the sale of fresh produce and seasonal items, including flowers, holiday trees, and wreaths.

Currently, farm stands are only permitted in some of the commercial or mixed-use zones.

When permitted as an accessory use, the code limits their overall size to 800 square feet.

Because of the size limitation, the planning commission felt the impact of permitting them would be minimal.

And allowing them in all residential zones reflects their guidance.

Uh the proposed changes would also create a new use category called urban agriculture.

Um as you may recall, one of the existing businesses operating as a home occupation is a home winery, which is a fairly intense use to be classified as a home occupation.

Staff is proposing that the urban agriculture use category be created, which would allow us to create specific use regulations that are tailored to this type of use.

It would be permitted as an accessory use in the R10 and R15 zones, or the lowest density residential zones the city has.

Staff is currently proposing a limit of 20,000 square feet or 35% of the area of the lot, whichever is less.

That would include the area under cultivation, any structures associated with the agricultural use, the compost pile, or any other area associated with the use.

Hours of operation for sales or serving and use of heavy equipment would be limited to between 7 a.m.

and 8 p.m.

And there would be a further limit on the total number of days for sales or serving of 70 days per calendar year.

A maximum of 30 clients or customers would would be permitted on the property at one time.

If a proposal did not meet one or more of these standards, a conditional use process would be available.

Before you leave farm stands, Michael, farm stands would be a do you have to grow the produce on your own property or produce the goods?

Doesn't specify.

So anyone could just open a farm stand on their residential property without growing any agricultural products on their property under this provision.

As currently written, I believe it would, but we could uh address the provision.

I mean, the kinds of things we're thinking are the people who put the little stands with the farm where they sell flowers.

And sell them in my neighborhood.

And regularly, yeah, Bill Youngblood has to go visit they're not they don't grow the Christmas trees on their property.

I know someone who does that.

Yeah.

I think he might be at school.

It might be different.

He's not residentially zoned.

I'm talking about single family homes.

So I just I I'm I'm concerned about I understand what you're saying, which is the cute little stands where people have the honor system and you can pay five dollars and get flowers, but I'm thinking that this might not be what actually ends up happening.

So we right now, we we don't allow the farm stand.

Uh not in any of the residential zones, no.

I see.

Yeah.

I mean, and and and to follow on Martha's question.

So you don't have to grow it, and you have to sell something agricultural, but it but it could be if it's pretty expansive, like a re wreath, Christmas tree.

You could just be, and how many folks.

I'm just thinking like we're having this other discussion about the other types of businesses and how many people can come, but the farm stand you just plop a table out, and people could you could do it year-round, people would be, yeah.

I don't know, I'm kind of leaning towards just keep the kibosh on the farm stands.

I mean the farm farm stand.

I mean, there's nothing here that's anything about a farm.

I mean, what the heck.

We have one farm, washer, and it's not even in the city.

So yeah.

What do you what do you all think about that?

Uh my thought is that uh part of the original discussion that we had was that you're in a residential area being a commercial zone.

And we have so many commercial zones that are within literally half a mile um of any anyone's residential that you kind of have the divide.

Um I would uh I I just don't I mean this doesn't prevent somebody from having like a little uh lemonade stand or things like that, right?

No, I mean we don't typically I mean I guess unless somebody was was operating one of those you know constantly every day, you know, but that's typically not what we see.

Um and I would point out that um we do allow community gardens and it does allow the sale of produce that is grown at that garden uh on a limited basis.

So we do already have that provision.

Um but that's a community garden that is not on somebody's residence.

Is that correct?

Yeah.

Yeah, I can't.

It doesn't preclude it, but but typically no community gardens are usually kind of as a right.

I mean, those are you go, I mean, if you live near a cooperative garden or whatever, you just know that there's a lot of people there.

It's kind of like living next to a park, right?

Yeah.

So I'm kind of like, let's keep the let's just not go there.

Yeah, I don't see the need for the hi, Jerry.

Yeah, yeah, you good with that too?

Yep.

Okay.

Well, that's an easy one.

What about you?

What do you all feel how I feel about the urban agricultural use?

This is our winery.

Indeed.

But the agriculture, yeah.

Yes, it would.

We have a winery in in Lake Washington.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I think they're not doing any harm.

But he doesn't have uh yeah, these little side stands that I mean, he's out.

I think you want to get 30 people doing the wine.

Oh if it if our current winery would qualify.

Hmm.

I mean, to me, one of the questions I have with this is it where you start impacting neighbors is with noise and with parking.

So if they can, if you've got an acre lot and you've got a little winery and you can have kind of keep it quiet and keep it on your property.

Doesn't bother anyone else.

It doesn't really bother anyone else.

It's when you start getting the overflow, that it becomes an issue.

Does this address that?

The parking lot it addresses it uh indirectly by limiting the amount of act uh the amount of days that they can um operate as well as um the number of clients that can be permitted at one time, and then of course the hours as well.

So it it indirectly does that, but we also have a minimum lot size requirement as well and a pr uh maximum percentage that can be of the site that can be used for the um winery or agricultural use.

But 70 days a year, I mean, that means you could be doing a lot of kind of weekend stuff, which then kind of again, if they can't fit 30 cars or let's say even 20 on their lot, you're getting overflow into the neighborhood.

Right.

Um and I believe that the 70 days uh was referenced from another code that um we reviewed.

Uh yeah, so the city of Portland has a use called market gardens that is kind of a similar idea.

Um and so some of the uh allowances were taken from that was used as a reference.

So the 70 calendar days was taken from their market garden use.

But we can limit that further.

I mean, obviously, these these are these standards can be customized how however we want.

We use that as a reference.

Um, just from what we found in a in another city city's code.

I mean for me, it comes down to the parking and the noise.

Yep.

And if those things can kind of be contained, however it's written.

Do they have to do some kind of agriculture on the property, like they gotta be growing something in this use, kind of like we were talking about the well, there's a definition of urban agriculture, which I think Michael can bring up, or I can't just like that.

Urban agriculture, you can't wear overalls.

You have to do it in designer clothes.

That's the urban case, the urban aspect.

Student ties.

Okay, so I can just read the definition as we've written it.

So it's a site where food and or plants are grown to be sold, including crops that will be used to produce alcoholic or other beverages.

An area for serving or tasting can be included.

