Portland City Council Special Meeting

3:14This is Councilor Zimmerman.

3:15I'm just trying to do a mic check.

3:21Hi, Councilor.

3:22Uh, this is Christina with the Council Clerk's Office.

3:24I don't think they've turned on the audio yet, but I can hear you great.

3:28Okay, that's great.

3:29I just wanted to get on early in case it got weird.

3:31Thank you.

3:31Hey, no worries.

3:32Thanks.

6:32Good afternoon, colleagues.

6:35I am calling to order a special meeting of the Portland City Council.

6:39It is Wednesday, July 16th at 2:32 PM.

6:45Rebecca, could you please call the roll?

6:48Koyama Lane?

6:50Here.

6:51Morillo?

6:52Here.

6:53Novick?

6:54Here.

6:54Clark?

6:55Here.

6:57Zimmerman?

6:58Here.

7:00Avalos?

7:02Here.

7:03Here.

7:07Here.

7:08Here.

7:09Here.

7:09Pirtle-Guiney.

7:10Here.

7:12And could I have our attorney please go over the rules of order and decorum?

7:20Welcome to the Portland City Council.

7:21To testify before council in person or virtually, you must sign up in advance on the council agenda at www.portland.gov/council/agenda.

7:31Information on engaging with council can be found on the council clerk's webpage.

7:35Individual may testify for 3 minutes unless the presiding officer states otherwise.

7:40Your microphone will be muted when your time is over.

7:42The presiding officer preserves order.

7:44Disruptive conduct such as shouting, refusing to conclude your testimony when your time is up, or interrupting others' testimony or council deliberations will not be allowed.

7:53If you cause a disruption, a warning will be given.

7:56Further disruption will result in ejection from the meeting.

7:58Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass.

8:02Additionally, council may take a short recess and reconvene virtually.

8:06Your testimony should address the matter being considered.

8:09When testifying, state your name for the record.

8:11Your address is not necessary.

8:13If you're a lobbyist, identify the organization you represent.

8:17Virtual testifiers should unmute themselves when the council clerk calls your name.

8:20Thank you.

8:20Thank you, Council Clerk Keelan McClymont.

8:22Thank you very much.

8:27Keelan, could you please read our first agenda item?

8:31Agenda item 1, refer to the voters a 5-year local option tax levy for the November 4th, 2025 election to maintain safe parks, nature, affordable recreation through 5-year levy.

8:47Thank you very much.

8:49Colleagues, this agenda item came out of a work session, not out of a committee, so there is not a committee staff summary.

8:59Um, this is a measure to refer a 5-year tax levy to the voters to maintain safe parks, natural spaces, and affordable recreation opportunities in our city.

9:13The current levy expires next year, and without this Without this new levy, we'll see 50% cuts in our Parks and Recreation Department.

9:24With the new levy, we will see levy rates increase to $1.40, which will allow us to maintain the investments that we worked hard to put in the budget this year.

9:36Generally, when something comes to council, we don't have a full presentation, but because at the last work session we talked about the levy conceptually, but not about the final details, and because this is a referral, And so it is a little bit different from our normal agenda items.

9:54We are going to have a short presentation today.

9:58I am going to have us start though with comments from the carriers like we usually do in our council meetings on other agenda items.

10:09After that, I will turn it over to DCA Dhanapal and to Sonia Szymanski to give us a little bit of information about what ended up in the final levy that we'll be discussing today.

10:20We'll then, as usual, take Technical questions, move to public testimony, and then have the bulk of our debate.

10:27So that is our plan for today.

10:30We have, I believe, 2 and a half hours scheduled.

10:33I don't know that we'll need the full amount of time, and I hope that by the end of our session today, we can refer a levy to voters with strong support from this council.

10:45So with that, this is an agenda item that is co-sponsored by Councilors Novick and Murillo and myself.

10:52And Councilor Novick, would you like to kick off a bit of an introduction about the levy before us?

10:58Sure.

10:59I want to focus on what this levy does and something about what it does not do.

11:04As the council president said, we— it was concluded that $1.37 is what it would take to, combined with general fund resources, maintain the park system where it is now, which means after the add-backs that the council made Many of them one-time to the mayor's budget.

11:24So this is a levy which will enable us to continue providing services at that level, and thus to some extent making up for the fact that some of the resources we used were one-time.

11:35Something that we've discussed is what do we do about capital maintenance, given that we have a hundreds of millions of dollars capital maintenance backlog?

11:43And what we're proposing is that we acknowledge that and recognize that we need to do something about it.

11:49Thank you.

11:50Although we're not going to be able to do a hell of a lot in this levy.

11:54So 3 cents of the levy are set aside for capital maintenance projects.

11:58We anticipate those will be kind of small-scale capital maintenance projects like fixing bathroom roofs.

12:04There's also a provision in the resolution that recommits the council to following a policy which was adopted in 2015, I believe, but which has not been followed in recent years.

12:18Yes.

12:19The description in the resolution is somewhat technical.

12:23It's on the second whereas on page 3.

12:26A somewhat simpler way of describing it is a policy that at least 50% of any excess ending general fund balance and 50% of any one-time general fund resources available in the annual budget development process is dedicated to major maintenance or replacement of existing assets.

12:42That's all infrastructure assets, not just— that's not just parks.

12:46That could also be transportation.

12:47Thank you.

12:48So this again is a signal that we take infrastructure maintenance seriously.

12:54And the language also recognizes that we will ask the— the council will probably ask the legislature to clarify that we can use systems development charges for maintenance.

13:07And it also recognizes that we will at some point need to think about a major maintenance bond.

13:13So with that, I'll turn it over to Councilor Murillo.

13:15Thank you, Mayor.

13:17Thank you, Councilor Novick.

13:18I appreciate you covering all the technical stuff so I can do the other fun stuff.

13:23This was a big decision for us with regards to how it's going to impact Portlanders, and I think that all of these decisions have been weighing heavily on us.

13:31There is no question that Portlanders and people across the country right now are really struggling economically.

13:37So whenever we make decisions about what changes we're going to be making to the fees and things that they have to pay for to get the services that they want, That's something that we have all really heavily considered.

13:48And I also want to talk about the fact that this levy is going to bring a lot of benefits to Portlanders.

13:53People really need their parks, they need recreation, they need third spaces to play, live, and thrive.

14:00And we need to ensure that we are still using our social contract and collectively working together to ensure that working families do have those options available to them.

14:10So I want to assure Portlanders as well who are listening to this that we are going to have direct oversight over this as a council.

14:16Thank you.

14:16Council, we're going to make sure that these dollars are being spent responsibly by your city government and that we're going to be delivering the services that you care about.

14:25The new form of government, our district system, our budget listening sessions all gave us an incredible amount of feedback about which programs and services you care about, and we are going to be watching this very closely to ensure that every dollar that we receive as the public body is going to be going directly to the things that matter most to you.

14:45Our city is going to be responsible for this, and it's not just going to be private entities that are, you know, profiting off of private partnerships.

14:55It's something that is a public good that the city should be taking ownership of in partnership with our community.

15:01We also— there's no question that we need to look up sustainable funding models in the years to come.

15:07We can't continuously rely on a parks levy to bail us out.

15:10And so we will be working as a council to ensure that that's And with that, I will pass it back to the council president.

15:20Thank you, Councilor.

15:22Colleagues, parks are a fundamental piece of what makes Portland a great place to live.

15:27It is a fundamental piece of what attracts families to our city.

15:32It is a fundamental piece of what helps us build community.

15:35This levy is our opportunity to continue our investments in our open spaces, our recreation programs, and our neighborhood parks.

15:44These are the places that connect our communities and provide our kids with natural areas close to home and offer hundreds of hours of classes and programs each week.

15:56This is our chance to continue funding those programs, and it's also our chance to make sure that we are talking about the way we fund those programs and the way we want our parks system to operate.

16:06And what you see in the measure before you, as our colleagues have touched on, are increased accountability measures, increased clarity around what the levy should be used for, And the start of a vision for how we want our Parks and Recreation Department to operate.

16:23As we move through the conversation today, I hope that we can talk about some of those pieces because I think they are important portions of what we're doing today.

16:34Before we move into the presentation though, I just want to very quickly thank the many people who helped bring this together.

16:41Thank you.

16:41All of you have provided feedback over the course of a few months on what this measure should look like.

16:48We had stakeholders from the employees who work within our Parks Department to businesses across the city, to our advocates within Friends of groups and the Parks Foundation and the Parks Alliance, and many other people all around the table talking about what a levy should look like.

17:10In order to truly reflect the needs of our community, the ability of our community, and the type of park system that our community would like to support.

17:20So a big thank you to all of those groups and to all of you and to all of the Portlanders who have already testified in support or with concerns about the levy before us today.

17:32It's with all of that input that we were able to bring this proposal forward.

17:35Thank you.

17:37With that, I'd like to turn it over to DCA Dhanapal, who I believe is going to kick off a brief presentation to make sure that we all have a clear understanding of what the final proposal before us looks like.

17:50Go right ahead.

17:51Good afternoon, Council President and councilors.

17:53I'm Priya Dhanapal, the Deputy City Administrator for Public Works.

17:57I'd like to begin by saying thank you for all of the work that you all have been engaging in for the Thank you.

18:02Thank you, Mayor Wilson, and thank you to all of you for your work over the last several months, and for some of you, for the last several years, to bring us to this moment.

18:08As the DCA of Public Works, I'm honored to now have Parks and Portland Parks and Recreation as a part of the Public Works service area, and I have appreciated learning more every day about the work these teams bring to care for Portland's treasured park system and the funding needed to deliver those services.

18:26Portlanders care deeply about their park system, and I've, uh, I've been, you know, inspired by how many people, whether during budget meetings or meetings about the parks levy specifically, have showed up and submitted testimony to have their voices heard.

18:40And while I'm new to the— this particular levy process, I'm not new to stewarding systems that serve people, nor to the deep responsibility of holding public trust.

18:49I've been following the conversations to date and look forward to partnering with you on the work to come.

18:53And with that, I'd like to pass it on to Sonya Szymanski, the Acting Director of Portland Parks and Recreation.

19:00Thank you.

19:00Good afternoon.

19:01I'm Sonya Szymanski with Portland Parks and Recreation, and I'm going to be so brief that I'm managing my own slides.

19:15Rebecca said it's a heartbeat delay.

19:16Okay.

19:19Thank you for having us back.

19:20This hearing follows 2 council work sessions in June and a hearing of the Climate, Resilience, and Land Use Committee last week.

19:28The time and care that you've taken in this conversation is felt and appreciated.

19:34For the next just few minutes, I'm going to do a quick recap of where we are and how we got here, and then I know you're eager to get to community testimony.

19:442 National comparators to start.

19:47First, Portland Parks and Recreation is ranked number 9 in the National Trust for Public Land review of park systems in the 100 most populous United States cities using the metrics you see on the slide here.

20:01We've been in and out of this top 10 for many years, and it is a point of pride for Portland.

20:08Secondly, we— you have rightfully pointed out the challenges of recurring 5-year levies, particularly when they're not sequenced as part of a long-term financial plan.

20:22And we are not the only park system in the country that uses this type of funding to sustain operations.

20:32Zooming into Portland and looking forward, we have learned through polling and community surveys and anecdotally every day what Portlanders value and prioritize most in their parks and recreation system.

20:46They want it to celebrate our natural environment, be safe and cared for, and be open to all.

20:54Based on those priorities and your guidance, the package before you today focuses on basic care and maintenance, environmental care and resilience, and affordability.

21:08It will fund daily cleanup and maintenance of our parks, Small but high-impact fixes to park amenities and our park ranger program to keep these shared spaces healthy, safe, and welcoming.

21:23It will support tree planting and maintenance of trees in parks, keep our natural areas healthy, and reduce risk from wildfires so Portland's unique and special natural areas stay that way.

21:36And finally, it will keep the events, classes, and programs that Portlanders use and value open and available to everyone.

21:43This includes free programming like Summer Free-for-All and Free Lunch and Play ongoing now, and class discounts so the cost is not a barrier.

21:54These slides have a bit more information, but we're going to go quickly through them.

21:58And the purpose of these is to show you how we got to the rate that's before you today, because that was heavily informed by the budget process that you just concluded.

22:08It was a difficult cycle for Parks and Recreation and required cuts well beyond those taken citywide.

22:15To close the deficit, the parks team advanced a large number of reduction packages to the city administrator.

22:22In developing his proposed budget, Mayor Wilson restored key programs you see up in the top left, including Sun Schools, citywide sports, which is home to Golden Ball, and the potential closure of a neighborhood community center.

22:36He did this through a combination of cuts elsewhere in the bureau and increased revenue.

22:44When that proposed budget came to you, you made a number of additional changes which added really significant funding back into park care and maintenance, and you partially restored community center hours.

22:56You did this through a combination of one-time and ongoing funds.

23:04So the net of all that on the personnel side is reductions of about 20 positions within the central teams that support service delivery, a few reductions to park care work, and significant reductions in the Urban Forestry Division, although about 2/3 of those were added back on the PP&D side, so they're not lost to the city.

23:29The net of all of that on the financial side is that the rate needed to sustain current operations Went down.

23:36We were talking about $1.60 for a while.

23:38We are now talking about $1.37.

23:42The levy package before you today sustains those current service levels and also includes, as you mentioned, a small but meaningful investment for high-impact capital repairs like fixes to pools, bathrooms, and playgrounds.

