All right, good evening, everyone.

This uh Tuesday, July 7th, 2026 meeting of the Lake Oswego City Council is now called to order.

Ms.

Hawkins, will you please call the roll?

Yes, Mayor Buck.

Here.

Counselor is Edmonds Manns.

Afkin.

Maboop.

Counselor Wendlin is remote.

Verdict.

And Corrigan.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, everyone, for your uh patience with us with the late start uh tonight.

Uh will you now please stand, remove your hats, and join us in the pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, indivisible.

Well, July is disability pride month, which recognizes the achievements, contributions, and lived experiences of people with disabilities while commemorating the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990.

This year's theme is the world works better with us.

And it reminds us that our community is stronger when everyone has the opportunity to participate fully and is treated with dignity, respect, and inclusion.

The City of Lake Oswego is prior to recognize Disability Pride Month for the fourth consecutive year and encourages all residents to help build a community where everyone is welcomed, valued, and able to thrive.

You will find this proclamation as well as all other city uh uh all other proclamations on the city website.

I saw that we have the disability pride flag flying from the flag pool, which is great.

All right.

Now is the time on our agenda for a public comment.

Is there anyone here who would like to provide public comment?

Okay.

All right, I don't see anyone.

Uh we are now going to move on to the uh consent agenda.

We have one item on the consent agenda.

This is resolution 26-29 authorizing the sale of geobonds for the South Shore Fire Station.

Is there a motion to adopt the consent agenda?

Move to adopt the consent agenda.

Second.

All right, the motion was made by Councilor Corgan, seconded by Councillor Verdeck.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Oh, and Councilor Woodland uh yeah, okay, motion passes 7-0.

Okay, we have a two public hearings uh to conduct, both annexed on annexations into the city.

I'll invite uh Paul Espy, our associate planner forward, and we haven't seen you in a while, Mr.

Espy.

It's good to have you here.

But uh before we begin, we will ask uh Ms.

De Toyon to please read the hearing procedures for these two legislative hearings.

We will now open the legislative public hearing on annexing on the annexation of 4951 Oak Ridge Road, starting with a presentation by staff.

Testimony will then be received by the public.

And now we're ready for the staff report.

Thank you.

Very good.

Um honorable mayor, members of the council.

We have before us this evening two annexations, one on 4951 Oak Ridge Road, and another one on 1667 Badson Place.

That uh Michael McNamy, who is here with us this evening, uh, will be presenting.

So uh property is currently under Clackamas County's uh jurisdiction and is zoned low density residential R 8.5 in the county.

It is designated R15 low density residential in our comp plan and will be zoned R15 uh upon annexation.

Sanitary sewer can be made available from an existing 10-inch public sanitary line located in Oak Ridge Road east of the subject property, and it's owned by the city of Lake Oswego.

Property owner wishes to connect to the city sewer system because the septic system has failed.

Property is served by a six-inch Lake Grove Water District line located in Oak Ridge Low Road along the site frontage, and the nearest fire hydrant is located approximately 185 feet east of the site on the southeast corner of the Oak Ridge Road, Woluga Drive intersection.

We find that these properties are within the urban services boundary, and the public services can be provided in a timely and orderly and efficient manner.

Uh proposed annexations are timely with regards to public facilities and recommends approval of this annexation.

Um enact the ordinance.

Thank you, Mr.

Espy.

Does anyone have any questions for Mr.

Esp?

Okay, we're gonna go ahead and open the public hearing then on ordinance two nine seven five for this property on Oak Ridge Road.

I'll ask is there anyone here who would like to provide any uh testimony?

Seeing no one, I'm gonna go ahead and uh close the public hearing and we'll entertain a motion to enact this ordinance.

Move to enact ordinance 2975.

All right, motion was made by counselor mboop and seconded by councillor Manns.

Any discussion?

Okay, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Are you opposed?

Okay, okay.

Motion passes seven zero.

Thank you, Mr.

Espy.

You bet.

All right.

Mr.

McNamy.

Good to have you here.

Okay.

Annexation number two.

All right.

Good evening.

Um, so this is a proposed annexation of 0.4 acres at 16676 Babson Place, uh, including the right of way adjacent to the property.

Uh property is currently under Clackamas County's jurisdiction and is zoned R10, low density residential on the city of Lake Oswego comprehensive plan map.

This property zoned R75, also low density residential, and it will be zoned R75 upon annexation.

Sanitary sewer service can be made available from an existing eight-inch public sanitary sewer main located in Babson Place to the south of the subject property.

Development will be required to extend the eight-inch sewer line to the northern boundary of the site under a public improvement permit.

Property owner wishes to connect a sewer so they can partition the existing property.

Uh properties served by a Lake Grove uh water district line located in Babson Place along the site frontage, and the nearest existing fire hydrant is located approximately 20 feet south of the site on the east side of Babson Place.