The food and/or plants may be sold directly to consumers, restaurants, stores, or other buyers or at markets.

Heavy manufacturing is not allowed as part of this use.

So to meet the definition, you do have to be growing food or plants.

And are there hours for the events on this one?

I know we were talking about like seven.

Well, that was for a different part of the code.

So yes, we do restrict the hours.

Let me make sure I have the right.

Okay.

Okay.

From seven days.

Seven.

Yeah, I mean, I'm less.

But that's also the um that's also the time where the use of motorized equipment is allowed.

So I think it coincides with that.

I'm fine with that.

I mean, yes, yeah.

I think that's that's good.

The fact that they have to grow the crops on the property.

I mean, that's my only concern with this is it still doesn't address any parking.

And if you're having 30 people come and you're not doing enough to accommodate parking, then to me that will become a burden of the neighborhood.

So a standard that requires uh parking to be accommodated on site, for instance.

Or at least most, I mean, it I'm not expecting all 30 cars necessary, but you know, I just I I think that's where again noise and parking is where it starts to get upsetting of neighbors.

That's where the impact is, but that's where it actually gets hard to have objective standards because in some neighborhoods, five cars might be fine, and other neighborhoods, five cars might create a parking problem.

And so these guys are trying to do is get away from those subjective standards related to having impact on neighbors or trying to fulfill that policy intent without having it be arbitrary on the part of the planner.

So I hear what you're saying.

I just don't know that there's a if if the number's 30, you can reasonably assume there are 15 cars.

Oh six and you know that on some parts of town where there are one acre lots, 15 cars would be no big shakes.

And in other parts of town where they're one acre lots, 15 cars might be a real inconvenience to the neighbors.

And so that's I think that's where you have to go, though, is if you want it to be objective, yeah, so that we're treating similarly situated property owners the same, then you don't then you have to expect that in some cases it might be a different impact.

Yeah, it's pretty limited.

I mean, R10, R15, you know.

I mean, that's pretty much up to the many places that can do that.

Forest highlands.

I mean, no, yeah.

How many properties did you say?

191.

Have we truly had any complaints about issues like this ever?

I've never heard of new use.

Yeah, not that I'm aware of, and I did talk to our civil enforcement staff about the existing business, and they said they weren't aware of any complaints.

I think we're creating a problem that doesn't probably exist.

I mean, I totally get what you're saying.

I I would say that we could if we get um something that's causing an issue, then we could change things.

Yeah, we can always change things, but I don't I because part of it is that I mean, I know a lot of people who have graduation parties, and there's more than 30 people there.

And I mean, it's I know it's they only have a graduate every once in a while.

No, but I mean if you go around here and like us, we go on a after graduation.

I mean, there's a lot of we have yeah, 600 kids graduating, and at any given time, there's a lot of parking.

I guess that's where my concern is when you get 70 a year, you know, it's one thing when your neighbor has a couple parties a year and it goes, but it's another if it's like they can have up to 70 for money.

And it's a money, it's not you know, that's where I'm just that's where I have a concern because I'm in an you know, an R 10, and we do have some one-acre lots, and I know when someone has a big event, our neighbors all let everyone know, so that you're kind of working to accommodate because we haven't, you know, we don't have sidewalks, we have narrow streets, and that if I had someone doing that 70 days a year, I'd be ticked off.

Yeah, but you don't.

But I'm just saying, but this allows it, so I I'm just I'm just putting it out there, and maybe it might never be an issue.

So I do agree, it's like do we want to be careful not to create an issue where there isn't an issue.

But I also just want to bring that we have to be careful because we're also saying, well, this is now allowed, so people might be like, oh, well, guess what I can do?

And we just still have the other provisions in the code, you know, if like if folks are parking illegally.

I guess my my other thought process is it's gonna be a rare person who's gonna take land that's in Lake Oswego that's worth quite a lot of money and convert it to AG.

I mean, I'm I I'm not I'm not suggesting, I mean, I just it it's it's not gonna be 192 lots where this happens.

I mean it's on one now, maybe it'll be on two someday.

But I just don't see this as something that is gonna pencil for most people financially speaking.

Right.

Right.

If they own a one-acre lot, this is not what they're gonna do.

Yeah, they'll be subdividing it to four.

Yeah, yeah.

And our purpose I mean that is the other thing because it's so limited.

I mean, we we could I would think potentially just could we make it a conditional use because it's so few and far between, and just like it wouldn't be something we want everyone doing, but to have them come in.

Well, that's true, and then I would believe then the existing um winery would be considered non-con legally non-conforming because we changed the code, and so but if they wanted to do any expansion or changes, they would have to come in for a conditional use permit.

I mean, the whole the whole reason that we put this forward is that we discovered this use.

We didn't want to preclude this use.

It didn't fit well with the business license or business um home occupation um uh type of business.

So that's what we're really trying to do is um make sure that we can accommodate this use, which we haven't received any complaints about, so we don't want to stop a business that's doing well and not having impacts to anyone.

Uh so the other thing we could do is um, you know, contact the business and try to get some um feedback um direct on this, and and if you know, maybe they don't operate 70 days a year, maybe they don't need 30 clients.

I mean, we we could also look in in into it in that way, uh, or another option is to make it a conditional use, just outright.

Yeah.

Since it's so rare.

Yes, I see.

And then to make sure it's you know that there is some parking, or at least they might say, hey, I like once in a blue moon, I want to, you know, do an event.

I don't feel like the current one is I mean, those are narrow streets up there, and you never hear anything about it being a problem.

Right.

No, so I think it's pretty low what they're doing.

Okay, I feel good about that.

Yep.

Yep.

You know, and what Council Wynn was saying, like our whole thing initially, we go back to like the outdoor, like the events was we were like, okay, got residential areas or residential areas, and we want to primarily keep them residential areas.

No one moves in and you know, wants a new neighbor to move in and then they're running, you know, some kind of business with lots of customers coming to the house, you know, day in and day out.

So we got to thinking though, like really the outdoor, it's not so much like at to what counselor verdict was saying, it's not so much like outdoor versus indoor, it's like it's noise and parking.

So is there a way maybe that we could look at this, like instead of thinking, you know, and like you said, so the current thing is we really don't allow the outdoor activity?

That's kind of the status quo.

That has been our our our current status quo, and it was to address the specific outdoor rental of outdoor space that was being disruptive.