23:57It also includes a new investment that I'll touch on in this next and final slide.

24:06I have here a summary of key city direction included in this referral action, either in the resolution, in comments elsewhere, or in the accompanying exhibits.

24:17Some of these things will be carried out by organizational leaders like us, others by you directly.

24:24Through this action, Portlanders can expect, as was mentioned, thank you, both immediate and long-term steps towards solutions for the deferred maintenance backlog at parks and citywide.

24:35Thank you.

24:37Ongoing oversight with annual and regular reports, cadence to be determined, including in conversation with you, from the Bureau, from a community oversight committee, and at least once from an independent auditor that speak to the financial and performance outcomes of the investments.

24:58You'll see no impact to the Portland Children's Levy, which will be reimbursed for the compression impact of this levy.

25:05And you'll see, I hope and anticipate, a much stronger connection and support of partners and volunteers who are part of delivering this system with a particular emphasis on revenue-generating opportunities.

25:21That's the end of this presentation.

25:25Thank you very much, Sonia.

25:27Colleagues, before we move to public testimony and then our broader debate, are there any technical questions about what is included in this document?

25:36Final proposal that, um, Sonia has laid out for us.

25:44Councilor Ryan.

25:45Yes, thank you, Council President.

25:47I don't have a, um, a technical question.

25:50I have a clarification.

25:51Uh, we've been in dialogue about this for the last couple days, Sonia, and, um, in the whereas that's at the second— the second page, yeah, it talks about The City of Portland recognizes strengthening partnerships with the private sector, philanthropic community, volunteers, and grassroots, that area.

26:12I wanted to put a little bit of teeth into that with a friendly amendment that would add a sentence that we were talking about this morning and yesterday that would have some indicators that we'd actually measure.

26:24So if we're 2 years into it, we'd see it going from the 1% it's at now to hopefully a higher percent.

26:32And include that for earned income too.

26:33Because if we go through this 5-year cycle and nothing really happens with this whereas that actually indicates that we landed that, people will be mightily disappointed, including me.

26:47And so I wanna make sure that we have that type of accountability.

26:50So when we do our annual updates or whenever those are, we can actually look at that data.

26:56Thank you.

26:58So my question is, like in our conversation earlier, you're good with that friendly amendment, but you want me to specifically tell you what that is?

27:07I thought for some reason when we got off the phone that you were gonna magically put that in there.

27:11And so I apologize for not tracking that.

27:13No, not at all.

27:14There is a resolution that came from your office, thank you, that does put a somewhat finer point on what the work will look like, including dedicated staff person, focus on private and philanthropic dollars.

27:24It doesn't speak to particular metric, I would welcome that direction either in the resolution or here in the legislative record, and I would consider it guidance either way.

27:33Okay, give me a minute or more than that to figure that out, colleagues, and I'll go ahead and bring that to you before we vote.

27:40But I wanted to at least indicate that to people who are going to testify so they knew that that might be added into this just in case.

27:46Thank you, Councilor.

27:47Does that make sense?

27:48Okay, thanks.

27:49We do have— we have some of— we have your original language included in the proposal.

27:54It sounds like you have Yeah, based on the meeting we had yesterday with some stakeholders and a dialogue, a couple of conversations this morning, I think people would just like to make sure that it's so transparent that we're tracking it and that the voters do that.

28:10So again, we're not— this isn't the 2020 levy, it's a different levy.

28:14And colleagues, I know there are a few others who have amendments that you plan on bringing forward as well.

28:22Without introducing those, why don't we open up the opportunity for people to just put on the record You know, a sentence or two what you have coming so that folks who are testifying know what that is.

28:35Uh, Councilor Avalos, go right ahead.

28:37I don't have an amendment, I have a question.

28:41Okay.

28:41Um, I— on the be it further resolved that says— that starts with be it further resolved that the 3 cents for capital projects is intended to be distributed between the 4 council districts, that section I guess I'm just trying to understand what is the intended process for this.

29:00Is this an area that could benefit from using the city's Building Belonging framework?

29:06And how, I guess, like, I don't know, is this a decision the parks director is making?

29:12How are you going to determine the equity in the distribution to each district?

29:17It just seems really prescriptive.

29:20I obviously understand the intent and also the fact that it has a section here essentially saying Um, uh, let's see, City Council members in each district will recommend which projects.

29:32I understand the intent.

29:34I'm worried about the application and it being equitable, so I'm curious if you can speak— you can speak to that.

29:40I'm assuming that would be to Director Szymanski.

29:45And Acting Director Szymanski, I believe that the distribution of these funds would be part of the regular budgeting process, so Council would have the ultimate decision-making authority here.

29:55But if you speak to how the Bureau might bring forward a recommendation, that would be great.

30:05We have dialed in the scope of the universe of projects that would be options for this investment with the scale of the 3 cents.

30:17So that kind of fixes the overall scale that we're talking about.

30:21And it is things like playgrounds and bathrooms and somewhat smaller-scale neighborhood park amenities.

30:27So the first thing we would do is gather all of those.

30:29What happens between there and a final list that you approve in the budget is something I hope we can figure out together.

30:36It would involve a lot of dialogue with you, and I would happily take your guidance about what that conversation looks like and how it's processed.

30:43You have a process right now for rating deferred maintenance needs that includes a number of factors, including Things around likelihood of failure and danger and equity.

30:56Is that correct?

30:57Yes.

30:58So could we assume that the proposals you brought forward would be run through that same lens that current projects are run through?

31:06Yeah, we could definitely do that.

31:09Councilor Avalos, does that help answer your question?

31:16Not fully, but I'll follow up.

31:17Thanks.

31:19Okay.

31:20Councilor Green.

31:23Thank you, Madam President.

31:25As we get into the substantive part of the discussion, I will be bringing forward and have filed an amendment to the body of the resolution, not the exhibits.

31:35I wanted to be careful not to upset a delicate balance there, but that changes one whereas clause and a therefore be it resolved clause that really speaks to the question of Kind of using a fiscal stewardship and responsibility lens, given that we are going to go in with a lower recommended levy that tries to extend what we get in terms of capital maintenance.

32:01And so the basic spirit of it is to clarify and sort of suggest that we continue to use system development charges That extend the useful life or restoration of existing capital assets.

32:18And, you know, recognizing that we do need to build new assets in parts of the city that are poor, it will hopefully reaffirm that it's okay for the city to do this, that we have done it in the past, and it's a really good way, I think, to use already existing funds.

32:36So that's what that will be about as we get into it.

32:38Thank you.

32:38And I hope that, uh, if you're following along in the public, uh, it's on the website.

32:42It's Councilor Green.

32:43Thanks.

32:44Councilor Green, number 1.

32:45Thank you, Councilor.

32:46Councilor Zimmerman.

32:50Uh, thank you.

32:51For just in terms of your intent, Madam President, just highlight where we might be offering in the second to last be it resolved.

33:02It starts with be it resolved that the 3 cents per capital project You know, I think that one of the things I've talked a long time about has been, you know, taking care of the basic infrastructure in the parks, and particularly in our district, in District 4.

33:18I think it's been a challenge in our bathrooms.

33:20And so in that be it resolved, I will be proposing an amendment in the middle of the paragraph after.

33:31Along with annual estimates for available funds for each fiscal year, period.

33:36The 3%— this is the amendment— the 3% for capital projects will be spent only on bathroom facilities, period.

33:44And that's the extent of the amendment.

33:45And then it continues on with the city council members in each district, etc., etc.

33:50So I just wanted to highlight that, and I appreciate you having these at least aired out so that if public comment has opinions, we can, we can be forthright about it.

34:00Thank you.

34:00That's all.

34:01Thank you, Councilor.

34:02Councilor Kanal.

34:04Thank you, Madam President.

34:06Colleagues, I've emailed you the exact text of the amendment that I will be proposing, but to describe it briefly, it is an amendment to the body of the resolution, not the exhibits.

34:13It would ask Parks to direct $139,000— sorry, $139,169, which is 0.232 cents or just under a quarter of a cent from within the existing $1.37 to a pilot project That would extend community center hours at one community center per district on Friday and Saturday nights in the summertime to 11 p.m. to promote access to free third spaces for all Portlanders, in particular young place young people, and promote student achievement, community safety, and youth development.

34:44It would be an extension of hours without programming, but I'm sure that the existing text around volunteerism and my personal pledge should have.

34:53To donate 2 sets of dodgeballs to any community center in need would help with ensuring that there are activities for people to do.

35:01Thank you.

35:02Thank you, Councilor.

35:04Councilor Novick, do you have a proposed amendment?

35:08I have several possible proposed amendments.

35:12One thing is, and actually the Parks Alliance brought this to my attention, there's a number of places in The resolution where there's reference to capital projects, they've recommended that we in each case clarify that means capital maintenance projects, which is the intention, rather than just perhaps imply that we're talking about big fat building new things.

35:33And there's a variety of places where that appears.

35:35I also realized that the whereas at the top of page 3, which I actually proposed, I kind of screwed it up.

35:43Whereas City Council recognized the parks and recreation system has an extensive backlog of major maintenance needs, And the 2025 parks levy will begin to address those needs, but only a small fraction of them.

35:55I concluded I made a mistake in saying major maintenance because we're not talking about using the parks levy to do big fat things again.

36:02So I'm proposing changing major maintenance to capital maintenance there as well.

36:08And then there's a couple of other additions that the Parks Alliance suggested, which I thought were worth They wanted to add a whereas saying, whereas PP&R shall, as part of the annual budget process, describe to council the approximate percentage of its operations and number of FTE which will be funded by levy resources.

36:28And then after the whereas that I was referring to before, which discusses, it says the parks and rec system has extensive backlog of capital maintenance needs, et cetera, et cetera.

36:40And then the whereas that I was referring to before, And it says the council will continue to work with PP&R community on a long-range financial plan with variety of components.

36:48They've suggested that we say that we will adopt this long-range financial plan by the end of fiscal year 2027-28.

36:54So I just wanted to actually— I just wanted to put that out there for discussion.

37:00Thank you, Councilor.

37:04Councilor Ryan.

37:05Yes, thank you, Council President.

37:06To bring some little clarity to what I Thank you.

37:09As I mentioned earlier, I would propose adding a whereas.

37:13It's very basic.

37:16It would say this: Whereas, on or before December 31st, 2025, parks leadership in collaboration with stakeholders will submit 10 key performance indicators for council's approval.

37:29These KPIs will form the levy performance dashboard.

37:38And I'll, um, make sure we email that to everyone by the testimony is going on.

37:42Thanks.

37:42Thank you, Councilor.

37:44Colleagues, are there any other potential amendments or technical questions before we move to public testimony?

37:55Okay.

37:56Uh, Acting Director Szymanski, DCA Dhanapal, my suspicion is that we will ask you to come back up for our broader discussion after we hear from the public, so please don't go too far.

38:07But for now, before we move into that discussion, I'd like to have us hear from members of the community about their feedback on the levy proposal before us today.

38:18Rebecca, could you please call up our first panel?

38:25Thank you, Mayor.

38:28Jessica Green, Allison Berman, Sue Ann Ho.

38:38Welcome and thank you all for being here today.

38:43Can I go?

38:48Go right ahead, Jessica.

38:51Uh, thank you, Council, Mayor.

38:52I'm Jessica Green.

38:53I'm the executive director of the Portland Park Foundation, a citywide parks nonprofit whose mission is to mobilize support for parks, natural areas, and public spaces.

39:03I'm here today to affirm PPF's support and commitment to leading the levy campaign in partnership with the Intertwine Alliance and you once referred.

39:13I also want to take this time to thank you, councilors, Mayor Wilson, and all of your staff for the collaborative spirit in developing the levy over the course of the last several months.

39:246 Months ago, you were faced with the question of whether to refer $1.60 to the May ballot, and you made the bold decision to hit pause and discuss what this levy should be and could be.

39:36The pause allowed the proposed levy in front of you to be informed and shaped by the public through polling and various forms of testimony, by conversations with each other, key stakeholders that Council President mentioned earlier, the business community, labor, CBOs, and Parkrose Heights.

39:50Thank you.

39:52Partners, and by a hard look at the parks budget during this year's budget cycle.

39:57This has been a really thoughtful process, no matter how rushed it's felt in the final weeks, days, hours, minutes.

40:03And I really want to thank each and every single one of you for carving out the time and being open-minded, coming to the table curious and with creative ideas.

40:13As Commissioner Ryan said during a meeting yesterday about this, everyone in this room has had to compromise on some level, and it really shows the partnership of the city.

40:24Ultimately, the levy maintains a parks and recreation system that we know and love and is essential for a thriving, livable Portland.

40:33In addition to the levy proposed today, the process really has also reignited a couple very important conversations: the need to address the $600 million-plus backlog in capital maintenance Thank you.

40:45And an opportunity to do more with partnerships in order to advance an equitable park system.

40:51The commitment towards some capital maintenance in this levy signals a shift towards prioritizing our capital maintenance needs in our parks.

40:57But as you all know, it's only just a start, and we are committed to work with you and other parks leaders to develop a long-term strategy to address parks' operational and capital needs.

41:09The levy also recognizes the power of partnerships.

41:12I recommend prioritizing investment also in existing partnerships, looking at how the city works with them.

41:18How can we streamline systems, remove obstacles, invest in a culture of creativity and collaboration?

41:25There are hundreds of partners looking to do more together.