Staff finds this property is within the urban services boundary and public services can be provided in a timely, orderly and efficient manner.

And therefore, staff recommends approval of the annexation and to enact the ordinance.

Back to me.

I just have is that Babson Place?

Is that kind of an un is part of that unimproved roadway?

Yes.

When when this is, I know unrelated to the annexation, but when would we when would when would that unimproved part be improved?

Uh that I'm actually not sure about.

That would be the engineering department.

Oh I'm just curious.

It looks like a good evening.

Uh Jessica Numanalu, community development director.

So this particular application, uh, they are um annexing into uh partition, and so as part of the partition, we could require some street improvements.

Now we wouldn't be able to require the full street improvement the full length of the right-of-way, but we could require front edge improvements.

I can't determine that at this point, whether or not partition improvements are gonna be required because they have not submitted for their partition, and we have to make sure that the uh exactions are roughly proportional to the the proposal, but that could be improved uh partially as part of that partition.

The neighboring properties are in the city.

And don't they abut the unimproved?

Um, actually out in the county.

They are, but those ones just to the side to the south area.

You are correct, and it's possible because I believe that was the subject of a partition by looking at the configuration.

I think that was a three-parcel partition.

It's possible that we might have uh required some improvements along Washington Court, but I'd have to go back and look at, but not up the entire uh Babson place.

Um, but I I need to go back and look at the the file to see the the reasoning behind why we didn't require public improvements for that case.

I don't know.

Well, thank you.

Um, Councilor, thank you very much.

Counselor Mance.

Oh, you don't have a question, okay.

Does anyone have any questions?

No, okay.

Um we'll go ahead and open the public hearing on this ordinance two nine seven six, and I'll ask if there's anyone here who would like to testify on this annexation.

Okay.

See no one, we'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion to enact ordinance two nine seven six.

Move to enact ordinance two nine seven six.

All right, motion is made by councilor Manns and seconded by Councilor Corgan.

Any further discussion?

All right, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

No, okay.

Motion passes seven zero.

Thank you, Mr.

McAmee.

Thank you.

Okay.

So now we are going to move on to item 9.1.

This is a study session on the criteria for the new library site selection and the reuse of the existing library site.

We are joined here this evening by our library director, Melissa Kelly.

Director Kelly, it's great to have you here.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and Council, and thank you for the opportunity to present to you again today.

My name is Melissa Kelly, and it's my privilege to serve as the city's library director.

And I'm before you today because of the council goal to develop a strategy for an expanded and modern library facility, prioritizing west side of town and urban renewal funding options, allowing it to serve as an all-ages and all activities community center.

And to support this council goal, today's study session is intended to clarify council direction on two sets of criteria to guide community task force recommendations in future decision making.

And as you'll recall, we spoke about this on June 2nd, and we wanted to follow up and get more clarification.

And the two sets of criteria are around selecting a new library site and criteria related to future reuse of the existing library site.

We'll also cover the findings of a pre-building program study that informs the size needs for a future library site and an updated timeline for this early phase of facility and site planning.

And for community members who may not know the background of this project, I wanted to quickly review why the library facility needs to be replaced in the coming years and why a new site is necessary.

The existing facility is quickly nearing the end of its useful life, with significant and worsening seismic deficiencies, water intrusion issues, building system failures, and accessibility deficits.

And these conditions negatively impact our ability to provide services safely, reliably, and equitably.

And furthermore, the issues and their costs will continue to escalate over time.

Estimated costs to address our current needs were approximately 10 million as of 2024, and that figure has and will continue to escalate.

And this is on top of the 2.5 million already spent on extending the life of the facility over the past 10 years.

While maintenance can extend operations in the short term, it does not resolve the core building limitations or constraints of the site itself.

The existing library was rebuilt on its 1.1 acre site in the early 1980s.

And due to the constraints of the site and opposition from the surrounding neighborhood at the time, the facility was ultimately built 23% smaller than voters approved, opening in 1983 at only 27,100 square feet compared to the 35,000 that was approved through the bond measure.

In the decades since the building opened, the service population has more than doubled.

The borrowing rate of physical materials has more than tripled, and the role of the library has expanded significantly from a book repository to an active hub of community learning.

More and more community members, particularly young families, teens, and adults.

I'm on the wrong slide here.

How did I do that?

Teens and adults who do more than borrow books are not being well served by the facility's lack of room for modern library services and community spaces.

In other words, size constraints limit the library's ability to meet core community needs and expectations.

That is why community input continues to highlight the need for a replacement library, while ensuring the new facility is financially feasible for the community.

Council has given direction to continue engaging the community in a public process for this long-term facility planning.