And so now we've kind of though we've drawn a line in the sand there.

That would be prohibited under either of those options.

Okay, okay.

So that's great.

So what if it was something that um had some of the provisions like the planning commission has suggested, like the the sessions for I think what you referred to, like instructional slash demonstrational like classes, as opposed to you know, the the professional who may be having one person?

I mean, they're not doing instructional or okay.

Um so with some of these provisions, the holidays, the hours, but it but limiting instead of trying to draw this eight, I think it was a um eight per person per class.

I mean, because I'm you know, I mean, counting the people going in, and you know, that gets tricky.

Can we focus on off on the parking?

You know, could we say no more than number of off-site cars?

Because again, we feel like if people are walking there, they're biking there, and they're or they can somehow handle it on the who no one cares.

No one can and they're not being loud, like you can't hear anything.

No one, whether they're inside or outside, who cares?

And and that way we're creating like that flexibility that I think the planning commission is looking for, but really addressing what the key issues are, which is you know, if you can handle it with, you know, and setting some number that's really uh than it's objective.

You can say, hey, you know, you've got eight cars here off, I mean, no, you know, like it for your business.

Um, and then it really keeps it to like an accessory type use too, and not you know, someone who really should be in a commercial zone operating a yoga studio out of their garage.

Um you know, it's kind of in a high intense way.

That's you know, now they're taking up all the parking or whatever.

Is that possible?

Uh just a clarifying question.

Uh so are you suggesting we keep we still keep the hour limitations, the number of sessions, etc., but it replace instead of saying no more than eight people, you would say no more than five off street parking or something to that effect.

Yeah.

And then there's no limitation on the number of people that they can have there.

Yes, and and and no noise beyond the property lines.

You know, I think the difficulty is is how we identify the cars that are associated with that.

I mean, we have a similar provision when we're trying to get at um commercial uh vehicle parking because we can clearly identify those.

It's a little bit more difficult to identify the personal vehicles that are associated with the clients of the the business.

We kind of we were talking about this.

It's like I think in all of this, there's no and unfortunately.

It seems like there is no perfect because I mean it's identifying how do you know if there's eight people going.

I mean, right, Bill's not gonna come and sit there with his camera and well, we know well then.

Um so it's all kind of challenging.

But I think these are also like the few and far between.

I mean, I mean, you know, well, I yeah, I think so, hundreds of these businesses in town that are causing no issue whatsoever.

You don't even know there's a business.

You don't even know it's a bit, and that's what we like.

Discretion is the key to the everything, I think is but I but I also look at it as let's say a college kid is home and they they're a swimmer and they they want to teach kids swimming lessons in their pool in the back.

So I mean I you know, we don't want to regulate that.

I mean, but but that technically would be a business and it'd be an outdoor activity, and you know, uh so I I don't know.

It's I'm almost in the the realm of just saying um what is it it uh if we don't hear you we don't care about you or something.

That's kind of what yeah, yeah.

I mean it's just um just it's a the outdoor outdoor activity with discretion.

That's our policy.

Is that nebulous?

That's not that's that's kind of now.

I mean we do have a conditioning authority under the business license um procedures, which does do allow us to impose conditions of approval.

So if for if for instance we looked at a site and it had some unique circumstances, such as I don't know, it's in the uplands neighborhood and where you know on a street that has absolutely no on-street parking, and they have a short driveway where you can only park two vehicles.

I mean, we could potentially put a condition that says no more than two clients.

Um, and that applies only to that business.

Um, we do have to give them an opportunity to appeal that um that decision to a hearings officer.

Uh, but but we we do have the authority as staff to impose conditions of approval to address site specific issues.

Um, but if you're looking for something broader, um yeah, I mean, I suppose we could do that.

It it you're right, it's all gonna be a little bit difficult to um to precisely uh enforce when if we get a complaint.

But I think we're all getting off to the same thing, which is like we just we we we want to allow the flexibility, but you know, try to set these objective standards that really limit the you're concerned about the impact on the neighbors, right?

Yeah, I mean, because things like not having noise.

I mean, I will say my dogs are in the backyard, my neighbors definitely hear them.

Um so it it's it's the noise associated with the business that I mean noise, it's the parking impacts on neighbors that we're concerned about.

Like, I don't know, and that's the problem is we are in subjective land then, right?

And that's why you set a number of cars, you know.

That's why, yeah, no, we could do that.

Yeah, and no noise beyond the property line.

That seems like a standard we have elsewhere, you know, no noise beyond the property.

Yeah, all I'm saying is no noise beyond the property line isn't a realistic standard for any activity in LO for anything.

No.

It's not a real like when you mow your grass, your neighbors hear the sound of your lawnmower.

I mean, um except for those of you using electric, and then you're I think what we're looking for is some form of a phrasing or something, just that I mean, there's a big difference between having someone with a loudspeaker directing a yoga class, you know, directing a fitness class.

Let's versus quietly, you know, no amplified noise.

Right.

No, I'm following your logic.

I'm just trying to figure out noise, yeah.

And the words.

Yeah, but I see even in your own backyard, you can have amplified noise, right?

You can listen to music when you're in the but it's not a commercial.

Again, it's about the relationship between the noise and the business, and also about the relationship between the the frequency.

That's probably the number one thing.

Actually, if you're if your neighbor had a yoga class once a year in their backyard, really, no one would care.

It's if your neighbor has a yoga, eight yoga classes a day.

Right.

Every sunny day of the year, that's when people start to care.

And so I think that's what staff have tried to do.

And so you guys have ideas.

Well, I what I would what I would just note is that the um eight-person limit.

Um, our code enforcement staff has said that that is more um far more enforceable than the cars because we can see, you know, a lot of times they'll have a sign-up, you know, or whatever.

And and people can physically see their neighbor in their backyard.

There's eight people, or there's 10 people out there instead of eight.

Whereas cars, I we cannot identify whose car belongs to whom.

Um, so it is a proxy for um noise and it's a proxy for traffic by having that eight person limitation.

Um, it's not perfect, but I do think from our code and enforcement staff perspective that it is more enforceable to do the um person limitation rather than the cars.

Oh, counselor rep is as oh, yes, okay.

Uh Laurel, let's uh got a little system here.

Hello?

Okay, okay, counselor Raf, go ahead.

Oh in.