41:30And in true partnership, PPF and the Intertwine Alliance are ready to partner with you, City Council, on this future levy.

41:37Thank you.

41:38Thank you for your time now and in the past.

41:42Thank you.

41:43Go right ahead, Ali.

41:45Thank you.

41:46And just echoing Jessica on the thoughtful process that has gone into this.

41:51My name is Ali Berman, and I'm the chair of the Portland Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, a Tier 1 advisory board within the city.

41:57I'm representing the board today to strongly advise the City Council to refer a levy renewal at an increased rate for the November election that will allow community centers to remain open, Stop programs from being substantially reduced and ensure ongoing park maintenance as well as capital maintenance.

42:13This is vital for the health of our city, especially in light of the cuts PP&R has already faced in this year's budget and projected further cuts in fiscal year '26-'27, as well as the proposed pause on SDC collection.

42:27Right now, city councilors get to determine what kind of city they want Portland to be.

42:32The board believes that an extensive, vibrant, and robust park system is essential for Portlanders.

42:38That parks are one of the main reasons why Portland is so special, and that parks are a material driver for both new residents and businesses.

42:46But a great park system requires both operational funding for programming and maintenance, and capital funding to preserve and expand systems.

42:54We're excited to build on the 2020 levy, which was very successful in fulfilling what was promised: delivering recreation programs, removing fiscal barriers to park.

43:03Yes.

43:04Prioritizing services for communities of color and households experiencing poverty, and planting and maintaining trees.

43:11The 2020 levy allowed the park system to be more robust and more equitable than before.

43:18The board asks council to refer a levy renewal to ensure the kind of park system that would be best for Portland and their constituents.

43:26The board also asked council to not underestimate the popular support for parks and park programming.

43:31The support has been seen in polling and more importantly to the recent response to the budget.

43:36Thank you for your consideration and all of your work on behalf of parks.

43:40The board is committed to working alongside you, Portland Parks and Recreation staff, and the broader community to ensure a vibrant, equitable, and sustainable future for our park system.

43:52Thank you.

43:53Right ahead.

43:54Good afternoon everyone.

43:56I am Sunn Ho.

43:57Today I am speaking to you not as a board member of the Portland Parks and Rec Advisory Board, but as a Portland citizen asking you to refer the parks levy at a higher rate to care for and maintain our park system.

44:13I want to share a beautiful evening experience with you.

44:16At 6 PM this past Sunday, when the temperature finally dropped to 90 degrees, Adventurer Park.

44:24Myself and 700 other Portlanders cheered as the Summer Free-for-All concert began.

44:31Portland Taiko filled the stage with their big Japanese drums.

44:35The invigorating drumbeats inspired so many little kids to dance and wave their colorful streamers.

44:42Such pure joy at our shared backyard.

44:47The magic of the 2 hours of applause-filled performance did not just randomly pop up.

44:54It took Portland Parks staff months of planning and coordinating volunteers cleaning and maintaining the park ahead of a scorching hot day.

45:05Multiply this effort by all the other parks events this summer, by the quick run to the restroom between laps, up and down the playground slide, by the long hikes on your favorite trail, and by all the other year-round reliable, well-loved outdoor-indoor programming in community centers that are clean and cared for by parks staff.

45:30None of this would exist at this scale or be functional without parks levy.

45:35With the parks levy, this work is done daily, oftentimes behind the scenes So that we as park users can enjoy our beautiful parks and recreation spaces and programs.

45:49This park levy is an essential piece of Portland's next 5 years and beyond.

45:55It maintains the services and programs that are critical to community and the health of our city.

46:04I sincerely hope that you will decide on a levy amount that maximizes children and adults being inspired by our wonderful parks, programs, and facilities for years to come.

46:16Thank you.

46:17Thank you very much.

46:25Next we have Elizabeth Aravelta.

46:32Whoever you are.

46:35Elizabeth Milner, Karen Chi Ray, and John Isaacs.

46:40Elizabeth is online.

46:44You can go ahead, Elizabeth.

46:46Hi there.

46:47Good afternoon, councilors.

46:48My name's Elizabeth Milner and I'm the Development and Engagement Director with Sellwood Community House.

46:52Apologies if it's loud, we're full of summer camp today.

46:57Thank you so much for the opportunity to give testimony again regarding the parks levy.

47:01And thank you so much for the careful time, consideration, and thoughtful thought you have offered Now that you've settled on a dollar amount for the levy, Portland really needs to know what the specific vision is for how those dollars will be spent.

47:14What will this levy mean for people in their daily lives?

47:17At the last council session, one of the slides presented measured the health of PPR by comparing the number of full-time staff to other cities' park bureaus.

47:26By that metric, Portland is in the middle of the pack compared to other comparable cities.

47:30Thank you.

47:31But how well does that metric really measure what's happening in Portland?

47:35Minneapolis, where I lived for several years, employs just slightly more full-time staff per capita than Portland, and yet operates 47 community centers, dozens of free summer park programs, and hundreds of free concerts, movies, and community celebrations all over the city so that residents on any given day can find fun, easy activities to do with their families.

47:54Portland, meanwhile, operates 22 free lunch and play programs from 10 AM to 2 PM and a smattering of concerts and movies that for most of us require advanced planning and transportation in order to enjoy.

48:05Portland has so much potential.

48:07We have new music venues going in, the WNBA, great local festivals, and Portland Parks and Recreation should be at the heart of a vision for a vibrant and engaging city that attracts and cares for its citizens.

48:17And we are just not quite seeing that yet.

48:20So it's heartening to see the new language on partnerships, but please don't consider partnerships as an opportunity to outsource the work of Portland Parks and Recreation, but rather as an avenue for achieving a shared vision of Portland that we all have a stake in.

48:34And then support them, work with them, collaborate with them, and pave the way for them to help achieve that shared vision for our city.

48:41As someone who engages with hundreds of families each year, organizes events in parks, and is a parent who has accessed or tried to access parks programming for the past 16 years, here are my suggestions for this levy.

48:53Please make our parks and recreation more fun and less complicated.

48:56We need activated parks in every district, vibrant community centers, activated rivers and streets, And citywide sports, art, music, and nature education.

49:06Those same summer park staff, in between playing with kids all day, can clean bathrooms and remove trash, just like they do at the shack in Sellwood Park, which the Sellwood Community House activated this summer.

49:17Where PPR doesn't have the staff or capacity to program yet, truly partner with and support the friends groups, neighborhood groups, business alliances, etc., to take on those programs.

49:27And finally, shake off the past.

49:28Just because we've done things one way doesn't mean we have to keep doing them that way.

49:32Current levels of service doesn't necessarily equate to optimal delivery of service.

49:37This is an incredible opportunity to start fresh with a bold vision for Portland Parks and Rec for the 21st century that is more robust, not less, than the one we enjoyed in the 1970s.

49:46Thank you for your time.

49:49Thank you very much.

49:51Karen is also online.

49:53Karen, you can go ahead.

50:04I believe you're muted.

50:07There you go.

50:08You're unmuted.

50:08Can you hear me now?

50:10We can.

50:10Sorry about that.

50:11We can hear you, Karen.

50:13My name is Karen T. Ray, resident of District 3, business owner in District 1, and a member of Stadiumhood.

50:19And while I recognize the importance of parks and recreational facilities in our community, I believe that we as taxpayers have reached a breaking point with new taxes.

50:29I'm all taxed out as a business owner.

50:31I already contribute significantly to the city's revenue through various taxes, permits, and fees, and yet I see little return on this investment.

50:40The promise of improved parks and recreational services does not justify the additional financial burden on residents and business owners, especially when many of us are struggling to keep our heads above water due to the rising cost of living and doing business in Portland.

50:55In the four-block radius of my store, Stadium Superette, within the stadium neighborhood, we have seen over 19 businesses close or move in the last few years, and just found out today that another will be moving in September.

51:10Most of those are due to taxes and safety.

51:13The proposed tax rate of the 1.4 per 1,000 assessed value may seem small, but for many of us, it translates.

51:22Into an added monthly expense that we cannot afford.

51:26At a time when our local economy is still recovering, it is essential to prioritize the financial well-being of our residents and small businesses.

51:34Furthermore, while the city emphasizes the operational needs of our parks, I urge you to reconsider the allocation of existing resources instead of placing further financial strain on taxpayers.

51:46We need to ensure that the current funds are being utilized effectively before seeking more money from the community.

51:52I implore you to listen to the voices of residents and business owners who are concerned about the implications of this levy.

51:58Instead of proposing new taxes, let's focus on finding innovative solutions to manage and maintain our parks with the funds we already have.

52:06Thank you.

52:08Thank you very much.

52:12Good.

52:14Uh, Council President Pirtle-Guiney and councilors, for the record, my name is John Isaacs.

52:17I'm the Executive Vice President of Public Affairs for the Portland Metro Chamber.

52:22I prefer he/him pronouns, and I'm a resident of District 3 in Southeast Portland.

52:26The Chamber is the Portland region's Chamber of Commerce and Oregon's largest business association, representing about 2,400 members, over 80% of which are small businesses.

52:36I'm here today to express our strong support for the parks levy resolution and explain why the Chamber chose to endorse it.

52:43And because I cannot be Thank you.

52:44While we're here tonight, I want to also express the chamber's support for the directly related action you will take at 6:45 PM to formally have Portland join the International Swimmable Cities Alliance.

52:55In 2023, Governor Kotek and the Central City Task Force called for a 3-year moratorium on new or increased taxes with our full support.

53:03Since 2020, 2 taxes have advanced without our support, and both were soundly defeated.

53:08This levy is the only significant tax increase we've allowed to advance without opposition during that moratorium.

53:14Here's why.

53:15Because Portland's parks are more than amenities.

53:18They are core economic assets.

53:20For decades, Portland's growth was built on livability, safety, strong public schools, quality transit, and a reasonable cost of living.

53:28But over the last decade, that foundation has eroded and is now crumbling.

53:32We overregulated housing and small businesses, increased business taxes by 84 percent since 2019 and adopted the 2nd highest marginal income tax rate in the nation with little focus on results, killed our housing production market at the very worst time, allowed core public safety services to degrade, and let our core infrastructure decay.

53:51The result: Portland is losing over $1 billion a year in taxable income.

53:56Businesses are leaving, layoffs are growing, and private investment is drying up.

54:00Population growth will turn into negative territory by the decade's end.

54:04So without question, Portland will need to compete with other cities for people and growth.

54:10We will only do that successfully by unleashing private sector growth, adopting a competitive tax burden, supercharging housing production of all types, and investing in our core competitive assets.

54:20This includes parks.

54:23And if they are core economic assets, then they must be maintained and the services delivered delivered in a manner worthy of the beloved treasures we say they are.

54:33This levy must be the beginning of that transformation.

54:36In 2019, the Portland Parks and Rec budget was $5.6 billion.

54:42Just 6 years later, its budget is $8.2 billion, and during this time, services have declined, deferred maintenance was ignored, and trust eroded due to promises broken.

54:53Still, we support this levy because parks remain essential to our competitiveness Yes.

54:59We believe the longtime Portland spirit of collaboration and innovation can make change possible.

55:04I want to be clear, the support of the chamber and our partners is contingent on change.

55:09We expect accountability, fiscal discipline, and adoption of national best practices, like an expansion of public-private partnerships to drive increased economic and cultural vitality, development, development of more diverse revenue streams, and performance Most other cities, including all of our peer markets, formally work with the private sector to manage and activate parks to attract investment, talent, and drive economic and cultural vitality.

55:33Portland must do the same.

55:35Next year, when you have to consider more cuts to the parks general fund, the Chamber and our partners will hold the city accountable to ensure levy—.

55:43Thank you, John.

55:44I'm sorry, I'm sorry, John, but we've got to move on.

55:51Thank you.

55:54Thank you.

55:56Brian Owendoff, Mary Ruble, Rob Martineau.

56:08Councilors, Mayor, Brian Owendoff, live and work in District 4.

56:12Parks matter.

56:14Since moving here 17 years ago, I've been a strong supporter of parks.

56:18Both through treasure and time.

56:21The treasure includes over $25 million in parks SDC fees generated through 7 mixed-use towers I've had the pleasure of working on.

56:27I've also spent significant time volunteering on the South Park Blocks, Couch Park, and the soon-to-open Darcelle 15 Park in the West End.

56:37The proposed increase of the park levies from $0.80 to $1.40 per thousand of assessed value is a sharp jump.

56:43Councilor Yes.

56:50This proposal does not meaningfully address the backlog.

56:54Instead, it sustains the current operations, operations that many residents believe have been poorly managed.

56:59The recent dismissal of the parks director, paired with an ongoing city review, raises serious questions.

57:06If the audit uncovers fiscal mismanagement, it would only deepen public concerns about how the tax dollars are being spent.

57:12It is essential that the parks audit be released before tax-related measure is placed before the voters.

57:18To withhold it until after the election would be a serious breach of transparency and could reasonably be seen as an attempt to obscure facts that would inform voters' decisions.

57:29With housing affordability at a breaking point, year-over-year increases in property taxes, often overlapping with duplicative services, Places a growing burden on Portlanders.

57:39We are a generous community.

57:42We value public spaces, but many of us are at our financial breaking point.

57:47Here are 3 things I ask you to consider.

57:51One, a moratorium on new tax measures until audits are complete and publicly released.

57:572, A requirement for clear performance metrics and cost controls tied to any future levy.

58:04Thank you.

