West Linn City Council Budget Work Session - October 8, 2025

The West Linn City Council held a work session on October 8, 2025, from 8:30 AM to approximately 12:00 PM, focused on the city's budget needs and opportunities. The meeting was facilitated by consultant Sarah Wilson and included city staff and the council. The goal was to establish shared financial priorities, explore revenue options, and develop a community engagement strategy. No formal votes were taken, but consensus was reached on next steps.

Discussion Items

• Warm-Up Exercise (Shark Tank Edition): Two teams of council members and staff pitched hypothetical $20 million community initiatives. One team proposed a waterfront phase one project with multimodal transportation, marina acquisition, and partnerships. The other proposed commercial property acquisition, a municipal fiber network, street improvements (including Highway 43), and a rec center phase one. Staff judges voted based on sustainability, alignment with council priorities, operational budget impact, and community outreach. The second proposal won for its focus on long-term revenue generation.

• SPOT Analysis (Strengths, Problems, Opportunities, Threats):

  • Strengths: Small-town feel, prosperous community, green spaces and river access, community pride, safest city in Oregon (Safewise #1 five years running), low tax rate, collaborative council-staff relations, efficient small workforce, robust communication tools (weekly newsletter, biannual print newsletter), high community participation in advisory groups and meetings.
  • Problems: Declining/concerning economic climate, frozen tax base due to state limits, capped utility increases, expenses rising faster than revenues, state mandates conflicting with community wishes (e.g., housing density), lack of commercial/industrial tax base, limited developable land, very lean staffing (one-person departments risk burnout), high community expectations, difficulty communicating construction impacts, public unawareness of city services' value, increasing police response times, perception of high taxes despite low city portion, employee recruitment/retention challenges, hidden needs of rent-burdened households (over 25% rent burdened), potential budget deficit.
  • Opportunities: Good climate for a ballot measure (city hasn't asked voters for a tax increase since 2018), Willamette Falls as a tourism draw (partners attracting millions), manageable size for community outreach, urban renewal districts (one existing, potential for a second on Highway 43), residents' willingness to learn and pay for added services, opportunity to reduce service levels and focus, different funding mechanisms (local option levy, public safety fee, bond, grants, partnerships), projects like Parker Road property (food cart pod/music space), Oppenlander development, pre-phase one waterfront community amenity, facilities and parks asset management planning, land acquisition from ODOT and PGE, operations building, public safety fee for sidewalk gaps, utilities and streets funding.
  • Threats: Cybersecurity attacks, continued increase in infrastructure costs, economic downturn, being too broad with objectives (risk of failure), vocal minority opposing measures, failure of a measure, uninformed community members, federal/state funding cuts, anti-government narrative, social media misinformation, AI and loss of traditional media, residents struggling with cost of living, natural disasters (seismic, fire), COVID resurgence, lack of public awareness of low city tax portion, competing tax measures from other governments, voters' past rejection of water funding (three years ago), recession or wage stagnation, risk of going too big without community support.

• Prioritization Exercise (Dot Voting): Council members and staff placed three dots each on identified priority areas. Results showed top priorities:

  1. Increase and maintain staffing levels/service levels (received most dots, both council and staff).
  2. Land acquisition (as a return-on-investment strategy).
  3. Investing in basic infrastructure (water, sewer, roads). Some council members emphasized maintaining current service levels over increasing staffing; others saw them as connected. Staff noted that without infrastructure investment, service levels will decline.

• Discussion on Funding Tools and Community Engagement: The council examined examples from other cities: Tigard's police levy (initially failed when broad, then passed when narrowly focused), Milwaukee's public safety fee (specific positions and services), Happy Valley's police operating levy, and Tualatin's transportation bond (success after storytelling). West Linn's own history (police levy failure in the past) was noted. The group agreed that a focused, specific ask is more likely to succeed than a broad package. They discussed the need for community input before finalizing priorities, but also recognized that council has a leadership role in proposing what is needed. Staff proposed a three-tier approach: stabilize services with fees (e.g., $20/month public safety fee), then use levies and bonds for amenities and infrastructure. Council expressed interest in a comprehensive strategic financial plan that sequences asks over time.

Key Outcomes

• No formal votes were taken.
• Consensus on Next Steps: Staff will compile a draft strategic financial plan based on today's discussion, including cost estimates for priority areas (maintaining current service levels, key staffing additions, land acquisition, infrastructure projects like Parker Road, waterfront amenity, operations building, utilities, roads, and asset management). The plan will propose a timeline and potential funding sources (fees, levies, bonds).
• Community Engagement: The council will use the draft plan to conduct community outreach (open houses, online surveys, simple two-question polls) before finalizing priorities. Staff will also explore a digital survey where residents can allocate virtual "dots" to options.
• Further Workshop: The council may hold another work session with facilitator Sarah Wilson to refine the plan after receiving the draft.
• Staff Direction: Staff will bring back a draft plan with specific proposals and questions for council direction on engagement and sequencing.