And in the most recent statistically valid community survey in 2025, more than 70% of respondents expressed a need for modern for a modern facility that includes the community spaces listed on this slide.

The majority of these spaces are core offerings in modern libraries, creating synergy with the book stacks that remain central to the library's role as the community's learning hub and an important partner in our city's education system.

I also want to recognize that some residents are content with our library as it is.

We do have an excellent book collection and friendly, knowledgeable staff, and we maximize the current facility to the best of our ability to serve the community.

Yet to continue to satisfy those needs in a facility that is nearing end of life, and to meet additional needs of the community as reflected here, we need to plan for the future.

To meet community needs and expectations for 21st century library services, the facility needs to expand in size, and a larger site is required for that to happen.

So given all of these factors, developing a replacement strategy for the library is the most responsible course of action that aligns public investment with life cycle value, risk reduction, and long-term community needs.

Council has approved a two-track, three-phase public process to begin the long-term planning for a replacement library.

One track is focused on identifying and narrowing options for the preferred scope and site location for a future library.

The other is focused on identifying and narrowing options for future reuse of the existing site.

Each track will be guided by a community task force that will form recommendations to council.

We are currently in the first phase in which council is developing criteria for decision making.

In the second phase, the task forces will identify and analyze options pertaining to their scopes of work.

And in the third phase, council will receive task force recommendations and adopt future site decisions.

And these three phases will extend through fall, winter 2027 to allow for deep engagement with both task forces and with the broader Lake Oswego community.

In 2028 and beyond, there will be additional phases of work for this long-term project, including financial and conceptual planning and seeking broad community support.

Dependent upon community support, architectural design and construction could take place no sooner than the 2029 to 2031 time frame.

So within this larger context, I want to return to our present goal here today, which is to talk about criteria that the task forces would be utilizing.

Again, the library site reuse task force and the future library task force will be studying, analyzing, and ranking site options to present recommendations to council over the coming months.

At the study session that we had on June 2nd, Council discussed potential criteria that would guide the respective task forces in their work.

And based on that discussion, staff would like to clarify today if council would like to adopt criteria to be used to evaluate and rank options using a no stone unturned approach, or if any criteria are must-have requirements that would limit the options a task force could consider.

The no stone unturned approach was employed by the South Shore Fire Station Task Force, which Council noted as a successful task force to model after.

The no stone unturned approach would mean that the task forces would be able to consider all options for a new site or for reuse of the existing site, respectively, and would then utilize council's criteria to narrow assess and rank the options.

This would help address questions from residents who are not part of the task force and want to know did you consider X or Y?

And then Task Force member staff and community leaders would be able to answer, yes, we did.

We heard from the South Shore Fire Station Task Force members that that was really a good process for that project.

On the other hand, Council may feel that some options are truly not on the table and may want to guide the process so that community members do not get attached to options that the majority of council will not ultimately support.

And another option is to establish a mix of both.

Council could decide on some must-have requirements alongside additional evaluation criteria that would be used in assessing and ranking options.

So this isn't just an overarching question that we wanted to get clarity on after our last study session, where we were hearing a range of opinions from council.

So we'll but we'll circle back to that with examples after we talk about the detailed criteria.

But first, I wanted to review the criteria categories that council generally agreed on at the last study session, starting with what is an adequately sized site for a new library.

A pre-building program study was just completed that provides this information.

To meet community needs and expected growth, we now know that a site in the range of 2.5 to 3.5 acres is needed.

A site of this size would accommodate an adequately sized two-story facility in the range of 50,000 to 70,000 total square feet, as well as parking, usable outdoor space, and local zoning requirements for landscaping, setbacks, etc.

The study was based on community staff and city council input regarding Lake Oswego's needs for a library facility and site.

Sources of input include the 2023 library visioning process, where we heard from over 3,000 community members, the 2025 community survey, and city council and library advisory board meeting discussions over the past few years.

And so that we don't potentially miss a good option that is just under 2.5 acres, staff recommend broadening the future search to include sites two acres or larger with the clear understanding that a site 2.5 acres or larger is ideal to allow for a two-story building and adequate parking and outdoor space.

But again, there could be something just under that that we don't want to miss.

So that is our recommendation there.

An additional criteria that council discussed in relation to a future library site selection include an equitable and accessible location, more geographically central to the city's population, in a more visible, prominent location near an arterial road and allowing multimodal access in a location that is financially feasible with the potential to utilize urban renewal district funding, and in a location that is appropriate to be zoned for a public library.

And in a location that is appropriate to be zoned for a public library.

Have all the criteria been captured that council would like to adopt related to future library site selection.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yes.

Wanted to make sure.

We seem to be on this on this on that page last meeting, but wanted to make sure.

Perfect.

Thank you for that feedback.

Now let's revisit the question of must-have requirements.