58:053, A mandate that capital backlog plans be fully scoped, costed with a GMP if possible, and scheduled before seeking additional funding.

58:16Well-run, fiscally responsible parks matter.

58:20Thank you.

58:22Thank you very much.

58:25Good afternoon.

58:27I'm Mary Ruble, District 4.

58:29I have been involved in Portland parks for over 25 years, having served as board chair of the Parks Advisory Board as well as the Portland Parks Foundation, and currently a Parks Levy Oversight Committee member.

58:42I'm speaking as an individual, not as a representative of these groups.

58:46I encourage City Council to refer this parks levy to the November ballot.

58:51While I am no fan of additional taxes in Portland and agree with our previous speaker, I do support this levy at $1.40 because I believe in our park system and its importance to the city.

59:02As a member of the PLOC, the Parks Levy Oversight Committee, I believe I bring unique insights into the way that levy oversight committee has been run, and I have 3 things that I would request from the council.

59:17One is that the appointments to the role, after application by people interested in involvement with the PLOC, LOC be made by a select group of city council and mayor's office representatives with input from the bureau director and appropriate staff, as opposed to simply by the bureau itself.

59:36Secondly, I recommend involvement in levy committee meetings by appropriate members of the city council and the mayor's office and their staff.

59:45And I would like to see an opportunity for levy committee members to provide actionable input and advice on specific use of levy dollars because this group has a lot of insight into how the dollars have been spent.

1:00:00The bureau has done a very good job of ensuring that the levy committee understands the use of the dollars, and we have certified that use as appropriate in the past.

1:00:12I believe that should be what we do going forward but with additional input from the levy committee.

1:00:19In the future, the parks levy needs to focus on daily maintenance, cleaning, and care for our parks and natural areas, as well as additional tree canopy.

1:00:29We need to keep our parks usable and prevent further degradation, but it is also my belief that we need to focus on maintenance.

1:00:38And so I encourage the City Council to also look Look to the future and to a bond for capital maintenance that will be— that will make a difference.

1:00:48The 3% is helpful, but it will not make a meaningful difference in that $600 million backlog.

1:00:54Thank you very much.

1:00:57Thank you for being here and sharing those ideas.

1:01:02Good afternoon.

1:01:03My name is Rob Martineau.

1:01:05I am the president of AFSCME Local 189 and first vice president of the Northwest Oregon Labor Council.

1:01:11Both of these organizations I represent have been a partner and supportive of past levies and Portland Parks and Recreation.

1:01:19I hear the capital maintenance.

1:01:20I hear all of the things that need to happen.

1:01:22The city does a, I think, as well a job as it can at times in asset management.

1:01:28Asset management is a critical piece of this, whether we call it, you know, capital maintenance or however we're looking to ensure these parks remain.

1:01:37This is something that the city is not new at asset management.

1:01:40What we haven't been able to do is fund that.

1:01:42We've been able to do it in our other infrastructure systems, but this is one that has not moved forward with a clear plan.

1:01:49I am supportive of this levy.

1:01:51I represent nearly 1,100 people, city employees who live, work, play, and worship in Portland.

1:01:58All of us are beneficiaries, beneficiaries of this park system.

1:02:03I think about when the people I know from out of the area come to visit, and it's hard to think of something I do or that they want to do or how we spend time that doesn't involve parks.

1:02:11Of our parks.

1:02:13I said, what do you want to do?

1:02:14And my brother said, I've got to eat Voodoo Donuts.

1:02:17I don't know why I needed a bowl of cereal on my donut, but we ate that at Waterfront Park.

1:02:23When he said, we got to go eat at a food cart, we took that and blankets and went up and spent time on Tabor, Washington Park, our zoo, all of the things that are in our area.

1:02:34It's hard not to end up at a park.

1:02:36These are part of our identity.

1:02:37These are part of what we deserve to support.

1:02:39Thank you.

1:02:40And I'm sure all of us have those same examples of where we started to do one thing and ended up in our parks.

1:02:47This levy has got to be well-defined, giving Portland Parks and Recreation clear direction and visible accountability.

1:02:58Our community should rally to support and pass this levy.

1:03:02As a member of organized labor, I expect to be a partner, and I expect And look forward to that opportunity as we develop and lay out vision and mechanisms for our parks, a vision that will ensure Portland's parks and services thrive to buoy and support our community as critical infrastructure.

1:03:25This levy is not going to fix everything.

1:03:27That's very, very clear.

1:03:29But this levy is a bridge to the future where we fund the park system we want and deserve.

1:03:34Thank you.

1:03:36As Portlanders, we owe you, our new form of government, an opportunity to raise up our parks rather than oversee their decline and loss.

1:03:45This levy and new council are the only next step for the public spaces and places we all deserve.

1:03:53Thank you.

1:03:57Sandeep Divakar, Micah Meskel, Ryan Um, so do I.

1:04:07Thank you for being here.

1:04:08Go right ahead.

1:04:11Let's see.

1:04:15Um, my name is Sandeep Divakar.

1:04:16I live in District 4 downtown.

1:04:19Um, Councilor Green, actually I heard you say at some one of your meetings that not many people live in downtown.

1:04:24I beg to differ.

1:04:25There's a lot of Section 8 low-income housing A lot of elderly people living in that downtown area.

1:04:31A lot of high-density housing.

1:04:33I've been a resident there for about 9 years now.

1:04:35One of the things I truly enjoy about Portland is the fact that we have the ability to use these public parks scattered all over the city.

1:04:42I studied urban design in graduate school, and parks are essential in high-density urban environments because they function as backyards for people that don't have backyards.

1:04:52These parks were a godsend during the pandemic when people were cooped up.

1:04:55Thank you.

1:04:56Which brings me to the matter under discussion today, the parks levy.

1:05:00The parks we have today are not usable, and not for the reasons that I heard today.

1:05:05I walked through the South Park blocks on my way here.

1:05:08There was a drug deal that went down in front of me.

1:05:10There's needles over there.

1:05:11There's a group called Portland People's Outreach Project that hands out needles and food at 4:30 PM in the South Park blocks in front of the art museum.

1:05:21There's a preschool on the next block.

1:05:22The children have to Worry about the needles and human excrement when they come out to play in that park.

1:05:28I was at Couch Park day before yesterday for a drawing class.

1:05:33Same thing, needles, tents, homeless people, and drug use.

1:05:38So it's very difficult for me and my neighbors.

1:05:44Many of the neighbors are older and they like to go sit in the park, which they're afraid to do because there's an 80-bed shelter going in 2 blocks from where I live, 3 blocks from South Park, We went to the shelter.

1:05:57They said they have no plans to do anything except clean around the shelter.

1:06:01None of us were given notice about this shelter.

1:06:03We heard about it in the newspaper.

1:06:06And this is a no-barrier shelter.

1:06:09These people have guns and knives.

1:06:11There have been stabbings and shootings in that area.

1:06:14This is 5 blocks from City Hall.

1:06:17They will be let out at 7 in the morning.

1:06:19They will be in the parks.

1:06:20Councilor So why should we be paying $1.40 more on everything that we're already paying when we can't use the parks that we have?

1:06:30So I urge you as a city council to please do your jobs and make this city livable.

1:06:35Thank you.

1:06:39Thank you very much.

1:06:44Micah, you can go ahead.

1:06:46Okay, thank you.

1:06:47Um, thank you, Council President.

1:06:48Good afternoon, Council President and the rest of City Council.

1:06:50My name is Michael Meskel.

1:06:52I'm the Urban Conservation Director at Bird Alliance of Oregon, a local nonprofit whose mission is to inspire all people to love and protect birds, wildlife, and the natural environment upon which life depends.

1:07:03Building and maintaining the regional system of parks, trails, and natural areas has been at the core of our urban conservation efforts for decades.

1:07:11Our goal is to ensure that every person in the region has access to nature.

1:07:14Thank you.

1:07:14Within walking distance of their home.

1:07:16To that end, Bird Alliance of Oregon has focused a significant portion of its efforts on ensuring that there's adequate funding for parks, trails, natural areas, and the maintenance of those.

1:07:27I'm representing the organization and our over 10,000+ local members and urging you to refer the parks levy renewal to the ballot in November at an increased rate of $1.40.

1:07:38This isn't enough, especially to meet the the maintenance backlog that the system is hampered by, but it is better than the status quo rates and will allow for you all to take iterative steps towards reducing the backlog while working collaboratively with partners, including community organizations, towards securing a more sustainable funding path— pathway for Portland Parks via a future bond measure or other strategies.

1:08:03Bird Alliance has helped shape and pass several bond I've been involved in bond measures and levies over the past 30 years and plan to play a role alongside Rob and other community members who have offered today in helping make this one past the finish line in November.

1:08:17As many city bureaus are, Portland Parks and Rec is struggling, especially in light of the cuts that PP&R has already faced in this year's reduced budget, both on the maintenance side and on the urban forestry side.

1:08:29Projected further cuts in 2017.

1:08:322627 Also loom, and the proposed pause of the STC collection.

1:08:37With all of this in, in place, it is essential that right now you all as City Council give them a lifeline to remain providing services and protecting the resources that Portlanders cherish and rely on.

1:08:49Thank you.

1:08:52Thank you very much.

1:08:56Ryan, Ryan's online.

1:08:58You can unmute.

1:08:59And begin.

1:09:04Good afternoon, President, Council President Pirtle-Guiney, and City Council.

1:09:10It's very nice to see you.

1:09:12Really appreciate all the work that has gone into this.

1:09:16We really appreciate all of you have opened your offices to us and have come to talk to workers out in the community, out in the parks.

1:09:27We look forward to further collaboration around the parks levy and also our working relationship with the Portland City Laborers and Recreation contract.

1:09:36I'm going to back up and explain that I'm Brian Sotomayor from Laborers Local 483, so we represent City of Portland workers in both the PCL contract, which covers Portland Parks maintenance workers, and then on the recreation side, the recreation contract.

1:09:53Act, folks in community centers, folks that are involved in summer programming like Summer Free-for-All, Lunch and Play, and seasonal maintenance workers.

1:10:02And we represent folks from lifeguards up to millwrights.

1:10:08Everything that happens in the City of Portland, uh, is somehow touched by folks in the Portland City Laborers contract and the recreation contract.

1:10:17So we appreciate your work And not only collaborating with community partners, but also meeting with labor.

1:10:25That is meaningful, and we appreciate the engagement and the investment.

1:10:29We appreciate the energy that's being brought by the community, the Portland Parks Foundation, the Portland Parks Alliance, all the community groups that have brought energy and spoken to the important resources.

1:10:44Resources that Portland Parks and Recreation are, and also supportive of the workers of Portland Parks and Recreation.

1:10:51So we really appreciate that and look forward to the partnership moving forward.

1:10:56We fully support this levy going forward.

1:11:00We are in it to win it.

1:11:02483 Was the folks that were texting and phone calling in the 2020 parks levy.

1:11:09We used Apano's texting infrastructure, but it was folks from the Parks Alliance and from the foundation and from 483 that brought this home.

1:11:20And we look forward to partnering with labor, partnering with all of you, and partnering with the community partnerships to make sure that the levy is passed and that there's accountability on the other side.

1:11:31We really appreciate the look into the budget that the mayor has been doing and that City Council has been doing.

1:11:37We know that it's difficult work We appreciate your leadership on that.

1:11:41We appreciate your— looking forward to your leadership around all the struggles that we face around transportation and livability and all of the things.

1:11:53So we appreciate your leadership.

1:11:55We look forward to seeing you in person.

1:11:57Thank you for your important work, and thank you for your time and your consideration.

1:12:03Thank you.

1:12:06Thank you very much.

1:12:07We appreciate it.

1:12:11Bob Weinstein, Ashley Murray.

1:12:21Hi, I'm Laina Ala-Slaughter.

1:12:22I did not think I was going to go right after, uh, Ryan Sotomayor.

1:12:27I am the union rep for LIUNA 43.

1:12:30I live in District District 2.

1:12:33Um, I'm here to also, um, state my support for the levy.

1:12:38Uh, we appreciate City Council, the mayor, um, for working on this.

1:12:42I know it's been hard and you haven't been in your position for, for that long.

1:12:48Um, I will say we, um, I am very supportive of continuing programs, which I've been a fitness instructor from Rec Lead, and I've, I worked at Grant Park during the summer doing, uh, fitness, teaching hula classes.

1:13:08Um, and this levy will help our teens, our, our youth who are employed for summer camps, um, for, for these summer programs.

1:13:17And if, if the levy doesn't pass, um, I'm not sure if we could continue those programs.

1:13:24So thank you so much.

1:13:27Um, I look forward to working with you in the future.

1:13:31Thank you very much.

1:13:35Am I next?

1:13:36Okay.

1:13:37Um, council members and mayor, my name is Bob Weinstein.

1:13:40I speak today on behalf of the Concerned Citizens.

1:13:43We urge you to revise the proposed parks levy before referring it to the voters.

1:13:48As written, the ballot title risks misleading the public in several key ways.

1:13:54First, the ballot title blurs the critical distinction between routine maintenance within operations and major capital maintenance.

1:14:02The language implies this levy will help address the city's staggering $600 million major maintenance backlog, but the actual portion going to major capital maintenance is minimal, and nowhere is that made clear.

1:14:16Why not specify the initial major capital maintenance maintenance allocation $2 million so voters understand what they're truly being asked to approve.

1:14:25Second, the language maintains excessive discretion for parks leadership.