Can you guys hear me?

Uh yes, yeah, yeah, yes.

Okay, oh god.

Um, pretty pretty straightforward for me on this one.

Look, I just I think as a city council, we should be careful not to over regulate our citizens.

Um anytime you create regulations, you have to police them.

Um just because we're afraid something's gonna happen doesn't mean it will.

I'd um, you know, I think also we have community in my experience that kind of tends to like to look for problems and to complain about our neighbors.

I don't think we should give people a reason to complain about their neighbors.

I think everybody we should trust everybody has good intentions.

Um, no one's trying to make anybody unhappy in our neighborhood.

Um so I would just say just we can't just because we can regulate something doesn't mean we should which way which way we're gonna do anything on the question.

You would do nothing you would keep the prohibition.

Okay, I didn't I don't quite understand which direction he was going with.

Okay, yeah, the echoes terrible.

Well, that okay, Council Rap, are you are you in favor of maintaining the prohibition then on the or just allow anything?

No, just not over it, like I don't know if he can hear us.

Can you hear?

He's got nothing.

Oh is anyone else have any are we getting complaints since we've kind of said no outdoor stuff?

I guess that's kind of put a kabosh on the outdoors prior to that.

I know we were getting complaints with the pool parties and the like the true events and so forth.

Were we getting complaints because people were having like outdoor, like I'll say more a quiet, like a yoga or some something like okay, we were.

I mean, is it is it our most common complaint?

No, it isn't.

But yes, we have gotten complaints about outdoor classes before.

Was it something that um was it that they were just happening?

Was it frequency?

Was it size?

Was it all of the above?

It was uh I think for one, it was frequency and signage.

Um, the one that I'm that I'm fully aware of, but um, and unfortunately, Mr.

Youngblood is not here with us um tonight, but um when we come to a hearing, we can have more information on the types of um uh and numbers of complaints that we've received for those types of outdoor outdoor activities, but I would say it's a handful.

Okay, not a lot.

I think too, it's like kind of putting these are good um rules for any for any of your type B.

I like those categories, uh, those type B businesses indoor outdoor again.

It's not you know, I think it helps mitigate the impacts in general.

Well, I I'd like to know the numbers a little bit because I think counselor Raf has, you know, a far porn.

Are we putting regulation in place where maybe we don't need it?

If I I definitely want to keep the the parties in that.

So to me, that's like that's a given.

But are we making something and kind of creating regulation where maybe it's not to the point where it's warranted.

And so, you know, do we that so some of the numbers would be interesting to see, just to say, or is this something that we can deal with because it's so few and far between.

We view it where you can do it on a specific basis.

Yeah, just well, I mean, and just to remind everyone, I mean we have always had this issue with the home businesses, it's just that we had a very subjective standard.

What we're trying to do is create a more objective standard.

We're not that's right, imposing regulate.

We've always regulated it.

We're trying to be more objective about it.

Yeah, yeah.

That's right, because we want to be fair.

We don't want someone who just happens to have a neighbor that doesn't like them or has a neighbor who's an unreasonable and any any noise is bad noise.

You know, we want to make sure that we can we can apply this evenly to everyone.

So we're trying to make objective, like the same the standard we always had was it had no impact, no adverse impact, you know, on the neighbors.

And I don't think anyone's thinking, well, screw the neighbors, yeah.

Let them, yeah, adverse impacts abound.

No, I mean we don't want to have so we're trying to figure out through the number of people, the noise, like how do we say that in an objective way?

Because I mean, with for me, I really feel like the the I we have we hear, even with our housing, you know, we hear we from neighbors, we want to maintain the neighborhood character.

That's like with housing.

I mean, these are houses being proposed, and they're like, it's gonna change the neighbor character.

Well, now we're talking about not housing, we're talking about commercial use in the residential area.

Um, and so to be consistent, I mean, I think our neighbors are very concerned about like they want a peaceful neighborhood.

And even though it doesn't happen a lot, I don't think anyone wants to be the one who lives next to, you know, the the person who has a you know, uh with with visiting patrons, you know, coming every day, you know, to the house and parking all over and blocking this.

Because even if it's not a thing, it's just inconvenient, you know, and you're like, oh God, you know, it's it's not what you expect when you live in a neighborhood that your neighbor is serving customers on a daily basis, you know.

I don't think I wouldn't expect that.

I mean, you can't.

Well, I yeah, I I don't think you buy a house in the neighborhood in residential area to have a business being run next door to you.

No, I mean, I just don't and I I think that's where I I think we have to be a little bit cognizant of what our zones are and what the expectation of a zone is.

And I'm all for home businesses that are pretty much absent of activity.

Yeah, yeah.

Um it's really what I'm after.

Because I I think in the same token where you have somebody running a mail order business out of the house and they have trucks coming five times a day and with a big loader in the back, and and they're you know, constantly in and out and in and out and in and out.

I I just don't think that's go get a warehouse, go get a place where it's a place of business.

And so I I do think our the standard in Lake Casuego, I think needs to be still rigid in the sense that a residential uh zone is for families and quiet and well, not quiet, I don't want to sound like an old person, but I mean it's but uh in residential areas so that there's not commercial activity going on all the time, and and I get the occasional um whatever um somebody I I agree kind of like with yoga classes, okay.

Well, go get a studio.

I mean, if if you're gonna have outside yoga classes with 20 people and there's cars everywhere, I think it's time to get a studio.

If you have a client that comes in and you have a home gym and they're inside and nobody even knows that they're there.

Exactly.

I mean, that's a whole nother story.

And so I I'm very pro-home business, as long as you're incognito, um, is kind of my viewpoint because that's what your expectation as a neighbor is, so that you I agree.

So I don't know.

I know that um and that's just pretty kind of cut and dried.

So yeah, I agree.

And I think we're just seeing like these more expansive home businesses, you know, with customers coming, and I don't I think like we said we have hundreds of established ones that we don't even know exist because they're just single people, whatever, you know, with the home office.

Um so I don't, I mean, I would lean towards I don't know, the type B business, like with the people coming.

I I don't know, I'm just not big on it either.

I just I think it's opens the door to this.

No one wants it.

Well, I feel I mean I think keep it to the neighborhood.

I don't know.

What do you think?

Yeah, I I I'm in I concur.