And here are two examples again, based in our discussion uh last month.

Um if council establishes that a future site must be within or near enough to be brought within an urban renewal district with the capacity to fund the project, and or if council establishes that the site must be centrally located within a particular geographic area, then the task force would be limited in considering only such properties versus the no stone unturned approach of looking at every two plus acre option across the city and then giving a higher ranking during the evaluation process to the options that are centrally located or to the options that are within or could be brought within the urban renewal boundary.

So looking at the at the options, um, are any of these must have criteria for council?

I kind of highlighted these on the screen based on our our conversation last time.

Um but wanted to get some clarity from you all.

Okay, we'll give you some feedback.

Counselor Corgan, then Councillor Mans.

So in my role as the South Shore Fire Station Task Force historian, I'd like to point out that was really was a successful pro that was a successful process, but it wasn't completely no stone unturned.

They had they knew that they had to locate that station within the FMA, the fire management area for 212.

So they had a they had a piece of a map, and then what they had was wonderful help from the city's GIS department in locating specific properties.

Um it was almost like magic.

They were so good at it.

And then they carefully picked through each and every one of those properties to see if it fit the criteria they were looking for.

So I would say that the South Shore Fire Station was actually a combination.

And I think we would be most successful if we took that approach with this project.

Yeah, I kind of wondered that same that same thing.

You know, if we kind of make a ballpark of sorts and then and then turn over all the stones within that within that ballpark, uh, Councilor Mansley.

I did want to bring up that if we're thinking on moving this forward sooner rather than later, that we probably don't want to include foothills necessarily.

Um because of the time frame of foothills and what it would take to get foothills ramped up.

I'm um concerned about how quickly that could actually come to be.

And perhaps I could get some clarity from someone on what we're looking at.

I have not onboarded myself with foothills yet, so I'm not 100% sure of timelines.

Um is there something that you can speak to, Mayor, or anyone else on the council or staff?

Well, yeah, the foothills development is is just a much longer, a longer uh time horizon than we're looking at for the uh for the library project, you know, given given its current condition.

Right.

Okay.

Um, so I would add that as say something that would be in if we're going to go with a hybrid or a mixed no stone unturned except for um the foothills should probably be kept off the list or added as an addendum.

If we all things being equal, we could have foothills.

Yeah, that'd be a great place.

Thank you, Councillor Mans.

Counselor Afkay.

Uh I was going to make the same comment, but from a different angle.

Foothills is not as central to our city population.

So that brings it out.

And from my perspective, fired uh station was very successful.

It was a combination of all of this stuff you're putting in front of us.

Uh on a process oriented person, so let the process speaks for itself as opposed to post us from the get-go say no, no, no, no.

So you just rank him and whatever presents itself, then we'll talk about it.

Could uh thanks, Councilor Afghan.

Could you help us direct to understand you know the amount of is I'm I'm hearing you know openness to like, well, let's explore some.

Well, we hear that it should be like a ballpark of some kind.

And I think you know, we the reason we're looking towards urban renewals.

I think we understand that there is not gonna be an appetite for the voters to fund a a you know, a law of um uh the size that would be required of a bond to you know pay for the facility.

So we don't want to waste time either having the staff run around town looking at options that we really know are not you know going to be feasible outside urban area and when it comes to library, I mean the the modern library is kind of location location location, right?

I mean, these are the civic hubs of the community, and you can't have a civic hub, you know, off in the in the hinterlands somewhere or like an industrial area or or whatnot, it you know, would would lose a lot of um the its purpose.

So I think what we've identified here, I would say these are kind of like must I mean I think they are kind of must-have requirements.

I mean, and so just from an efficiency standpoint, I don't know if it's like, oh, it's no big deal, it'll take us five minutes and we could unturn, we could turn over every stone in five minutes, or it's like, well, no, it's gonna take us a significant amount of time, and we're just gonna end up turning over a lot of stones that you know.

So I don't know if you can speak to the the time it would take to turn over stones.

I think it would take uh a good investment of time to be able to do that.

Yeah, and I think if council wants to be able to say to any community member, yes, we looked at all those options.

Um, you know, we could we could certainly invest that time.

What do you all think about you know, are these kind of must-have?

Yeah, uh-huh.

Uh-huh.

Mm-hmm.

Uh-huh.

I think Mr.

Mayor, we talked about this last time.

You're absolutely right.

If we look at everything, the process will result in this area because of the budget constraints.

Right.

So we can start documenting these boundary conditions.

So if 10 years from now we wanted to know why didn't we look at that area, then we can say this was the boundary condition because the results would have been right here.

So I think for efficiency sake, I'm okay to go in that direction, having the boundary conditions.

So from the get-go, we say financially feasible, that means it has to be in this area.

Okay.

Everyone on board count is Council Willen have any comments?