1:14:31This vagueness enables the same mismanagement and imbalanced spending between overall operations and major capital maintenance that created our current crisis.

1:14:41We do not need more blank checks.

1:14:44Third, the title masks the true cost impact.

1:14:48Nowhere does the ballot language acknowledge that this is a 75% parks levy tax increase from 80 cents to $1.40 per $1,000 in assessed value.

1:15:00Voters deserve transparency.

1:15:03This should be stated plainly on the ballot.

1:15:06The measure states also it may increase taxes by more than 3%.

1:15:11Without explaining that 3% is the constitutional cap on assessed value growth, making this sound routine when it's actually an override exception.

1:15:21Fourth, the timing is particularly concerning.

1:15:25Affordability in Portland is facing death by a thousand cuts, with recent huge utility hikes, large increases in parking, rideshare, and other fees, and And now a major tax increase in this levy.

1:15:39This comes as we await an audit of the Parks Bureau and following the recent departure of the parks director.

1:15:46We recommend 2 changes.

1:15:48First, significantly increase the share going to major capital maintenance.

1:15:523 Cents out of $1.40 generates about $2 million, not enough to make a dent in a $600 million backlog.

1:16:01Second, Second, revise the ballot title to clearly state this is a 75% tax increase.

1:16:08We also request that Parks and Recreation audit be released prior to the election.

1:16:13The current proposal asks for trust for a bureau that has demonstrated poor fiscal stewardship.

1:16:19Without transparency and accountability measures, this levy will perpetuate the same problems that created our parks crisis.

1:16:28We urge you to be honest with voters.

1:16:30Voters can make informed choices only when they're given the full picture.

1:16:36Thank you very much.

1:16:39Thank you very much.

1:16:42Ashley's online.

1:16:43Ashley, you can unmute.

1:16:47Hi, council members.

1:16:48My name is Ashley Murray, executive director of Solid Community House and District 4 resident.

1:16:53I want to say thank you for how much time, coordination, and effort has gone into bringing this levy forward.

1:16:58It's been complex and a demanding process, and your dedication truly matters.

1:17:03That said, as we look toward November, I'm asking us to make a shift beyond spreadsheets.

1:17:08Over the last 6 months, I've had dozens of conversations with park and rec leaders, Park Foundation staff, campaign strategists, volunteers, nonprofit partners, and many of you.

1:17:18In every Every single one of these conversations, I've asked the same simple question: who is shaping the vision for Portland Parks and Recreation?

1:17:26Every single time, the answer is the same: it's a really good question.

1:17:30That's not an acceptable answer anymore.

1:17:32Portland does not currently have a public unifying vision for its park and recreation system, and this isn't just my observation, it's widespread.

1:17:40No one can clearly articulate where we're headed or what kind of future we're building together.

1:17:44Councilmember We cannot move forward, not effectively, not meaningfully, without a shared vision and a visionary to lead it.

1:17:50We are not in a vacuum.

1:17:52Voters, partners, and staff feel the same uncertainty.

1:17:55Where are we going?

1:17:56What are we working towards?

1:17:57What does the future of Portland Parks and Recreation look like?

1:18:00Right now, we're asking Portlanders to support another tax increase without offering a compelling, inspiring vision in return.

1:18:07Maintaining current service levels is indeed necessary, but it is not inspiring.

1:18:11Thank you.

1:18:12People are hungry for purpose.

1:18:13They're eager to be part of something bigger, and they deserve more than operational upkeep.

1:18:18They deserve leadership that shows where we are and being bold enough to lead towards something better.

1:18:23The 1.0 FTE for partnership included in this levy is a start, but without a shared vision, what is that position building towards?

1:18:31Is it approving paperwork, or is it creating strategic collaborative relationships rooted in values like equity, belonging, and joy?

1:18:38Partners stepping in to meet the community needs should be seen as co-builders, co-authors, not just as applicants that require intention, investment, and alignment.

1:18:47We need someone who doesn't just say, yes, your program is approved.

1:18:50We need someone who can say, this partnership reflects our values and meets a critical need.

1:18:54It brings our vision to life, and we're doing it together.

1:18:57So I'd like to say it again.

1:18:59Portland currently does not have a vision for its park and recreation system.

1:19:03That's a leadership gap.

1:19:03Thank you.

1:19:04And we are asking clearly and urgently for council and parks leadership to make the creation of a shared, bold public vision a top priority over these coming months.

1:19:13We cannot keep answering the most important question, who is leading the vision of Portland Park and Recreation, with, that's a good question.

1:19:21We must start saying, here's where we're going, come with us.

1:19:24Thank you.

1:19:28Thank you very much.

1:19:33Jim Shulen.

1:19:45Thanks for accommodating me.

1:19:46Appreciate it.

1:19:47Um, I'm Jim Shulen.

1:19:50I am representing the Portland Parks Alliance today.

1:19:52I'm also a volunteer with the 40 Mile Loop Land Thank you very much for this opportunity.

1:19:59As a resident of District 3, I really appreciate it.

1:20:03I'm going to read a letter into the record from the Portland Parks Alliance.

1:20:09The Portland Parks Alliance is an informal alliance of volunteer-based and professionally led not-for-profit organizations that are allies and supporters of Portland Parks and Recreation and their programs.

1:20:22We are representative of 60 participating organizations who are concerned about the sustainability of PP&R's financial model and the long-term sustainability of its assets.

1:20:35Our purpose is not to advocate for individual programs or assets.

1:20:38Rather, we exist to advocate for the entire system of parks, natural areas, trails, community and cultural centers, and for programs that are desired by the community that PP&R is uniquely able to provide.

1:20:54PP&R's documentation tells us that the amount of deferred capital maintenance totals $600 million.

1:20:59You've heard that about 5 times today.

1:21:02This list includes everything from worn-out playground equipment, restrooms with failing roofs, buckled pathways, sidewalks, and sports courts, inefficient lighting, park lighting poles that are subject to failure, and the failure of entire structures.

1:21:15Oh, my goodness.

1:21:16Such as the Multnomah Art Center.

1:21:20Because of our concern about the deterioration of PP&R's assets, nearly a year ago we came before City Council to question the process of simply renewing the parks levy of 2020 without also addressing the deterioration of PP&R's assets.

1:21:35Since then, we have met and spoken to most of you about our concerns.

1:21:41The budget's— the city's budget office recommends an annual expenditure of $60 million just to maintain PP&R's asset base, never mind addressing the $600 million backlog.

1:21:52In recent history, the city has appropriated $5 million per year.

1:21:573 Cents specified by Resolution 2025-281 will add about $2.1 million per year.

1:22:05You could say it's a start, and the PPA appreciates it as a good faith gesture in a time of financial stress for the city.

1:22:13Thank you.

1:22:14The PPA also appreciates council's renewed attention to its own statement of intent made in 2015 to address the city's capital maintenance backlog.

1:22:26Clearly, we have a long way to go, and we wish to continue working with you to find a sustainable funding model for Portland Parks and Recreation.

1:22:36Thank you very much.

1:22:37Thanks.

1:22:38Special thanks to Councilor Novick for bringing forward a discussion on the amendments that we propose.

1:22:45Thank you.

1:22:47Thank you very much.

1:22:49That concludes testimony.

1:22:52Okay, colleagues, that moves us into our discussion.

1:22:56And as we heard, we have a number of councilors who have amendments to propose to the resolution before us.

1:23:03When we take our vote today, we will be voting on the resolution as well as the exhibits, which are the materials that will actually appear before voters.

1:23:14The resolution will guide us in our work as we implement this levy moving forward.

1:23:22So I would now entertain a discussion on the underlying materials or amendments to that resolution that folks have brought up previously.

1:23:38Thank you, Madam President, and also thank you to everyone who came out today to testify and share your priorities, concerns.

1:23:48I think the amendment that I want to bring today is responsive to a theme that I have heard since taking this office, which is sort of voter and taxpayer trust in the city.

1:24:00And my approach to this conversation is not necessarily from the standpoint of taxpayer fatigue.

1:24:08I think if you know me, you might think that that's not my position.

1:24:11I see Bob smiling there.

1:24:13But I also think from the standpoint of stewardship of our existing resources and how we use our money.

1:24:17And that's an area that I think I'd like this amendment to speak to.

1:24:22So if you have the amendment in front of you, I'll just read what it is.

1:24:27Um, oh, before I do that, I just want— I just want to motivate it.

1:24:31Um, I, I, I think that we have a narrow interpretation of ORS— uh, what is it— uh, ORS 223, which begins on .297 and runs through, um, I think it's, uh, 316, which, which is the state law that governs our use of system development charges.

1:24:51Um, and I'll direct you to So let me go to the section on authorized expenditures of system development charges.

1:24:57Basically, we are allowed to spend SDCs only on things that are capacity increase and capital improvements.

1:25:04And they give us a number of definitions for what that means.

1:25:07And they say specifically, an increase in system capacity may be established if a capital improvement increases the level of performance or service provided by an existing facility or provides new facilities.

1:25:19And so Yes.

1:25:19So colleagues, I just want to say that if you're looking at a facility that is near failure and a roof is about to fail or, you know, an HVAC system is about to fail or you've got tennis courts that are so buckled that you cannot play tennis anymore, that is no longer routine maintenance.

1:25:37That is something qualitatively different.

1:25:40And so I think from the standpoint of, you know, recognizing that yes, we do need to build some new assets for part of the city, Or kind of, I think the council president had articulated a vision for regional parks assets.

1:25:56I, you know, things like the North Portland Aquatic Center.

1:25:59Those are meaningful and reasonable new investments.

1:26:03I want the resolution to sort of put in writing that we recognize that we have some internal work to do inside the city to clarify our policies, to revisit our internal assumptions about what's in and what's out of the parks system.

1:26:14Councilor Dan Ryan.

1:26:16Of classifications for system development charges.

1:26:18Because if we can use a good share of the existing pot of money for SDCs to tackle some of these very important capital maintenance programs that are not routine, that are of a nature that is going to threaten the viability of the capacity of the existing system, then I think it's a strong signal to voters that— Councilor That this council is willing to take very seriously the fiscal stewardship lens.

1:26:47It doesn't go as far as I think some would, you know, it's not perfect and I would love to refer a levy that was much higher, but I'm more interested in a levy passing than what I think is necessary for the maintenance backlog.

1:27:00So colleagues, I would move that we adopt my amendment that's, let's see here, let me stop rambling and get to the point here.

1:27:08All right, so there's a whereas clause Yes.

1:27:10I have a motion that speaks to the backlog, and it says, whereas City Council recognizes the parks and recreation system has an extensive backlog of major maintenance needs and the 2025 parks levy will begin to address these needs but will only be able to make— only be able to address a small fraction of these needs, the council will continue to work with PP&R and community on a long-range financial plan.

1:27:32We'll explore options for a major maintenance bond measure And will direct the Office of Government Relations to work in the legislature.

1:27:39And here's where my change is.

1:27:40I say strike authorize in the underlying resolution and replace it with clarify authority for, because I believe we already have the authority to use SDCs to invest in capacity preservation of our assets.

1:27:53And then I add a new clause that says, and will pursue as appropriate policy changes in the City of Portland that clarify and prioritize The use of system development charges for extension of useful life or restoration of existing capital assets.

1:28:08So that's the whereas piece.

1:28:10And then it's just mirrored later on in a second to last be it further resolved where I add a clause on that that says, and where appropriate, system development charge use will continue to include major maintenance projects, which the major maintenance piece may change and adjust pursuant to Councilor Novick's previous comments.

1:28:28Thank you.

1:28:29That extend the useful life or restores the capacity value of existing parks capital assets.

1:28:35And colleagues, before I yield, I just would like to mention that I had previously contemplated putting language that said prioritize SDCs for existing kind of preservation.

1:28:48And I want to recognize that that might run afoul of some of our equity commitments and some of our—.

1:28:53Yes.

1:28:54You know, uh, I, I, I don't want to put prioritizing there.

1:28:57I just want to say let's just continue to use this practice and codify it a little bit.

1:29:00So, um, that's what I'd like to add, colleagues, and, um, would love to, to hear a second.

1:29:06Second.

1:29:06Second.

1:29:10Colleagues, we have a motion and a second.

1:29:13I believe Councilor Dunphy, was that you first?

1:29:17I think 4 of us might have said it at the same time on the table, and clearly a fair amount of support here.

1:29:24Is there any discussion?

1:29:29Seeing none, Councilor Novick.

1:29:33Councilor Novick, go right ahead.

1:29:35Um, I just want to raise— I, I'm, I'm a little worried about confusion because I think that there's a general impression that you can't use SDCs for maintenance, even if in fact we have used them to some, some extent.

1:29:47And we're talking about going to the legislature, but we're also saying we're going to So I just want to know, Councilor Green, how do you think that we should manage any confusion that arises from adding this to the conversation?

1:30:05I think it's a great question.

1:30:06I think part of why— I mean, I think we tackle that by updating our codes and our policies that specify how we use them.

1:30:14And we need to, as we consider Councilor Clark's asset management lens going forward, We need to incorporate maybe some of the KPI discussion that Councilor Ryan wants to contemplate.

1:30:24We need to provide a qualitative distinction on what we mean between capacity preserving and increasing and how this fits in the capital improvement plan lens.

1:30:36And so it may be the case that the legislature doesn't need to do anything, but I still think we got ourselves into this mess because the language in ORS 223 would benefit from some— just like maybe an example of, of how, of how, um, an investment might be a capital improvement by just fixing up an existing thing.