I think that our position has been no outdoor activity, and I don't I I don't have a really hard time thinking we shouldn't open up, open it up, especially since we are in a situation where we are required to increase the density of housing units, and we're actively doing that.

I don't think this is a good idea for us to I don't think it's a good idea for us.

I think we should stay with option two.

I mean, once again, the the things that are happening now where people are conducting these indoor activities that aren't having any negative impacts on the neighbor, I think are perfectly fine.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

It's the it's the impact that we're really concerned about.

And that's what's so hard to be clear and objective about.

Either you hear it or you don't.

And I say we we shouldn't.

Okay.

Um counselor Afghan.

Okay.

Hi, can you hear me?

Oh, we can hear you here.

You can hear you.

Okay, we have an echo.

This is what I'm thinking.

We have 570 uh businesses, and we hardly hear about any problem.

So the problem from my perspective doesn't exist.

So if the problem doesn't exist, maybe it is okay to be a little subjective and not have hard rules in place.

So if a yoga class doesn't bother any of the neighbors, they can have as many people as they want.

But if there's a uh one person jazzer size class that's going to create so much noise, that's not acceptable.

So right now we don't have a problem.

And being subjective to for me is okay in this case.

Thank you, Councilor Afghan.

I do think uh Councilor Raff says what counselor Afgan says, so he agrees with me.

I will say this this is exactly what we're trying to get away from, though, is uh regulating only businesses where the neighbor complaints.

You know, that's that is why we're here.

That is why we're here.

We already regulate these businesses.

This is not new regulation.

We're just trying to make it objective.

Yeah, which means yes, we have to hash out these details.

And it can't just be if your neighbor is nice, you can do whatever you want.

But but I go back to what counselor verdict was saying.

If your noise doesn't go beyond your property line and the parking doesn't negatively impact the neighborhood, then there's no problem.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Afghan.

Can we put no impact to your neighbor?

Uh well, that that is more or less our current regulation.

Um I would just remind you, you know, you you all tasked us with coming up with clear and objective standards um almost a year ago trying to to do this.

We spent quite a bit of time talking with this with the public, with the planning commission, um, doing surveys, um, going kind of back and forth on these issues.

So uh that that is certainly something that would be very easy to implement, and that we already have that.

Um, you know, we're doing this because we found that that was presenting a lot of issues for our code enforcement staff in terms of enforcing it and actually being able to regulate at all when it comes to these subjective regulations.

You guys also are aware that sometimes neighbors call code enforcement when they don't like their neighbor.

Of course.

And then often what happens next is the other neighbor calls code enforcement.

And so the reality is when you have subjective standards, that's the dilemma that we put staff in the middle of.

And Eric Summit.

Like, do you because honestly, I want your insight on this because you are the folks who are there and know all the things like I didn't even know that we're 500 seven.

I've never heard you know, a war torn as we go in terms of people like calling, hey, he did this, and you know, like Jessica said that if it's eight, we know that's objective.

You see in your backyard, oh, Icon one, two, three, it's 15.

Those I think this is things like that we need something objective.

Said that hey, you really cannot have 20 people in your backyard doing some gym and put like yelling and doing things, you know.

But you eight people, it's a reasonable day, not being loud, they do their stuff.

We can do that, but you know, we all like we say, we these things are here.

We just need to be more objective.

And I think you what do you to cut this thing very short?

Do you have any like I know you give this option, but where do you think we should go where?

What like it's not my uh project necessarily, but uh you know, I I do think that the option one provides the flexibility we need.

You know, I think we've heard really consistently from the neighborhood chairs as well as the planning commission and almost everybody we've talked to about this publicly, that they do not want to be overly regulated, they don't want to impose too much regulation on home businesses.

They don't want to impose too much regulation on home businesses.

Um we've consistently heard that when we've presented these standards to them, and specifically with the outdoor activity standard.

Um so that you know, that's why we created this option to try to sort of bridge um, you know, the the sort of um gap between the desire for this activity in a limited sense, again, limiting the number of folks that can visit at one particular time with the you know, sort of reasonable expectation that that not, you know, um, you know, sort of uh I guess you know, we we we want to limit it, I guess in a reasonable way, allow for the activity, allow this to happen without um, you know, completely uh, you know, saying no to everything.

Um so I think you know, we we have heard that there is a desire to do these classes outdoors, you know, that that there are limited sort of um versions of these, like art classes and particular yoga classes that are relatively quiet.

Um and we do think that that eight eight clients might be a more reasonable, obviously 20 is is kind of getting a a little um beyond the pale, I think.

So, you know, I think it we we have to draw a line somewhere if we want to have them be objective, so it's really difficult, and we can go kind of back and forth about this forever.

Um but you know, I I do I do think we're on the right track, hopefully.

Um, but I I just want to I guess give a little bit more voice to the fact that we have heard that consistently, not just from the planning commission, you know, the concert consistent concerns about imposing too many regulations through this exercise.

And I would also add that the number eight um actually came out of the survey.

Um and so yes, we have this policy now that says you can't have outdoor activity.

But I don't think that that means that all of our home occupations are complying with that.

So I think we heard in the survey that there are some businesses that are doing it.

And when I asked them about what allowances they needed, that was kind of the upper limit of and so uh when we discussed this with the planning commission, we actually originally came with the number five and they felt like that was a little too restrictive.

And so we went back to the survey.

Um and based on those results, that's how we came up with the number eight.

So from the home businesses.

Yeah.

Yes.

No, honestly, it is like when we put it to like we say in a three-year-old class, it have to be one to ten.

Some people go twelve, but if you get caught, you will be in trouble.

You know it's a one to ten.

If we set these things and say it's eight people, that's it.

This is their code.

If the neighbor call take pictures and call cut in fact, say, oh, he has 20, we will we should have also a way to put sanctions on people who violate the code we are doing and enforcing.

But I think that's a way we should go.

Like honestly, I totally agree with you, and because it comes from findings of people surveyed of the planning commission and of you.

We can have our view of things, but I think also these are very objective things coming from multiple sources to for us.

I would go option one.

Do I have your permission to ask a question at the night?

Um, yeah, that question.

I I think what might be helpful for council and certainly for me, and to clarify the record, is that I've heard two things.

One, um, that the city only receives a handful of complaints every year, despite the fact that we believe we have around 570 home occupations.