Yeah, he's good.

Okay.

Okay.

So we're hearing is these are kind of must-have the financially feasible and the equitable and accessible criteria.

Thank you.

That's very helpful.

Um, I'm definitely, you know, hearing what you say about wanting to have those boundary conditions to ensure that project is financially feasible, and that's something that staff will take into the process and um be able to hone in on what properties are being considered by the task force.

And I think it's a really um your information is really clear about why this is a community priority, and I think will be um something that we can clearly explain to community members who are wondering, well, why didn't you consider those other options?

Like, here's this is this is the really strong reason why, and I think everyone will really understand and be on board with that.

Well, one of the and one of the main things will be explained to folks.

I mean, and I know we we we already have articulated, but we will need to continue to articulate is why aren't we rebuilding the current site?

Why aren't we remodeling the current library?

You know, those options will probably be continuing to talk about those would probably be the biggest options, just like with the fire station.

Why aren't we remodeling the fire station?

Why are we even touching the fire station?

You know, I'm sure I'm sure so yes.

We definitely have our messaging points on that.

Yes.

And we're honing them in further job to be able to answer that for the community.

Yep.

All right.

Okay, next, moving on to the existing site reuse criteria that council discussed at the previous study session.

Um we discussed generating revenue that would effectively lower the cost of a future facility is a potential criteria for future reuse of the existing site.

And then understanding and abiding by uh any land use requirements, including zoning risk zoning restrictions, code regulations, and any other requirements is another important criteria.

Staff are in the process of gathering more information related to these areas to share with the task force and council.

Um so we'll be able to bring that forward in the future.

Uh, is does this capture all the criteria that council would like to adopt related to the existing site reuse uh discussions with the task force.

Yes.

Okay.

Okay.

Yeah.

Just wanted to make sure about that.

And then again, we can see if any of these are must-haves.

Again, highlighting the area that had the most discussion from council at the last meeting.

Um, and and again, trying to seek direction on whether this is a must-have requirement.

Uh and as an example, if all the reuse scenarios developed by the task force must generate some level of revenue, um, is that council's intent, or is the council open to considering options that do not generate funding?

Both points of view were expressed by council members at the last study session.

Um, if generating funds to help pay for a new library is a council priority, it's important to establish clear expectations around this.

Um there's a concern that it could be harmful to community relations for the task force or community to fall in love with an idea that the majority of council would not ultimately support.

Um, however, if council does not want to restrict the task force in considering all ideas for the future reuse of the site, it could be made clear that, for example, two out of the three recommendations must generate funding and that the recommendations need to be evaluated and ranked based on that council priority.

Um so again, I wanted to kind of talk about those two sides of the coin and hear your feedback on this policy question.

Okay, let's have some discussion.

Councilor Corrigan, I guess.

I'm wondering if we could put in kind of a tiered system saying we know we need to generate revenue, this will be an expensive project.

But what revenue does is it supports public per public purpose.

So would it be possible as these people look to I I mean, I can't imagine what it would be, but if there were some sort of a public purpose that this could be used for that would generate value for the city without going through a monetary process, would we consider that some intrinsic value?

Something that brings value to the city that is perhaps doesn't have a dollar, a dollar um uh revenue stream.

Not necessarily something that would support the future library.

Yeah, I mean, could we, but I think I would prefer we it's gonna be such an expensive project and we want to do it well, but it's a it is this is gonna be this is a sticky wicket.

Is it possible that if we are unable to do that, that we could tier the a second choice as bringing value to the community in some way?

I don't I don't know.

That's what my thought on it I wanted to share.

Kind of a combination or just a uh fallback position if they really can't do it.

I I think I would prefer to see the site generate revenue, but I don't know.

Maybe these people are gonna have a tough job.

So I don't know.

Okay.

Uh thank you, Council Corgan.

Counselor Vertic.

Yeah, I I agree with Councilor Corgan.

I think sometimes value we always want to put in terms of dollars, but there are other types of value, and I think we shouldn't ignore that.

Um, again, it would be nice if we could generate some funds from the property.

What that looks like, I'm not sure.

We also might have some money that needs to go back into the site for one reason or another.

So I don't want to necessarily restrict the funds that potentially could be raised from the site to have to go into the new library.

It might need to go into that whatever is come up with that site.

So I I want to be careful that we're not so strict that it has to, you know, I kind of want to limit it to the site or the library, but I I just don't I don't want to be so strict that we kind of pigeonhole ourselves later.

And I do think the intrinsic value is there.

So I kind of I do uh like the potential of you know, I think we should get some recommendations that include funding, it might be some you know different levels of funding.

Um I don't think that should be ignored because I think most of us are like we need this is gonna be expensive, we need to make sure we get some funds, but yeah, options are gonna be important.

Options.

Okay.