1:30:58And this is always a hard question to ask without also asking for privileged information, but have you run this by the City Attorney's Office?

1:31:06Yeah, my staff has had conversations with the, uh, City Attorney.

1:31:09I, I forget the gentleman's I don't know the gentleman's last name, but he does not support this interpretation.

1:31:16And, you know, I'm not convinced.

1:31:20I can read the law here, and I do have a background in cost accounting, and I think it's fairly straightforward to say, look, you can capitalize a project, you can capitalize a roof if it threatens the viability of an existing asset.

1:31:32So the resolution just asks us to do some internal work on our policy work.

1:31:37So there's still an opportunity.

1:31:38Councilmember for us to discuss what that policy change in relation to the City Attorney and have a broader discussion.

1:31:46So I am comfortable with that tension with the City Attorney's Office.

1:31:51I recognize others may not be.

1:31:55I think that a little— Phil, probably okay with pursue as appropriate policy changes in the City of Portland to clarify.

1:32:04And you said you're removing the word prioritize.

1:32:06Which is what it had.

1:32:08The use of SDCs for extension of useful life.

1:32:11So maybe as appropriate is like enough of a savings word that I'm not as worried about it.

1:32:16But then where you say in the subsequent amendment, where appropriate, systems development charge use will continue to include major maintenance projects that extend the useful life or restores the capacity value.

1:32:34I know you're saying that there are examples that we have done that, but I think that I just feel more comfortable saying include rather than continue to include.

1:32:47May I offer a potential compromise here that I think gets to your concern?

1:32:52Maybe if we strike major maintenance projects, which I already don't think belongs there, what if we just replace that with capacity improvement projects?

1:33:00Because those are the ones that can go into our capital improvement plan, and those are the ones that are already in our 2016 SDC plan.

1:33:06So where—.

1:33:07Let's see, actually, I'm not sure I'm looking at the same thing.

1:33:12What I've got looking at now says, where appropriate, SDC use will continue to include major maintenance projects that extend the useful life or restore the capacity value of existing.

1:33:22So how would it read?

1:33:23I would say instead of include major maintenance projects, it would say include capacity-improving projects that extend the useful life.

1:33:32That's very different.

1:33:32It's very closely connected to the 223 language in ORS, and it's also how it is described in our own SDC capital improvement plan.

1:33:40Okay.

1:33:40Is that okay?

1:33:41Yes, thank you.

1:33:42Do we have that?

1:33:43Are we following that friendly amendment?

1:33:44Can I—.

1:33:44Can you say that one more time?

1:33:46Yeah, so in a green amendment number 1, what I'm, what I'm getting from Councilor Novick is to replace in the penultimate be it further resolved in the last clause, replace major maintenance projects, Councilor Dunphy is the seconder.

1:34:09Are you okay with that change?

1:34:11Okay.

1:34:12Rebecca, do you have that or do you need us to send it in writing?

1:34:17Yeah.

1:34:18You have it?

1:34:18Great.

1:34:19Okay, colleagues, we have a slightly tweaked amendment before us now.

1:34:25Councilor Ryan, go right ahead.

1:34:27Yes, to the amendment.

1:34:28And I want to say thank you to Councilor Green.

1:34:31I had a 2-year experience where I was pursuing and all I heard was no.

1:34:36So the legal said no, and then it was never a legislative priority.

1:34:40And so I think we need to do this action to get to the bottom of this.

1:34:44And I think the language changes that you and Councilor Novick ironed out were, were superb.

1:34:49Thank you.

1:34:51Councilor Thank you, Councilor.

1:34:56Colleagues, is there any other discussion to the amendment?

1:35:00And I'll note this is our first council meeting since the break, and I did say that after the break I was going to hold us to the policy and Robert's Rules of Order to not speak at length with our votes.

1:35:12So if folks have comments on this vote, now is the time to make those.

1:35:17Thank you, Mayor.

1:35:21Okay, seeing no one else in the queue, Rebecca, can you please call the roll?

1:35:27Aye.

1:35:29Aye.

1:35:31Aye.

1:35:34Aye.

1:35:35Aye.

1:35:45Aye.

1:35:46Aye.

1:35:4811 Ayes.

1:35:51The amendment is approved.

1:35:53Thank you very much.

1:35:54Colleagues, are there other— is there other discussion to the now amended resolution, or are there any other amendments to bring forward?

1:36:07Councilor Ryan.

1:36:09Thank you, Council President.

1:36:11As mentioned earlier, here's the language for the amendment.

1:36:14My chief of staff did send that to everybody over the last half hour, hour.

1:36:19It reads as follows.

1:36:20Whereas, on or before December 31st, 2025, PP&R leadership in collaboration with stakeholders will submit 10 key performance indicators, KPI, for City Council's approval.

1:36:33These KPIs will form the Parks Levy Performance Dashboard.

1:36:37Second.

1:36:39Colleagues, is there a second?

1:36:41Second.

1:36:43Any discussion?

1:36:46Councilor Kanal.

1:36:48I just had a question.

1:36:49Um, can you speak to the, the choice of the date, December 31st?

1:36:55I didn't want to rush it, um, and have it, um, be pursued, uh, obviously today.

1:37:00That would not work.

1:37:01I thought it was necessary that we include many of the stakeholders that we've been all talking to the last And I do think that the Arts and Economy Committee, which is the rec side, I think would like to provide a space for that to take place.

1:37:16And I did December 31st because in a quick conversation with the current director, it seemed like it was fair.

1:37:25I'm sure it will come prior to that.

1:37:26That's why we used language that it needed to land before that.

1:37:30So what are you thinking?

1:37:31Just to clarify, so then the intent is that they would start working on it before the election?

1:37:35Oh, absolutely.

1:37:36Just making sure.

1:37:37I wanted to understand that we're not asking for like a month and 3 weeks.

1:37:40I just didn't want the experience that we had with the last levy where there was so much confusion and what was the intent, how did it make the world better.

1:37:51And I think that that wasn't fair at times, but we didn't have anything clear and visible that was transparent to the public that what success looked like.

1:38:00So with this one, since we want to improve operations, And improve in addition to the ones I mentioned.

1:38:06That's why we have up to 10.

1:38:07And we want them to be digestible so that they're easier for people to understand.

1:38:11It's not going to be an insider's indicator.

1:38:15It's one that the public could definitely understand.

1:38:17Thanks.

1:38:18And you answered my second question, which is sort of in passing, which is would this include indicators about recreation?

1:38:24So I am good and I'm comfortable supporting this.

1:38:27Thank you.

1:38:29Thank you, Councilor.

1:38:31Councilor Ryan, I have a question.

1:38:34Um, I'm wondering about the statement that there would be 10 KPIs.

1:38:39I'm wondering if you have specific KPIs in mind or why you chose the number 10.

1:38:45I'm just concerned that if we get feedback back that we need an additional or that we don't need that many, are we holding ourselves to something where we then are trying to split things and we don't actually have the performance measurements that we want.

1:39:02We have the ones that we need to, to make sure it's exactly 10.

1:39:08How did I come up with 10?

1:39:10So I came up with 10 because in my life experience in doing work like this, continuous improvement work, 10 is a good number.

1:39:18Many times organizations will let List hundreds, and that doesn't really track as well.

1:39:24And people also get lost in it, and you lose the accountability.

1:39:28So I thought we should lift the key ones that we keep hearing over and over again from partners, and all of you will be included in that dialogue.

1:39:35And so it's giving us some discipline to make it so it's manageable.

1:39:42I hope we don't feel hemmed in by that number later.

1:39:51Councilor Green, are you in the queue?

1:39:53Yeah, I just wanted to say that the reason why I seconded this, uh, Councilor, um, Ryan and I, when we sat down to chart out what our committee would look like and what it would focus on, um, KPIs was at the forefront and kind of a data-driven approach was at the forefront of how we manage our portfolio, and recreation is a big part of that portfolio.

1:40:12Um, you want the KPIs to be driven by a need And we have this opportunity— we have a new levy, we have some new leadership in the Parks Bureau.

1:40:21We're hearing calls for increased accountability and transparency.

1:40:24And so I think this is just a great way to slot that in.

1:40:26So I just wanted to articulate why I think it's a good idea to add this in.

1:40:31Thank you, Councilor.

1:40:32Councilor Novick.

1:40:35Councilor Ryan, since you and I are of a certain age and share cultural references, are you sure you wouldn't want to go to 11?

1:40:45I'm, I'm open to a number change on that, and, uh, it was— so I am open to the number.

1:40:52Would you accept a friendly amendment to it?

1:40:54I really am trying to discipline us.

1:40:57I won't use the word hem, and so, um, hem us in, but I do think it's important that we, um, are disciplined.

1:41:02I'm fine with a friendly amendment of 11.

1:41:05And I also, when we listed testimony, colleagues, it was really clear that people want that vision.

1:41:11In my experience, what you measure matters, and what you put out visually does provide that transparency, and it further provides an opportunity to track that vision.

1:41:21Are you getting the results from what you're putting out there?

1:41:24So we've been operating on a lot of vision at times, or maybe ideas, and it's really important that we have an operations plan that has strategic clarity And so when you can measure it and everyone can see it and they're all seeing the same thing, that dashboard is visible to the entire community.

1:41:39They know where we are and they know where we want to go.

1:41:48And I just want to pause, actually.

1:41:53I'm not sure if there was an actual proposal for an amendment to 11 or if that was just a joke.

1:41:58So I'm moving on to Councilor Murillo.

1:42:02I didn't understand the reference, so, um, sorry.

1:42:07It's true.

1:42:09Um, I feel like I had the same question as Council President Pirtle-Guiney, um, around the number of 10 key performance indicators, and I know that you answered it, but I'm not quite sure I understood specifically what we're looking for.

1:42:23Um, so, uh, could we specify that?

1:42:27Yes.

1:42:28Or maybe just remove the 10 so we're not bound by it if we— if there aren't 10, or—.

1:42:35The friendly amendment that you're offering is to just not have a number, and that I hear that.

1:42:41Or to hear specifics from you about what it would be covering.

1:42:45We have to work that out.

1:42:46I didn't want to tell you what the 10 were today.

1:42:49I think that it's really clear what some of them are from based on dialogue of late.

1:42:53But I'd rather take a pause and all of us come together with parks leadership and the stakeholders to identify what they are.

1:43:01If we did that today, this meeting would last really long.

1:43:06So what if it just says we will submit key performance indicators without the 10?

1:43:16I can, I can accept that from the amendment.

1:43:18Okay.

1:43:19Because we're going to do them.

1:43:20Then I propose the friendly amendment.

1:43:22All right, I accept.

1:43:23Green, do you accept that?

1:43:25I accept as the second.

1:43:27Okay, so this would say, in collaboration with stakeholders, will submit key performance indicators for City Council approval.

1:43:36Yeah.

1:43:37Okay, Councilor Novick, are you back in the queue?

1:43:41Yes, well, just for my own amendment, so I'll discuss this one.

1:43:44Okay.

1:43:45Is there any other discussion on the amendment before us?

1:43:49Yes.

1:43:49Okay.

1:43:50And this is now a slightly amended form of the amendment to say will submit key performance indicators without a number there.

1:43:59And Councilor Ryan, before we vote on this, could you let our clerk's team know where in the resolution you would like this whereas clause to be located?

1:44:12We placed it on page 2 and now it's on page 3.

1:44:14It's the 3rd from the bottom.

1:44:17So it's after the one that talks about the annual reports.

1:44:21Okay.

1:44:21So in between whereas PPR will produce annual reports on how levy funds are being spent and whereas a community member oversight committee will review?

1:44:29Yeah.

1:44:30Okay.

1:44:33Rebecca, do you see that?

1:44:37It was in the email that was mailed out about an hour ago.

1:44:41Perfect.

1:44:42Okay, thank you.

1:44:44Rebecca, can you please call the roll?

1:44:48Koyamalene?

1:44:55Aye.

1:44:56Murillo?

1:44:57Aye.

1:44:58Novick?

1:44:59Aye.

1:45:00Green?

1:45:00Aye.

1:45:01Zimmerman?

1:45:02Aye.

1:45:04Avalos?

1:45:05Aye.

1:45:09Aye.

1:45:10Aye.

1:45:11Aye.

1:45:12Aye.

1:45:1411 Ayes.

1:45:15The amendment is approved.

1:45:17Ryan won.

1:45:24Councilor Novick.

1:45:26Thank you, Madam President.

1:45:27Um, there's a whole bunch of really tiny things here, and I'm going to I'm going to mix in the slightly more substantive proposals from the Parks Alliance with the simple word changes.

1:45:37If anybody wants me to divide those up, then I'd be happy to do that.

1:45:41So the first word change is, whereas the proposed 140 levy would include 137 for Park and Recreation options and 03 for— now it says capital projects, add the words maintenance, capital maintenance projects.

1:45:55Okay.

1:45:55Then 2 whereases below, the 03 rate for capital projects, again, make it capital maintenance projects.

1:46:01Yes.

1:46:02Then, let's see, this is a more substantive addition to the whereas.

1:46:09After the whereas that says PP&R will produce annual reports about how levy funds are being spent, including performance metrics, etc., the addition would be, whereas PP&R shall, as part of the annual budget process, describe to council the approximate percentage of its operations and number of FTE which will be funded by levy resources.