But I also just heard that um that our current prohibition and the lack of uh objective standards presents a lot of issues for enforcement.

And I think that's some of the confusion you're hearing both on the dais and in from council wrap is how are you all squaring those two things?

Is there a problem?

Because we have so few complaints that indicates we don't have a problem.

And yet you all are just telling us code enforcement is having a heck of a time.

Yeah.

And I think maybe the answer is code enforcement is having a heck of a time in theory applying the code.

But if you're saying, so if you can square those two things, that's right.

And I I apologize, I should have been clearer.

When what the context that they asked that that I was asked that question was specific to outdoor classes.

Um we have lots of different types of home occupations that um, but we get complaints all the time about people using commercial vehicles or people who um are creating excessive noise.

I mean, there's lots of different kinds of complaints that we get that not are not necessarily specific to outdoor classes.

Those ones are very difficult because uh as um Miss Bennett um pointed out, some people don't like each other and then they pity they they're pitted against each other.

Um, or we have a neighbor uh a neighbor that just it has unreasonable expectations for a business, or maybe they have reasonable expectations, but we can't apply it evenly because we have these very subjective standards.

So we are trying to create more objective standards.

They're not perfectly objective, but more objective, so that when code enforcement has these issues, which do uh come up frequently, although the the specific outdoor class ones are more of a handful type of so I I should have clarified that, but that's what I meant when I uh about a handful.

Yeah, so I think that's that's very helpful factual information, I think, for you all in terms of the concern that I hear being generated around is there a problem or isn't there?

And I think what we're hearing is very clear that there is a range of complaints, and that in addition to the practical problem of enforcement, that of course your legal team, as you all are well aware, is concerned about the general application of our land use standards and that they should be objective.

They should be subjective.

No, they should be um objective.

So I think maybe those are some of the reframing as you all continue the discussion.

That's very helpful.

So thank you, everyone.

Um with the information, you know, I think I'm leaning towards option one for this when we're talking about outdoor activities.

I think we should uh have some leniency.

I don't think just saying nope, cut it out.

I think that's I think that goes too far.

Um but I my next question goes to you're saying that you're kind of getting a wide range.

Are we addressing enough of those other issues within this what you're okay?

Because yeah, the commercial vehicles is uh is a big one or that's a more common one for me when I was reading through that, I was like, okay, that seems reasonable your recommendation.

Um what about the noise?

I mean, is that always just kind of up in the air or what we would specify the proposal is to specify that we it that all businesses, actually any any activity on the site is subject to our noise ordinance.

So if it's an unreasonable um noise, it's outside of our uh oh, that's construction activity, I guess is when the hours of operation.

Yeah, I would say that having worked on noise issues for a long, long time, they're really hard.

And no matter what your noise code says, there'll be some circumstance that arises that doesn't quite squarely fit it that you wish you could make stop.

And so that's what's gonna happen.

And I would also add that we explored the idea of having specific noise standards for home occupations and the recommendation of our code enforcement staff was just to defer to the um nuisance or not.

Is there is there a way to um you know, like uh it's just thinking about the and I hear what core enforcement and the cars difficult.

Okay, so that's great.

We'll we'll definitely you know take their advice on that.

But if they're you know, customers uh patrons in these type B businesses are getting um you know illegally parking, you know, parking on the pat, getting ticketed, that we take that to the as a condition of the license, and you know, they get to think, hey, I'm gonna be a business and I'm having people come here and say, listen, well, you gotta make sure that they're not, you know, illegally parking.

Because you know, I mean, hey, we got some neighborhoods with street parking, that's easy, you know, boom, easy to find a place to park or big property, maybe they're not even on the street.

I don't know if that's I don't we're gonna talk about that because Ellen and I were just like, can we hold the business accounter owner accountable for something that one of their patrons does?

I'm not positive.

And you know, now with our nuisance, you know, like if you're doing it, I'm not saying like hey, someone got tickets.

Exactly.

That's don't you feel like the person who actually committed the violation is the one who should face the consequences.

Well, yeah, they should.

I'm just saying if if what I'm getting at is if they're can creating conditions that are creating a neighborhood nuisance.

I don't want us to be like, well, whatever.

You know, I mean, I think that we should have some way of addressing that.

Yeah, we never we never do that.

But the question, well, again, do I hold the business owner?

Like if you're if I go to your business and I behave irresponsibly, do I hold you accountable?

Uh licensees accountable for the actions of their patrons and they close them down.

If I drink too much and you say, Yeah, and you're causing disturbance, absolutely.

Pull the liquor license.

Yeah.

Okay, we'll we'll talk about it.

But it's it's it's kind of interesting.

I'm just thinking like this is what we're trying to get at.

You know, it's like the few and far between, but what you don't want to have is like the one bad actor who's just really pushing the envelope with with the neighbors, because I think we are trying to find this happy medium where it's not just straight prohibition, but there is some.

Why don't we do something slightly different though?

Why don't we think about, and maybe you guys think about how could we track complaints against these type B businesses over the first couple of years?

I mean, as opposed to trying to figure it out now at the dias, why don't we collect some data and see what happens?

That'd be great.

And then if we need to modify the code in the future to address the impacts, then we can do that.

As opposed to, I always feel like I I always tell people my crystal ball is cloudy enough that I do anticipate problems, but I usually anticipate the wrong ones.

And so I think the things that we're afraid of will not be the actual things that come to pass.

Something bad will happen.

I just don't know what it is yet.

I think that's great.

And I mean, because I will say, like, even in the commercial areas, like, you know, there's conflict between the the commercial neighbors, right?

But what do they do?

Well, they're commercial, so they put up I'm gonna have you towed, and they but a neighbor's not gonna have contract with the towing company in the same way.

So I'm just thinking like it's almost like when they open, I always think like you know, a pound of prevention, right?

You know, so um uh or an ounce of prevention.

What is it, ounce of prevention?

Whatever they're yeah, ounce of prevention, pound of so like you know, anything we can get, like, hey, you got this this permit, but you really gotta like be a good neighbor, like let's you know, like kind of head it off as best we can.

Yeah, we can do some education, that's also a great idea.

But I I'm thinking that the the way to tackle this is to not try to figure out not to pre-anticipate, because the truth is we pre-anticipate.

Yeah, I really appreciate that.