Uh thank you, Council Verde, Councilor Mans.

Very hard to make this determination for a site that has been a library since the 1970s, 74.

Um, and and uh put that funding, if you will, completely into a future facility at this point in time.

It's difficult for me to consider it, and I think going looking at the intrinsic values of at least a portion of that site might be useful, but then again, this is going to be a very expensive project.

So I think options are what we are looking for most definitely.

Okay, thank you, Councilor.

Council.

I I'm kind of lost, like we want to reuse the site.

I future use.

Yeah, the future use, like what do you think we can do that to generate money except yeah?

Okay, yeah.

And then I yeah.

That's one reason why that's what the task force needs to kind of come up with.

That's why we're asking them to kind of say what could the site, what could the existing site be?

So I don't know that we can answer that question because like we have to come kind, you know, cut to the case, you know, like just uh they do things you sell the site to put the money on the existing on the future project.

It's uh like I said, we we have to know the like the attachment, emotional attachment that is in that building for people who live around who grow up and stuff like that.

But there were there's always some time when we make policies that things can hurt, like we have to be objective and also realistic.

What can we put there to generate money?

Like if you folks don't have an idea on it, like what it can be, I don't think that the task force can have we or no when I'm saying that like you don't have an example, like sometimes we can have say that oh, we can have a boutique or stuff like that, but nothing is realistic there that we can make to generate money except sell the lot.

Yeah, that's the only thing, or you build something.

No, that's uh like I want to be realistic and be respectful.

So do you think that it should be a criteria that it generates Yeah, yeah, I mean the criteria is if yes, yeah, we yes, and what do you think, Council African?

Dido.

Yeah, but that site, didn't that site you know, this is not a black and white answer for me right now.

I don't have enough information to say no or yes.

I understand what counselor Mabu says, but at the same time, let's look at options.

At the end of the day, it may be a no answer or it may be a yes answer, depending on uh what the options are.

That's what I'm thinking.

What and uh thank you, uh Councillor Afghan, uh Counselor Winland.

Well, I'm in an agreement with Counselor Maboop.

Um I I get uh I totally understand the emotional part and the possibilities that you might have for the site.

Um but I think we need to look at in the larger picture the uh enormity of a new library at 50 to 70,000 and the urban or no district dollars that could offset that cost.

And we're gonna come up pretty short.

And I just have a problem um trying to take a task force and have them create some something that we don't even have any ideas about, and it would be hard pressed unless you want to open up a food court place.

Um just kidding.

Uh but it in the in the big picture, um uh if we want to move the library, and I think this council has said that we need to.

Um I think we need to leverage on behalf of the taxpayers the uh maximum amount of money that we can get out of the the old property and put it into the new library and make the new library the very best possible facility we can that will serve our community for the next 50 to 100 years.

And so I I tend to look at it from a financial standpoint of view, and folks, we don't have money to spend on the library, current library to re envision it and to make it um uh and I don't know when you say money generating, is that like a rent or is that I'm looking at sale of property um and then uh making sure that we do the very best possible um service to the first edition neighborhood to say, hey, what are the ideas that you would like to have here um and help guide that decision?

And folks, we don't have money to spend on the library, current library to re envision it and to make it um uh and I don't know when you say money generating, is that like a rent or is that I'm looking at sale of property um and then uh making sure that we do the very best possible um service to the first edition neighborhood to say, hey, what are the ideas that you would like to have here and help guide that decision, but knowing that we're going to sell the property and maximize our offset for the for the library because we're talking about I mean we haven't even talked it talked about costs for the library, but I have a feeling when it comes out, it's gonna be a pretty big number, and we're gonna I don't want us to fail uh standpoint, and I want to I want to provide as much um financial uh uh comprehensive study that we can to ensure that we're making the maximum uh effort of of uh um building a new library at the at the least amount of cost, but having a great library and a and a facility with a good financial plan.

So anyway, that's my my thought.

No, thanks, Council Willeman.

Yeah, I I agree with that.

We we wanna I I we just met Council Verdick and I with um director uh Kelly earlier today and selecting members for the task force that are gonna look at that site, and I think it's really important that the community has a voice in what happens to that site, but we're also gonna have folks voicing their uh perspectives on the future library, and I'm sure they'll be just as robust as they were on the Lorac, which went from one pools to two pools to, you know.

So, you know, um and we we do want to be realistic because I I mean if if we're not selling the site and we retain the site, that means we're investing in the site.

Where's that money coming from?

So you know it's like um so I I'm all for options, but I I don't see a path forward to a new library unless we generate money.

And I I don't know for certain, but you know that we did um the family that donated the site for the use of the library, I do think they want to see it kind of springboarded into a new library, not repurposed into a non-like, you know, that they want to see it that sold and that money reinvested in the new library, I believe.