1:46:28And then below the current whereas that says, whereas City Council recognizes the Parks and Rec system has an extensive backlog of major maintenance needs.

1:46:40So first of all, I'm proposing change major maintenance needs in that paragraph to capital maintenance needs, extensive backlog for capital maintenance needs.

1:46:50But then follow that paragraph with the language suggested by The Parks Alliance, whereas City Council will adopt this long-range financial plan by the end of fiscal year 2027-28.

1:47:04And then let's see, there's a whereas which reads, whereas if approved, the 2025 Parks Levy would raise an estimated $2 million in the first year to support capital projects.

1:47:15Again, add the word maintenance, capital maintenance projects.

1:47:20In the now therefore be it resolved, also change the 0.03 of the rate will be for capital projects, capital maintenance projects.

1:47:29And then subsequent be it resolved that the 0.03 for capital projects is intended to be distributed between the 4 council districts.

1:47:40Again, add the word maintenance between capital and projects.

1:47:44And then in the same further resolved, Instead of capital project decisions from levy funds will be included capital maintenance projects, and then along with other capital maintenance projects.

1:47:55So that would be the extent of these numerous but small amendments.

1:48:02Councilor, I believe what you're doing is adding capital to any time where we talk about maintenance projects.

1:48:09Actually, maintenance where we talk about capital.

1:48:11Maintenance where we talk about capital.

1:48:12I apologize.

1:48:14Adding language about long-range financial plan development and adding language about reporting on the percentage of the budget, the parks budget funded by the levy.

1:48:24Right.

1:48:24Are those the 3 categories?

1:48:25Right.

1:48:26And in one place, replacing the word major with the word capital.

1:48:29Perfect.

1:48:31Is there a second?

1:48:32Second.

1:48:33Okay.

1:48:34I believe Councilor Kanal beat you to it, Councilor Ryan.

1:48:38Is there any discussion on this amendment?

1:48:41Okay, colleagues, seeing none, Rebecca, could you please call the roll?

1:48:50Koyama Lane?

1:48:51Aye.

1:48:52Morillo?

1:48:53Aye.

1:48:54Novick?

1:48:54Aye.

1:48:55Green?

1:48:56Aye.

1:48:57Zimmerman?

1:48:58Aye.

1:48:59Avalos?

1:49:00Aye.

1:49:01Dunphy?

1:49:02Aye.

1:49:03Smith?

1:49:05Aye.

1:49:07Aye.

1:49:07Aye.

1:49:08Aye.

1:49:09And the amendment is approved with 11 ayes.

1:49:16Thank you.

1:49:16Councilor Kanal.

1:49:18Thank you, Madam President.

1:49:20I'm going to take the opportunity to formally propose the amendment that I handed out and have emailed in as Kanal 1.

1:49:27This would create a new whereas clause that I have placed Between the whereas on community and art centers and then free and discount options for recreational programming above, and then below the— sorry, those would be the ones above it, and then it would be directly above the strengthening partnerships ones about midway through page 2.

1:49:50Whereas a new levy would allow for $139,169 per year, $0.00232 Aye.

1:49:58Motion passes.

1:49:58Resolution number 4, which would authorize $100,000 of the $137,000 for parks and recreation operations to be dedicated to the extension of hours at 4 community centers, one in each council district, on Fridays and Saturdays from Memorial Day to September 30th each year to 11:00 PM to promote access to free third spaces for all Portlanders, in particular young people, and promote student achievement, community safety, and youth development.

1:50:18And, um, and just to speak briefly to it, uh, we have talked about Baltimore a lot.

1:50:24I think it's also worth noting 2 other examples.

1:50:26Yes.

1:50:26I think there are some examples of situations where the extension of community centers has hours on the evenings where young people in particular don't necessarily have something else to do that they can afford, or something else to do that they can afford that's in their home area.

1:50:45And so Baltimore extended their hours in the summertime on Fridays and Saturdays to 11:00 PM.

1:50:51Dallas has also done something quite We're clearly willing to learn from their example.

1:50:57It's— they call it the Summer of Safety program.

1:51:00And the other example I would cite is that this was a part of the conversation.

1:51:05I want to note the conversation, not the programming, around some of the initiatives we've done in the past here in Portland.

1:51:11A couple years ago, we recognized that gun violence goes up in the summertime, and we worked on a Safer Summer intervention program.

1:51:19Thank you.

1:51:20Programs like that would be supported by having the ability to send young people to a place where they don't have to pay.

1:51:29And so that's fundamentally what this is about.

1:51:32We did have it scored.

1:51:33We're talking about an $84 million levy, and this is $139,000.

1:51:38And I just want to close with that piece of information.

1:51:42Actually, I'll also note that the testimony we got from— Councilor Dan Ryan.

1:51:47Sorry, I have forgotten the name.

1:51:50Miss Murray at Sellwood Community House talking about asking Portlanders to support an increased tax without getting anything new.

1:51:59This would be something new that would be visible in your community.

1:52:02And I think that's a really important thing to deliver to voters is that for a very small amount of money, you'd be able to see a space open that young people could go to.

1:52:09So that is why I would be proposing this amendment and I would ask for your support.

1:52:12Thank you.

1:52:15Second.

1:52:16Thank you, councilors.

1:52:17Councilor Murillo, are you in the queue to discuss this amendment?

1:52:21I am.

1:52:22Thank you, Council President.

1:52:24I am definitely in favor of this in terms of the substance of it and what it could do.

1:52:31I have some concerns about this amendment and Councilor Zimmerman's amendment with regards to earmarking funds for specific things because I think that Given all of the federal funding issues that are coming down the pike and just everything else going on, that I would like to give parks maximum flexibility in how they're able to allocate those funds.

1:52:50So I guess I wanted to hear your response and analysis of that, because I am— I completely agree with your analysis on what that could do for public safety and for youth in our communities, but just have some concerns.

1:53:03Yeah.

1:53:05I hear you.

1:53:07I think that there are massive concerns around, I think, roughly $100 million a year that we're talking about in the context of grants.

1:53:16I don't— so the 2 things I would say is, one, I don't think $139,000 is going to make a huge difference either way on that particular concern.

1:53:25But it is one of the best bang for your buck type of programs we could possibly do.

1:53:28I think it's a great program.

1:53:30Thank you.

1:53:31In terms— I was aware that it would be a low 6-digit number.

1:53:36I said that in the committee last Thursday when I floated this for the first time.

1:53:40I did not know it was going to be this low.

1:53:42So that's a pleasant surprise.

1:53:46And I also think that at a time when we are under significant threat from an authoritarian federal government, that one of its tactics is to divide us.

1:53:55Yes.

1:53:55Combining this with the idea of volunteerism as a way to help bring communities together in an intergenerational way, often in terms of who's volunteering to provide programs for teenagers and young adults, is actually a way of pushing back against the broader concerns there.

1:54:13But that's not the original intent, but it is sort of an additional benefit.

1:54:25Thank you, Councilor Kanal.

1:54:27I—.

1:54:27And thank you, Councilor Murillo, for asking that question because I was sitting with that tension.

1:54:31But I think where I'm landing is, one, the impact is very, you know, small.

1:54:38And I think that the impact in dollars and in percentage of the levy translates to a huge impact to East Portland where this will greatly affect our ability to create more third spaces.

1:54:52I think, you know, this is our opportunity in this levy, as we're doing in lots of other ways, to signal intent and program.

1:55:00And so I see this as just another one, even though, you know, it has a monetary amount.

1:55:04I mean, just like we're adding the 3 cents for capital maintenance.

1:55:08So I hear you, Councilor Morillo, because I agree in general that I want us to be careful to not be overly prescriptive.

1:55:14Thank you.

1:55:15This feels like enough of a— like I can get down with this, and I think the impact is good.

1:55:22And it's also us— totally agree with the assessment of us adding something visible that people will be able to feel.

1:55:30So I plan to support it, but I'm grateful for the discussion that happened just before me because I was sitting with that tension, but I'm definitely landing on supporting it.

1:55:37Councilmember Herbold.

1:55:40Thank you, Councilor.

1:55:41Councilor Koyama Lane.

1:55:43Thank you for this work, for your work on this, Councilor.

1:55:47I am absolutely interested in the extension of hours at community centers.

1:55:52I would love to see this.

1:55:54I am wondering also if the levy is the right place to do this type of earmarking.

1:56:00And I'm also thinking about how this is very specific and how I know voters appreciate having some specific examples of what they can expect.

1:56:11And so I actually can see this possibly being helpful as a campaign will hopefully be ran around this.

1:56:18And then I also have another follow-up question.

1:56:20I'm wondering about this language, a new levy would allow, and then going on, and for that money to be dedicated.

1:56:31I was wondering if allow is the right word, or it seems a little squishier.

1:56:36I was wondering if there's another word, like the word direct, or can I hear your thinking around that?

1:56:45Thank you.

1:56:47So I'll first say, yeah, the part about specificity, I think, is— and this is a strange conversation because we're talking about how to build something that can be more politically viable, right?

1:56:57That's just a strange concept to this entire thing.

1:57:00But I do think that having specificity will help with that.

1:57:04In terms of the levy, I think next year's budget will take effect on July 1st.

1:57:08There's a lot of time between the end of the school year and July 1st where you start to see spikes in gun violence happen.

1:57:15And so we started— when I was at the Community Safety Division, we started the Safer Summer program significantly earlier than that when we could, and sometimes we couldn't because of funding and how it was funded.

1:57:27So I am thinking about that in terms of this opportunity.

1:57:29Thank you.

1:57:30So, and I think the 2 things together is the answer to your timing question.

1:57:34On the 3rd question, I think that's a really good one about the use of the word allow.

1:57:40And I think this also relates to Councilor Murillo's question of it's signaling council intent, but I don't think the resolution itself can direct it.

1:57:48And we were advised by, you know, not to amend the exhibits on the dais on the day of.

1:57:54Thank you.

1:57:56And through no fault of their own, I want to be clear, I'm not blaming them.

1:57:58It just took a little time to get the exact scoring figured out.

1:58:02And so it kind of, it made sense to frame it this way as a direction.

1:58:06And I'll also just take the opportunity to note, you know, we are expecting that for 3 of the districts, we're going to have the conversation about which community center, you know, with the councilors.

1:58:17And I apologize to my colleagues in District 1.

1:58:20You only have one community center.

1:58:22For now, that's a challenge for a later problem to solve.

1:58:28But for the other 3 districts, I would hope that we're able to have input into that process.

1:58:34Thank you.

1:58:36Thank you.

1:58:37All of that is helpful, and I am excited to support this.

1:58:46Councilor, I I had told you when you first brought this concept up that it was something that I was excited to support in the budget next year because I do think that it is a really important thing for us to do.

1:58:58And we've had a lot of conversations about programmed— less time but more programming, or more time even if it means less programming.

1:59:07And I'm really supportive of this concept.

1:59:09I'm struggling because we costed this levy in order to be able to assure Portlanders that we would maintain all of the investments that we bought back during the budget process.

1:59:20And I worry that if we start to say, and also this, and also this, it becomes harder and harder to keep that promise.

1:59:29And I don't want to set ourselves up to not be able to keep the promises that we make during this levy.

1:59:37I know it's only a small amount of money I am going to take the next minute or two as others talk to think about my vote, but I'm leaning voting no because I worry about being able to keep that promise that we will maintain what we have, that Portlanders won't see cuts.

1:59:54But I did just want to state on the record that, um, if I vote no on this, that does not mean that I wouldn't support it in the budget process.

2:00:02I do think it's a really important thing for us to do.

2:00:05Councilor Thanks.

2:00:06And I'll just clarify, based in part on our conversations, this does not include programming.

2:00:11It includes enough staff to keep the space open, but open gyms for gyms that have basketballs, gyms that at least one of which will have dodgeballs soon, you know, those sorts of things will allow for that.

2:00:23And I think if there is a need for additional programming, there is the concept of volunteerism that we talked about in a lot of places.

2:00:30And obviously, Obviously the friends of groups and things like that.

2:00:34To the other point about costing it out, that's where the costing is based, just to clarify that.

2:00:44Thank you.

2:00:46Councilor Novick.

2:00:48Yeah, I share the concern about this being really prescriptive.

2:00:55I also worry that I think that the overall message here is that we've got a levy that, in the words of Bon Jovi, holds on to what we've got.

2:01:05And I think that polling actually shows that the maintenance message is strong.

2:01:11And I'm a little worried if we say all this is about is holding on to what we've got, plus a little bit for capital maintenance, plus this one other thing.

2:01:19It kind of implies that we've thought that— we think that only this one other thing is important enough to be worth adding.

2:01:24I think that's a fair point.

2:01:25And maybe there's a reasonable case for that, but I can sort of see people saying, well, wait a minute, if you're gonna add things, why didn't you add this thing or that thing or the other thing?

2:01:32So I'm just worried about having a bit of, I don't feel strongly about this, but I think I'm a no 'cause I think it's sort of a muddled, there's sort of a muddled message.

2:01:40So I'll just quickly state, because you brought up the Bon Jovi thing, the last reference was a reference to Spinal Tap.

2:01:45This is Spinal Tap, just to clarify for those who didn't know.

2:01:49Yeah.

2:01:53I guess this is kind of a response to both questions.

2:01:56I don't apologize for saying public safety is special and deserves prioritization.

2:02:01I do think it's appropriate to ask why this and not that, and I also think it's an incredibly fair response to say because public safety.