Yeah, because I guess what and this is where my concern is a little bit is like getting too restrictive, maybe also like when we don't even know what potentially the issues really are.

Whoops, sorry.

No, no, sorry.

I was just checking it with trees.

No, that's what you're doing.

But so if we can I but I also hear what staff is saying that we need some guidelines, we need some objective standards.

So if we can kind of just find that balance, and it seems like we're getting there with option one, at least for this issue, from my perspective, I would say that's what I would, you know, kind of just let's get what you guys need, but let's be careful of being too prescriptive.

And if then if we can track and have education and encourage where we need to businesses and say, hey, do your best to keep your people parking in front of your house and on your property, that will go a long way.

Exactly.

I just want to point out I'm sorry, I don't mean to interrupt, but I guess I would just point out we know we don't necessarily need you to make a decision on we want option one or two tonight.

It's more, you know, I think we're still planning to bring forth option two to a hearing.

Um based on your guidance, we can change that.

We can change option one.

You know, I think we're asking you are these options sufficient?

Do you want to tweak option one?

Is there something, you know, is there a another option that you you might be interested in considering here?

So, you know, I I just kind of want to remind you we we don't have to like completely solve everything um and come to uh full agreement tonight.

Um it would be great.

Yeah, and I think what we like what the mayor is saying is for example, not oversee like that talking people come and talk, create problem neighbors get peace and all that maybe in the option.

We can like the some stuff our objective.

I like what Ms.

Namanglu said.

Like we we it's a debuggy.

We look, we say eight there, 20 there.

These they are breaking the law.

Uh as opposed to, oh, I see 20 cars, but whose car are they?

They may be the neighbor or someone else.

You don't know who so I think we we just have to, and also in mind that what we want is I always love your expression of the blue zone.

We want a place where people are not very stressed, they live quiet life in the enjoyment of their homes.

I think that's what we all are looking for.

We discuss our expert hood of.

I think if we let them, they can pull out something that when they bring it again, we can make a decision.

Yeah, I yeah, I'm I'm with you.

I think the big picture is and you'll probably kill me by saying this, but um pickleball tends to be one of those things where it was a aggravated sound, right?

12 hours a day, and that kind of got the people.

Yeah, um, to me, you move, but that's my opinion.

But obviously, I was in the minority on that.

Um however, I do think it gives an illustration for us to say, hey, that's what we want to prevent is the next pickleball in a local neighborhood where i.e.

like the swim party thing where they were having a swim party every two hours with 20 to 30 people, and you did that over the the summer every every you know, four days a week.

I mean, I can totally see where people would totally be um aggravated.

Right.

Um so just put in the code um uh pickle no pickleball tolerance or something, and then I think we got like a good like we're hearing like that we there wants to be, I mean, the consensus is that you know, we want to create some flexibility, but that we are really to tell the planning commission we're very concerned about preserving that that that character of the neighborhood.

And so maybe like the upper limits are not, you know, maybe they come when it comes to us, it's like not the upper of what you know is that's the main, you know.

That's kind of the concern.

Because I think some of us are not even comfortable going this direction, but are willing to allow some flexibility, but it shouldn't be just like she doesn't have to vote yes on everything, it's okay.

Well, I'm kind of you know, in this, I mean I'm kind of with there's an interest, there's a good mix here, you know, of um, and I think we can get to some limited activity, but it needs to kind of really be limited.

So if they can work with that and be great.

So I I guess what I'm kind of hearing is that we will move forward with these two options, subject to you know, potential modifications of option one that may occur uh you know later.

But I think at least we have the structure in place potentially for us to to make those modifications out of hearing.

And maybe take off the PC and the council in parentheses so there's not a biased when we're gonna do that.

Well, and I think you could do things like look at hours.

I'm surprised that you're gonna limit public holidays, but not limit Sundays.

I mean, uh it's uh maybe there's other modifications that would limit impacts.

I think about part of what we tried with back to pickleball, part of what we tried with pickleball was hey, we're gonna give you four hours on Sunday mornings where you're not gonna hear the noise, so you can sleep in.

It didn't work, but uh so maybe there's uh there's and that's what the noise order, maybe there's other things you could do to still allow the activity, but maybe limit the impact on neighbors.

Yeah, pretend like you're a retiree who sits outside every day.

What would you want to have going on next door?

That's you know, then to channel that.

Okay.

We appreciate it.

This is like uh, I agree.

I mean, this is weed, you know, this is a lot of sausage making.

We don't we don't grind the sausage this often.

So it's good though.

This is this is great city work, yeah.

That's what we do best.

It's what we do best.

So thank you, everyone, for the good input.

Thank you all for thank you.

Thank you for your feedback.

Thank you.

Hopefully, you're about as clear as mud right now, but and we have this, yes, because we cannot wait for this hearing.

Yes, so um just so you're aware uh this is the tentative schedule.

Uh we're planning on a planning commission hearing at the end of November, and then we would come back to you for your hearing in January.

Thank you.

And we appreciate the planning commission um uh bringing the feedback back to us.

It's helpful, you know.

It's good to some of these topics, it's great when we can think about them, honestly, more than just like one time, you know.

It's so kind of thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Excuse Michael.

Thank you.

You don't want to stay for the rest of the meeting?

No, it's good.

Information from the council.

I can't see Council Will.

Wine walk was an absolute success.

Um there was over 800 tickets sold, sold out event, uh, with another 75 people that participated in um in functioning, helping to pour wine and whatever.

So we had almost 900 people that were brought into Lake Oswego.

Uh it was a great weather, great time, and uh a wonderful community event uh between the extension of Saturday market and the wine walk.

We had a uh uh a Saturday that had more traffic than I think we've ever had in the downtown area for a long long time.

And so it helped a lot of our businesses and it certainly brought the community um a lot of uh great goodwill because both the Saturday market and the wine walk were um perfectly executed and well attended.

So it was a good day for Lake Oswego.

Great.

Thank you for thank you for supervising it.

Hey, I I was just I was given tough assignment tickets, and you go around and um you help poor.

Yeah, yeah.

Um I wanted to um oh, counselor Afghan.

I wanted to thank you for collaborating with the other local mayors and mayor Wilson uh showing unity that we do not want to have uh military in the domestic affairs.

Thank you so much.

