West Linn City Council Special Meeting – September 22, 2026

The West Linn City Council held a special meeting on September 22, 2026 at 1:00 p.m. to consider two significant items: a resolution to delegate the council’s appellate authority over a land use appeal to a hearings officer (Resolution 2026-08), and an ordinance to repeal the noise exemption for the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and subject them to the city’s noise permit process (Ordinance 1775). The meeting also included public comment on the Vision 43 project code changes and approval of a consent agenda item regarding a housing planning assistance grant.

Consent Calendar

• The agenda was approved unanimously.
• The consent agenda, which included an Intergovernmental Agreement for a Housing Planning Assistance Grant, was approved unanimously.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Non-Agenda Public Comment: Mike Capigan, Chair of the Robinwood Neighborhood Association community development committee, requested the city hold a physical open house for the Vision 43 code changes, citing insufficient outreach and community concerns about high-density housing along Highway 43.
• Public Comment on Resolution 2026-08 (Delegation of Appeal Authority): Multiple residents spoke against delegating the appeal authority to a hearings officer:
  • Ed Schwartz (representing Savannah Oaks Neighborhood Association) argued that the city code requires the council to hear appeals, that the process was being changed mid-appeal, that materials were not properly posted, and that the council should not shirk its duty.
  • Roberta Schwartz echoed those points, emphasizing the planning commission’s thorough work and the flawed application process, particularly regarding the closure of Tandler Drive.
  • Scott Atheridge supported the Schwartz’s comments and noted traffic concerns.
  • Karen Barendrick questioned the adequacy of traffic studies and the impact on Salamo Road.
  • Carol Mann urged the council to make the decision themselves, citing her experience as an HOA president and concerns about misleading information from the city.
  • Mary Ritzman asked the council to hear the appeal, raising unresolved issues like parking, deliveries, and street ownership.
  • Former Mayor David Dodds advised council to either hire a hearings officer as extra legal counsel rather than as decision-maker, or hear the appeal themselves, warning of political consequences if they delegate.
  • Mike Capigan reiterated Dodds’ advice and argued that council members are qualified by being elected and living in the city.
  • Carrie Oakes objected to insufficient transparency, noting that key documents (the appeal and HAPO complaint) were not included in the agenda packet, violating ORS 192.620.
  • Shannon Knight (via Webex) raised concerns about transparency in the public process, unclear deadlines for testimony, and lack of notice of the appeal filing.
  • Rebecca Van Horn, a local business owner, expressed concerns about the project’s impact on businesses and traffic.

Discussion Items

• Resolution 2026-08 – Delegating Appellate Authority for Project ID DR-25-04/LLA-25-02: The staff explained that this complex land use application (approx. 320 apartment units with commercial space on Tandler Drive) had been denied 5-0 by the Planning Commission. The applicant filed an appeal and also a complaint with the state Housing Accountability and Production Office (HAPO) – the first such complaint for the city. The staff recommended delegation to a hearings officer due to the complexity of new state laws, the voluminous record, and the need for impartiality. Council members expressed varied views:

  • Councillor Crowner opposed delegation, arguing he felt unbiased despite public communications, and drew a distinction from a prior case (operations center) where bias was clear.
  • Councillor Bright favored delegation because of the new state law and her lack of expertise on its overlap with city code.
  • Council President Baumgartner favored delegation, noting the new legal territory and the need for expert legal decision-making.
  • Councillor Bonington cited complexity, the expedited timeline, and the politicized environment as reasons to delegate.
  • Mayor Bialostowski acknowledged significant political pressure and argued that hiring a hearings officer would ensure a decision based on law rather than politics, upholding impartiality.
  • Council also discussed the city attorney’s legal basis for delegation under the city charter and home rule authority. The motion passed 4-1 (Councillor Crowner voting no).

• Ordinance 1775 – Repeal of ODOT Noise Exemption: The staff presented the ordinance, which removes the blanket noise exemption for ODOT construction activities, requiring them to obtain a special permit and follow the same noise standards as other construction. The aim is to improve mitigation, monitoring, and enforcement, especially for nighttime girder installation work. Council discussion centered on enforcement mechanisms (e.g., citing the contractor rather than individual workers, using data from ODOT’s own monitoring), timelines for implementing the permit process, and the need for verification. Council members expressed frustration with ODOT’s past actions and lack of accountability. The ordinance was approved unanimously on first and second reading (emergency measure). A resident from the affected area thanked the council and reported continuing noise past 3 a.m.

Key Outcomes

• Consent Agenda: Approved unanimously, including the Housing Planning Assistance Grant IGA.
• Resolution 2026-08: Adopted by a 4-1 vote, delegating the council’s appellate decision-making authority for the Tandler Drive project appeal to a hearings officer. Next steps include selecting a hearings officer, scheduling the appeal hearing, and creating a dedicated appeal website with public notice.
• Ordinance 1775: Approved unanimously on first and second reading, adopting the repeal of the ODOT noise exemption and directing staff to develop special permit rules. The ordinance is effective immediately under emergency measures. Staff will work to have application forms available within the week and set a 30-day decision timeline.
• The council also informally agreed on legislative priorities for the League of Oregon Cities, focusing on transportation funding, infrastructure, behavioral health, housing with local control, and administrative rulemaking reform.