I don't know if uh Mr.

Toyana.

All right, there we go.

Yes, I've spoken with one of the heirs of the original donors, and they um did express that they are hopeful that the money generated if we do decide to sell that property is used for the future library that kind of goes with the original donative purpose um from the original donation in the 1960s.

So that was an they did it, they did ask that.

Um, and you know, and explain this whole process, but would pass that along.

Council verdict.

So I think it's very important to me that we keep that intent in mind, which does kind of say at least and I again I I want to be careful what I say because I really would like the task force to be able to brainstorm what these options are, but I think there's gotta be my hunch is that there's probably I can't I'd be surprised if there's an option available that doesn't raise or generate at least some dollars.

Now, does that maximize every square inch?

I don't know.

But um so I guess that's where when I'm looking at it, I don't know that we have to that's where I'm wanting some flexibility in there, but I think we definitely need to be leaning for or moving forward with the intent of that deed and the families um what they're asking.

To me, that's really important.

Yeah, you agree with that too.

Oh okay, yeah.

Counselor means sadly, I I agree with all my colleagues, which only muddies the water a bit, but um the one X factor that we haven't determined is what the the current value even of that property would be.

Um I can make up a number of my head that might be more or less in a ballpark, but I don't know what that particular raw land would be.

And if that were to be sold with that cost of taking down a library uh factor into it.

I mean, there's there's many different factors involved.

So until we have clarity around that number, I think that's kind of a I'll use the word squishy, a little bit of a nebulous area that needs to be determined.

So certainly it would support the future library, and we certainly would try to do what we could do to pay homage to the old library site in the neighborhood.

I don't know what that looks like.

And I would hope the task force might be able to come up with some solid ideas around that.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you, Councilman.

So Council Afghan.

I look at it this way.

If the building isn't good enough for us, it isn't good enough for anybody else to do business there.

So that's one factor.

The other factor is I don't know what are the options without the building, with the building, how much the property is worth.

I'm making these numbers, so I'm gonna go so big that nobody can challenge me.

It's hundred million dollar worth of property.

If it doesn't generate enough money to justify that cost that we can apply to the library, then the answer is no, we're not gonna go that direction.

But if it pays for itself in 10 years, then it's like, hmm, maybe we should consider this.

That's why I was saying I don't have enough information to say let's do or let's not do.

But the gut feel says at the end of the day that building is not worth anything, and the value is in the property, and is there somebody who wants that property so bad who wants to give us so much money every year for the rest of our lives, at least my life, that we would consider it.

Probability is very low, but the question is do we want to explore it, or do we want to take our experience and our gut feeling and our past experience and say it's just the value of the lot.

So thank you, Councilor Afghan.

So what I'm hearing is there's an emphasis on the need to generate revenue.

Um first priority.

But if there's a creative ideas that involve some that that in addition to generating revenue, involve some other uh scenario that none of us can envision here, uh then we would love to hear them.

Okay.

Yeah, I think yes, what I'm just gonna re restate what I think I heard you say, um, which is that it is you do want to see options that generate uh revenue or generate funds for the new library, um, but you're also open to perhaps part of the site, having another public good public value, um, and want to be don't want to say that every square inch needs to generate revenue, but that you want to prioritize generating revenue and see options that do.

Because only it's not like generates revenue or doesn't generate it's almost like it generates revenue or it incurs cost, you know.

So that's a problem.

Like I mean, that's a problem.

We can't be doing a project there and another.

I mean, that's so there'd have to be some kind of like a you know, Jack and the Beanstock miracle beans type of thing going on with that plan, you know, the miracle beans, we need miracle beans.

So they'd have to have a miracle bean component, you know, some miracle beans.

Yeah, they need miracle beans to to fund some other thing.

Yeah.

Anyway, so yes, they'd have to, there would need to be some kind of plan, not pie in the sky type of wouldn't this be like, well, yeah, where's the money gonna come from?

Yeah.

Right, yeah, exactly.

That makes sense to me.

Okay.

Looking at options.

If we're talking about six months with 10 people, community people working so long, it's like we have we have about uh task force of 20 people.

And five to six meetings, five to six meetings.

Yep, and uh so it'll probably be in the range of three of those meetings that they would be looking at the different options, analyzing them and ranking them with kind of an orientation meeting to start and then um follow up after they hear your feedback on their top recommendations to to conclude the task force.

And council verdict will be our liaison to that committee.

Thank you, Council Verdict.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Right.

Those magic meets.

Okay, I think we're ready to move on to the next slide, um, which is just to let you know what comes next.

Um, at our next uh meeting on July 21st, there will be a council business item for adoption of the criteria we've discussed here today at the last study session, and a council business item to establish the future library task force, as well as a consent agenda item to appoint the members to the library site reuse task force.