Well, thank you, Count and actually, Councilor Afgh, that is a great segue um into what I was gonna mention was that yeah, so I wanted to bring up with the council since our last council meeting, you know, there's a lot going on, and um I had emailed you all, joined with uh a cohort of other regional mayors to support um Mayor Wilson in solidarity and really wanted to see if that that message you know that I had is one that is supported by the council.

I think our staff here at the city, especially as we do communications.

I mean, um as this issue is not seem to be you know going away, would like to get a good read on the the council, you know, as a whole, not just the the the mayor on this one particular issue, and to be clear, the the mayors across the region joined with Mayor Wilson because we stood on one solid principle, and that is that um you know, one like a bedrock principle of our local sovereignty.

You know, we talk a lot about local control on the diet.

I mean, uh a lot, you know, right?

We don't want the state meddling in our affairs, um, and you know, a bedrock principle is is really the um uh refusal to allow the military to engage in this in the domestic policing, you know, that we have our civil police force, and I would think here if we had Chief Burke and Martha saying, hey, you know, the folks who gather on Saturdays are just fine, and someone else from the federal government came in and said we don't think so, that we would all have a problem with that, you know, and that we put a lot of faith in our uh our our our local police um in our um in the civil servants, you know, here at the at the city, um, and that that is a huge one of the biggest issues of local control.

And so that's what got us a bipartisan group of mayors all standing together behind that.

So I just wanted to bring that forth.

We hadn't had a chance to talk about it, and I don't want to be ahead of all of you and messaging either.

So wanted to to uh we heard from Council Afghan to see if this is um a consensus of the council too.

Right, I support that.

I think we feel pressure from we felt a lot of pressure from the state of Oregon that it has impeded our what we felt doing what was right for our community, and I would say wherever the pressure is coming from, we're on site, we were elected by the people here, and I believe that we are um we know what's best, and I think that we would if we had a problem, we would we would certainly be discussing it with our city manager and our chief of police, and we would act appropriately.

I would yes, no, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I think uh we armies you on that, and you know, we just uh all we want is a safe community, and you know, like we say we don't want any over it, like the state, the federal government, we have a police week and police our cities and when we need the federal government, like on an ice storm when everything we want them to come for that, not for something else.

And we have those channels exist for us to do that.

Yeah, to ask for it.

Yeah, thank you.

Uh counselor Raf.

Uh yeah, I mean, I agree with you, uh Mayor.

Um, you know, I I just think the i there is a bit of irony when our governor who has oftentimes not heeded the you know the rule that we advocate for of you know letting us do what we need to do, but then when we go come to her help her aid, it's kind of forgotten.

So um and I do think, look, I think Portland does have a problem.

I think there is a lot of crime and drug use that does need to be cleaned up, but I do also believe that it should be uh Portland's problem to solve, not anybody else's.

So right.

Yeah, thanks, Councilor F.

I agree.

I think we all agree with that too.

That's that's the thing.

It's not to say there's no all communities have have issues.

Uh certainly not to say that there aren't issues to solve.

I mean, we're all like acutely aware of them.

And we're so aware too of like the impact this has on our region, you know.

I mean, this is like we see it with the projects that we're trying to get done here, you know, the regional reputation, like this is not um these kind of you know, narratives are not they're not doing us any favors, any of us, whether we're in Lake Oswego, whether you're in Beaverton, you know, Wilsonville or Portland.

I mean, it impacts the entire region.

So I support you.

Okay.

You know what?

I um I'm just gonna say this.

Uh the unfortunate thing about Oregon is I it's almost with the current administration.

Uh when you when you put up the reactions like we do, it's uh feeds their fuel for the buyer.

I I think we got played.

Oregon got played, um, is what the bottom line is on a national um and we're expendable as the state.

Um and so he's gonna play us, and it's not good for Oregon.

And I wish we would have just uh said nothing and no protesters showed up, and it was a big blank.

Yeah, I mean, I agree, I don't like the whole thing, but um as an overview, um got played and they're gonna continue to get played, and um it's not gonna be to our benefit.

And I I just find that really unfortunate.

And so it's uh um if if we don't learn how to play the game, we're going to have fewer federal resources and more um uh times where we'll be made a uh example in the negative, and I I don't like that because that's not Oregon.

Um but I just think that's um it's an unfortunate byproduct.

That's all I'm saying.

Yeah, it's an unfortunate byproduct.

I don't like any of this stuff that's going on.

Um it's uh it's just sad that we're at this stage where this is happening.

But it could be a good opportunity for Lake Oswego.

I you know, they're they're having the emergency naked bike ride, and I don't see why it can't be an emergency naked triathlon, and you get them riding their bikes down to the steps, they take ride out of the dock at the village.

I mean it's it's gonna start to rain.

That is an idea.

It's gonna start to rain on Thursday.

It's gonna be 47 degrees Saturday night when they're doing the naked bike ride.

So there's gonna be a lot of goosebumps.

Usually, always in the summer.

That's what I when somebody said that.

I I was I'm like, wait, isn't this the wrong time?

It's an emergency, it's a special emergency.

It's an emergency.

Oh, it's a special one?

Yes.

Oh great.

I had a special one too.

You guys well thank you very much.

Um thank you for the the feedback.

That's very helpful.

Um thank you, and thank you for the the support.

Um I think overall the leadership throughout the region has been it's great to see everyone united in this way and generally on good behavior, you know.

I mean, we've we've seen, you know, and uh kudos to our community too.

I mean, they continue to come out on the weekends and have for years um really uh shown a way to express themselves in a way that I mean we have had no you know issues here, and and it's been um and you know, honestly, we're we're very lucky, and so it's it's great.

Community members know how to support one another, um, exercise rights, but then keep people safe at the same time.

That's what everyone wants.

Yeah, and then they stay in Lake Us We go and have lunch and then go do the shopping and then they go home.

It's great.

I I mean to me that's what it life is all about.

If you don't like what's going on, do do exactly what they're doing.

That I love that stuff.

Yeah, but it's it's uh the PG I don't like being played.

That's my PJ.

I like the PJ.

And I have nothing to top that it'll all wait.

Read the Friday email, please.

Okay.

But when you do the call off the meeting, I wanted to talk to all of you of something important.

It's not a lot of people.

That's not City in the United States.

Yeah, okay.

Okay, well, uh so stay online here a second, but we're adjourned.

Okay, can you wait till this?

Yeah, we have to, yeah.