West Linn City Council Meeting - September 8, 2026
West Linn City Council Meeting - September 8, 2026
The West Linn City Council met in a hybrid format on Tuesday, September 8, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. The meeting included public comments, mayor and council reports, a consent agenda, business items, and updates on the I-205 Abernethy Bridge construction noise issues. Key decisions included the adoption of a proclamation supporting affected residents and the approval of a 10-year Comcast franchise renewal.
Consent Calendar
- Unanimously approved (5-0) the minutes of the August 18, 2026 meeting and an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) amendment with Water Environmental Services for inflow and infiltration work, correcting a scrivener's error before the vote.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Dean Sirroy (President, Rosemont Summit Neighborhood Association / Friends of Oppenlander): Requested a working session between the Council and the neighborhood to discuss the Oppenlander Fields development before the application process moves further. He outlined eight issues including traffic studies, tree preservation, green space, and a wetlands delineation. He emphasized the neighborhood's goal is not to stop development but to ensure it is a good fit for the community.
- Liz Dordal (Miles Drive resident): Expressed support for her neighbors and asked for a working session with the Council, reiterating the resolution voted on by the neighborhood.
- Ted Nicholson (West Linn resident): Supported the Oppenlander concerns and highlighted the property's amenity value, particularly the mature tree grove and a potential wetland area. He urged a thorough investigation of the wetland question.
- Amber (affected neighbor, spoke later during noise ordinance discussion): Strongly urged the Council to repeal the ODOT noise exemption immediately, arguing it would send a clear message and that enforcement concerns should not prevent the action. She asked for the repeal language to be posted and a vote taken the next week, and for a timeline on comprehensive noise ordinance reform.
Discussion Items
I-205 Abernethy Bridge Proclamation and Noise Ordinance Update
- Councilor Bonnington introduced a proclamation affirming the city's commitment to residents affected by the I-205 Abernethy Bridge construction noise, vibration, and lighting impacts. The proclamation was unanimously adopted (5-0) after being read aloud.
- Doug (Community Services Director) reported on ongoing discussions with ODOT and QIT, listing key requests: moving high-noise work to daytime, meaningful advance notice, noise/vibration monitoring, property damage process, and stopping interactions between QIT employees and residents. He noted ODOT promised a response within 48 hours.
- City Attorney Kaylee outlined legal challenges: removing the ODOT exemption from the noise ordinance would be difficult to enforce because citations would need to target the actual worker, not the entity. Police Chief expressed concerns about enforceability and practical patrol limitations. The ordinance includes a variance process but only for 7-day permits.
- Council members debated whether to immediately repeal the exemption or wait for negotiations. Councilor Bonnington cautioned against a simple repeal without enforceable follow-through. Council President Baumgartner expressed frustration with ODOT's past lack of accountability but supported a more comprehensive approach. Councilor Groner favored both avenues: repealing the exemption and continuing negotiations. The Mayor noted that a 48-hour deadline for ODOT commitments was already set.
- After further public comment from Amber, the Council agreed to have staff post the repeal language for the next Tuesday work session (so it can be discussed but not voted on) and to continue working on a more comprehensive noise ordinance reform.
Oppenlander Fields Development (Raised in Public Comments)
- The Council acknowledged the request for a working session and committed to having the Community Development Director follow up on scheduling, as the matter involves land use policy.
Key Outcomes
- Abernethy Bridge Proclamation: Adopted unanimously (5-0), directing the city manager to continue engagement with ODOT and committing the Council to consider further legislative action if needed.
- Noise Ordinance: The Council directed the city attorney to draft language removing the ODOT exemption for posting and discussion at the September 15 work session. No final vote was taken; comprehensive reform will be developed separately. A timeline for that reform was not set but will be addressed.
- Angie Cole Appointment: Appointed to the Sustainability Advisory Board by a unanimous (5-0) vote.
- Comcast Franchise Renewal (Ordinance 1774): Passed first and second readings unanimously (5-0), granting a 10-year non-exclusive franchise from July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2036, with fees at 5% of gross revenues and capital support increasing from $0.80/subscriber/month to 1.75% of gross revenues. Carriage of five PEG channels and continued MAC oversight were preserved.
- Consent Agenda: Approved (5-0) as corrected.
- Future Meeting: Next meeting scheduled as a work session on September 15, 2026, with posted noise ordinance repeal language for discussion.
Meeting Transcript
Um minutos should have some paper. Scripteners there. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. And then uh ordinance 1774 is on the business meeting. That's uh Comcast franchise renewal. And uh haven't heard from the Comcast or telephone at this point. So I assume they're supportive because they're pretty vocal to that. Yeah, that's that was a standard process. I wasn't as involved in Mac negotiates that for many jurisdictions as a whole. Um, but I did review, I was surprised to find that in our code it does say that those franchises have to be adopted by ordinance, which I thought was strange like a law of general applicability. Usually you would think a resolution, but that's how it is in our quote, it's how it's always been done. So that's how I draft help traffic up the ordinance. I don't know what the argument against a simple repeal of the noise audience a lot. Um I can speak to that now, or we we can discuss it more at the meeting, but um basically removing ODOT express exemption altogether um makes it so any relatively minor ODOT project, like the example provided that they're gonna come and do about a four-day taping project that's really beneficial and critical for a resident. They would no longer have an exemption to do that work, they would have to apply for a waiver and go through that whole process to kind of a straightforward maintenance type project. Um and also although other jurors maybe a little function is good or right. Yeah, although um other jurisdictions don't necessarily have that express language, they all have a variance process. So when ODOT is doing major projects like this, you know, the seismic retrofitting, they're always granted some type of variance out of normal working hours. And so I think the the I think we would want to negotiate that rather than just for that. Yeah, there is negotiation included, but I think the the thought was um and and also after talking to Chief and his ability to enforce that that really the more beneficial path would be working with Fidel and Ryan and our representatives and Doug has been charged to have um required changes that they are gonna do, and basically holding ODA to those rather than trying to really change our local code in a way that may not have the best long-term consequences for other projects, and also the fact that you know citing them with a small fine versus um QIT, you know, is having liquidated damages of almost 75,000 a day. It really has little you know deterrence. I think the symbolic effect is certainly a statement, yeah. But I think it's it's it's not as simple as it looks. It's not as simple. Um I think looking at it, we need to look for what's the outcome gonna be. And I don't think we'll get the outcome that we want. If we just change the ordinary, yeah. I think we're gonna negotiate that everybody without having to do this. Yeah, that she's gonna be able to do that. Yeah, and then they want has been happening all week. It is, yeah, yeah. So we're gonna get them hopefully the relief that they want at the time they want it and some other provisions that we've asked in writing for them to respond to. Then that's fine. We're trying to we're trying to we're trying to get relief for our neighbors and also keep the project going that it can be completed. That was another discussion with uh removing that language and then having to pivot to the variance approach, and most likely would it end up extending the project while we work through that process. So trying to figure out what's the most efficient and um you know direct way of addressing the problem. I am open to noise ordinance reform overall. I hate our current noise or the language in there is terrible, it doesn't have decimal levels. Yeah, yeah. And that's something that we can do, it's just not gonna solve this problem. Yeah, have a worse situation as they end up with the noise ordinance or appeal. Think that's actually helpful, but they're still missable all night the next year and a half. Anything else on that topic or no, I don't understand the ordinance. Would you go to the order? Seeing none, uh we'll adjourn and we'll vote six. Eight minutes, seven minutes. Thank you, everybody. Okay, call this meeting to order.
openpublica.com