We'll continue moving forward with the process.

Um here if you have any other questions, but otherwise, thank you so much for your time and for clarifying the criteria for the task forces, and it's gonna be a really exciting uh and busy process working with the community to talk about these options and coming up with recommendations for you all to consider.

It's very exciting.

There was a lot of interest in the reuse task force too.

So thank you to all the neighbors who applied to be a part of that.

We really appreciate the engagement.

Yeah, yeah, it's great.

Excellent.

Thank you, Director.

Everyone, good, yes, yes.

Okay, thank you very much.

All right, folks.

Now time for information from council.

Councilor Mans.

Thank you.

Um, I'd like to give a shout out to our parks department for the fabulous job they did with the parade.

Um I was just having the best time.

I must have counted five hundred, maybe a thousand trader gel mini tote bags hanging over the barriers.

Very popular.

Also triggered treat bags, every sort of bag you can imagine.

Um the the kids were great, the parents were great, the staff was amazing to allow me the opportunity to engage with the community as I did.

Also, I do have to say I met a 2008 uh water polo Olympian who was there with her daughter and her, and they were all dressed up in their 2008 Olympic year.

Uh and and the daughter called her mom out and said, Yes, my mother, my mother was an Olympian.

So that was really really fun.

But again, thanks to the staff wherever you are.

Thank you.

Oh, and police and fire.

Thank you.

I have the city manager reminding me.

Police and fire uh maintenance were they involved?

Yeah, yeah, maintenance was involved.

Uh anyone else?

Executive team.

And weuncil, city council, city council, my colleagues.

It was a true Lake Oswego City team event.

Have I forgotten anyone?

Library was there, if not in person in spirit, certainly.

So they would.

The rover was there, of course.

The rover was there.

It's great.

The rover was there.

So thank you to the whole city for making this event just awesome.

Thank you all.

Yeah, thank you very much.

It was great.

And thank Councilor Afghan and I sat in the dunk tank.

Awful.

No, it's fine.

It's fine, except my family has some kind of water fetish or something.

I don't know what's going on.

They just love it.

We love attacking each other with water, so they all dunked me.

Horrible, including my own mother who paid for the guaranteed dunk, so she didn't have to throw the ball.

That's funny.

That's so good.

There will be revenge.

My family also showed up and after they missed the target, they just walked and paid their fairness in the water.

But uh thanks, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh, we were able to uh uh raise a few thousand dollars.

So how much that's great.

How much did you fly?

And well, I think that the director, parks director, Jeff.

Yeah, it's yes.

Well, I had a lot of employees paying to throw that ball.

And then Captain Simon, you know, it's a lot of tickets.

He was back on that morning.

I didn't have change of clothes, that's why I didn't show you.

Um councilor verdict and um and counselor.

We all attended a sorting-in ceremony here this past week for some new uh officers, the largest uh uh group that we've we've had here in a while, which is great.

So they're all at the academy and one new uh dispatcher as well.

Um we'll look forward to them joining the team.

We appreciate the the department including us in those in those ceremonies.

Um yes, anything else?

Anyone?

No, city manager.

I also want to thank the staff um the entire city for putting on such a great parade and all of the events.

Um it was just it was overwhelming how many different pieces of the puzzle that came together and made made it.

And I had so many people walking up to me and just saying thank you.

Thank you for this event.

Um whatever event that was that I was at.

They were very appreciative.

So thank you for being so supportive as well.

Thank you.

Oh, yeah, and the rover.

Um everybody and the rover.

Um also just wanted to uh make sure that it was on your calendar that we've got the Willamette River Greenway Trail opening on the 15th.

Um not opening, I'm sorry.

So groundbreaking.

The groundbreaking.

It's not done yet.

I'm getting ahead of myself.

But the groundbreaking on the 15th, which will be a special event that the city has waited several decades for.

So congratulations.

Thank you, Lynn.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you, everyone.

Um, so now at uh this point we are going to convene uh um an executive session, and I will ask City Attorney Erica to please read the statutory basis for this executive session.

Lake Oswego City Council will now meet in executive session under ORS 1982.660 sub 2 sub I to review and evaluate the employment related performance of the chief executive officer of any public body, a public officer, employee, or staff member who does not request an open hearing, and subsection F to consider information or records that are exempt that are exempt by law from public inspection.

Representatives of the news media and designated staff shall be allowed to attend the executive session.

All other members of the audience are asked to leave the room.

Representatives of the news media are specifically directed not to report on any of the deliberations during the during the executive session, except to state the general subject of the session as previously announced.

No final decisions will be made in executive session, and we will adjourn the meeting after the session.

Okay.

Well, this will conclude the um the broadcast portion of the meeting.

We are going to recess and then we will reconvene in the side room.

Thank you very much, everyone.