2:02:10And I, for me, that is a priority that we often view very narrowly, but I think this council has come to the realization that maybe other councils did not, that recreation and community centers are a part of our public safety system.

2:02:25And so it is special.

2:02:27I do think it's an exception, and I don't mind— I'm not apologizing for that.

2:02:32Councilor Ryan?

2:02:33Yeah.

2:02:34To the amendment?

2:02:35Yeah, great conversation on this amendment.

2:02:37I have agreed with a couple of the comments here.

2:02:40First of all, I'm struggling on my vote on this one because I I see the impact, but I also have experience where when there's carve-outs, how rough that is to land it.

2:02:52And I know that we already put in a couple that were negotiated over the last few weeks, the 0.3 for capital maintenance, or— and the other one is the 1 FTE for partnerships.

2:03:05And I'm concerned if we keep adding these, and it was so hard to get to 140.

2:03:09Yeah.

2:03:10And so this would— something would have to probably give.

2:03:14And so I'm probably just out of principle, would want to hear from parks leadership and have more time to see how they would be able to roll this out.

2:03:25I agree that I want this and I would support it in the budget process.

2:03:28Putting it into another earmark carve-out, whatever you want to call it, for this specific item gives me some—.

2:03:34Councilor Herbold.

2:03:36Hesitation.

2:03:38Thanks.

2:03:38I, I just wanted to quickly state, uh, this is kind of to both Councilor Novick and Councilor Ryan.

2:03:44Councilor Novick, in, in the previous amendment, you noted that as appropriate alleviated your concern, and I would, I would say that the, uh, the, the use of the phrase here of would allow should serve that same purpose.

2:03:57And I think this relates to the conversations that, that my staff had through with CBO and with Parks about, you know, we did staff— the main concern we heard is we don't want necessarily one person to always be there alone.

2:04:10And so talking about the staffing level, we did adjust and get it rescored based on that to have the ability to have a second staffer there so that the first person isn't staying alone the whole night, you know.

2:04:21So that we did adjust based off of those sorts of pieces of feedback, and I just wanted to make sure that was clear.

2:04:26Thank you.

2:04:26I don't know if that alleviates the full concern, but I think it's Okay, I'm going to try to keep moving us along because we have half an hour left today and at least one more amendment.

2:04:36Councilor Dunphy.

2:04:38To the amendment, I just want to note, and I'll be a bit of a broken record because I have said this multiple times on here, but I started my career working in a middle school in East Portland in the David Douglas School District.

2:04:50I have watched 3 of my students die of violence.

2:04:52I've watched 6 of my students shot and killed.

2:04:54Shot and live.

2:04:55I've seen one of my students doing a long-term sentence because she was involved in the violent beating death of her classmate.

2:05:02Third places for students in East Portland especially is unparalleled for our resources for public safety, and the reality is my 13-year-old daughter will not benefit from this because we live in Parkrose, and the only available community center is the East Portland Community Center, which is adjacent to Floyd Light Middle School.

2:05:19Those are my kids.

2:05:20Those are actually now the kids of my kids when I was there because it's been 15, almost 20 years since I left.

2:05:27I think that this may be a special carve-out.

2:05:29I hear my colleagues' concerns about calling out one special thing versus another, but for my students in District 1, for my young people, this is the difference between life and death.

2:05:39And it's not hyperbole.

2:05:42Kids who do not have a place to go find a place to go.

2:05:45And if they don't have something positive to do, they will find something to do and it will lead to increased It is directly tied to increased gun violence, directly tied to car theft, directly tied to retail theft, and directly tied to interpersonal violence.

2:05:58I think that this is an enormously responsible use of our time to modestly increase the amount of hours that some of our kids can benefit, even if it saves one child's life.

2:06:09So thank you.

2:06:09Thank you, Councilor.

2:06:10Councilor Green.

2:06:13Yeah, I just wanna say that I think public safety begins with strong and safe and healthy communities, and parks are a cornerstone of that for me.

2:06:23I think for all the other reasons that have been articulated, I think this is such a small amount of money that has the potential to save a lot of public safety expenditure on the back end that this is frankly, in a time where we do have budget challenges, I think just a really cost-effective I also, you know, I hear that— I do hear the structural concerns about like, okay, what are we cobbling together here and are we creating confusion?

2:06:51But I do think voters are looking at us to be increasingly creative in how we stretch the value of every resolution, every measure, everything that we refer and ask them to pay for.

2:07:04And if we can say, all right, this has a very, very small impact on the rest of the program delivery, but has a huge impact on public safety and, and, and whole communities, I, I think is really something we should support, colleagues.

2:07:14So I intend to vote yes.

2:07:17Thank you, Councilor.

2:07:18Councilor Avalos?

2:07:20Yeah, I agree with Councilor Green, and I just want to note there's been a lot of negotiating and carve-outs that happened before it came to this table.

2:07:26So, uh, I think that this is another one that is actually people forward, which is why I'm going to support it, and I think you all should too.

2:07:33Thanks.

2:07:35Thank you, Councilor.

2:07:36Any other discussion to the amendment?

2:07:41Okay, seeing none, Rebecca, could you please call the roll?

2:07:45Koyama Lane?

2:07:46Aye.

2:07:47Morillo?

2:07:49Sorry, I know we were supposed to have all our discussion.

2:07:51I'll be very brief.

2:07:52I think in general—.

2:07:56A sentence brief?

2:07:57Yes, a sentence brief.

2:07:58In general, I think that we should be able to indicate legislative intent when we are on the dais and have that be a part of the public record.

2:08:06But since this is such a small impact to the budget with such a big impact for the community, I will be voting yes.

2:08:14But generally, I'm quite tired of us being stuck in one position because we have specifically allocated funds when we need maximum flexibility.

2:08:23But I vote aye.

2:08:25Nay.

2:08:29Green.

2:08:30Aye.

2:08:32Zimmerman.

2:08:33No.

2:08:35Avalos.

2:08:37Aye.

2:08:38Dunphy.

2:08:39Aye.

2:08:40Smith.

2:08:42No.

2:08:45Kanal.

2:08:45Aye.

2:08:46Ryan.

2:08:47No.

2:08:49Pirtle-Guiney.

2:08:50No.

2:08:53And the amendment fails with 6 aye and 5 nay.

2:08:57Pardon.

2:09:02Passes with 6 aye and 5 nay.

2:09:05We need 7 to pass.

2:09:11Can we get the final vote count, Rebecca?

2:09:13Yes, sorry.

2:09:14The amendment fails with 6 aye and 5 nay votes.

2:09:17Okay.

2:09:21Thank you, Madam President.

2:09:26Um, as I indicated earlier, I would like to just add the sentence in the second-to-last resolved clause.

2:09:37The sentence reads, the 3 cents for capital projects will be spent only on restroom facilities.

2:09:44Thank you.

2:09:45So the reason I have shared before, and being the representative for the downtown area in particular, but actually across our district, this is one of those areas where I actually think specificity in levies is important.

2:10:02And in particular on this topic, the reason I'm presenting this as an amendment is because I think I think we have seen over the last few years, we have seen where restroom facilities in our parks have been downgraded, if you will, in terms of their prioritization.

2:10:21Instead, we saw the parks put in porta-potties and things like that.

2:10:27And I think it is important that we be specific that this is also part of it.

2:10:31And I appreciate the rest of the other capital maintenance and Councilor Novick's I think those are all really important signals and pieces to send.

2:10:44And the additional 50% open to other items.

2:10:48But I do think it's important for us in this time to consider calling out the park restrooms.

2:10:54Because for whatever reason, I don't think that park restrooms are held in high regard in the cultural decision-making of the last levy.

2:11:01Councilor Novick.

2:11:02Or in the last several years of parks, and so in this case, I think it's important.

2:11:08I would never shy away from specificity.

2:11:11I think that the health of a levy would be that this would all be more specific, and I'm willing to be flexible on this entire levy.

2:11:20But in this in this case, I I think for this one, I would like this three percent to be clear and that be resolved so that.

2:11:37Second.

2:11:38Okay, seconded by Councilor Ryan.

2:11:40Councilor Dunphy to the amendment?

2:11:43Yeah, um, Councilor Zimmerman, you know, there are— I think I'm ultimately going to be a no on this.

2:11:49I appreciate where you're going, and I've seen firsthand how, for example, For example, when the bathroom at Ventura Park was chained shut for a year, it led to less use by families and more use by bad behavior.

2:12:00But I also see situations like Lewitt View Park in my neighborhood where the rubber on the surface of the playground began crumbling within a year.

2:12:10The pipes that were used to irrigate the plants got run over by a lawnmower and never got replaced.

2:12:16And the splash pad has been out of commission for the last 4 years.

2:12:20So, There are some, you know, especially in my district, there are reasons beyond simply restrooms that people are no longer able to use a lot of these public spaces.

2:12:33And I would be hesitant to only specify that, especially because there are bathrooms in East Portland that are— I'm sorry, parks in East Portland that simply don't even have bathrooms.

2:12:43So.

2:12:48Thank you, Councilor.

2:12:48Councilor Novick.

2:12:50I wanted to second Councilor Dunphy's reference to playgrounds.

2:12:54The current language of the levy says that a new levy would include 0.03 of the rate for capital projects to maintain our park system, such as repair of bathrooms and playgrounds.

2:13:03So it does call out bathrooms.

2:13:05And as a 62-year-old man, I yield to no one in my appreciation of the importance of bathrooms, but I would not want to exclude playgrounds.

2:13:13Thank you, Councilor.

2:13:18Um, Councilor, I also am concerned with just calling out restrooms.

2:13:25Playgrounds stand out to me.

2:13:27There are also a number of facilities in my district that could support the type of partnerships that we are asking for parks to do more of if only the facilities were more usable.

2:13:37Things Like cottages.

2:13:39I know in Sellwood Park we've heard about the shack that need roof repairs and other upgrades to be able to be usable for the type of partnerships that we're talking about that actually come in at about the same cost range as the bathroom projects that I'd like to be able to have on the list.

2:13:59If folks are interested in moving this forward and the votes are not there with that I would suggest that I would be happy to say prioritizing bathrooms, but not excluding other projects to give us some ability to look at what the needs are in our districts.

2:14:18However, if the votes are there without that or are not there at all, I don't need to move that forward, but I am concerned with the current language as proposed.

2:14:29Councilor Avalos?

2:14:32Thank you, Councilor Dunphy.

2:14:34Uh, agree with your points.

2:14:36I don't see how at a moment where we are scraping by, we're already sacrificing so much by choosing this 140 number, we're already carving out 3 cents for capital and that's not even close to being enough, and our playgrounds are deteriorating, I don't see how we could put this kind of restriction on ourselves.

2:14:55To make it only go to bathrooms, especially when East Portland barely has them.

2:14:59So I'm going to be voting no.

2:15:01Thank you, Councilor.

2:15:02Councilor Koyama Lane.

2:15:05Thank you, Madam President.

2:15:07Glad you're with us, Councilor Zimmerman.

2:15:10I have a question for you.

2:15:11I kind of wish I could just ask you this not on the dais.

2:15:18I'm genuinely wondering and a little confused and wondering if you can speak I am genuinely curious, and, and it might be that those two are quite different, but can you speak to that a little bit, help me understand?

2:15:43Well, those are your words.

2:15:44I didn't speak to Councilor Kanal's issue about specificity, and I agreed with Thank you for clarifying.

2:16:01That's helpful.

2:16:04Councilor, anything additional?

2:16:06Nope, thank you.

2:16:08Councilor Green?

2:16:10Yeah, I was— Councilor President, I appreciate you brought in that potential.

2:16:16I think that's a good idea.

2:16:17Amendment that you can make, because that's something that I was going to suggest that could move me.

2:16:21But I think, yeah, I think that Councilor Novick has pointed to the language in the ballot that does identify the bathrooms.

2:16:34Bathrooms are a huge problem in our district.

2:16:36I know that.

2:16:38I also think that we have an opportunity with the amendment that we passed from Councilor Ryan with the KPIs.

2:16:43Yes.

2:16:44To say, look, we're in the 5-year levy period.

2:16:47How are we spending our money?

2:16:50Are we prioritizing the right things?

2:16:52And yes, bathrooms need to be opened up.

2:16:55We shouldn't be using porta-potties.

2:16:56But I don't know if I'm there yet on this.

2:16:58So if there's further discussion, I might be able to be moved.

2:17:03Or if you want to have a response to me, please, please, please go for it.

2:17:08Councilor Zimmerman.

2:17:11You know, I think that this levy should have specificity.

2:17:16I think there's so much about this levy that is being taken on faith, and I have great concern.

2:17:22I think being able to signal a couple of areas where we have seen time and time again the decision-making within the bureau has not prioritized something, and so that's all I'm really trying to, trying to, you know, signal.

2:17:35Thank you.

2:17:36Solve for here is because I think that it can be very easy to get a bureau to talk about repairing a playground, but for whatever reason, um, that decision-making has not ever prioritized restrooms in our community.

2:17:49And so I, I don't disagree with a lot that's being said.

2:17:53I certainly wish this levy was more transparent in terms of what was being included in it, and I thought that this one little ounce of that might palatable.

2:18:06And I just want to highlight a little bit of a difference when we talk about some of the parks that are in West Portland.

2:18:12We're usually— when you stand in one position of that park, you know, you can see almost the rest of the entire park, except for, of course, the Forest Park.

2:18:23That's a little bit different than when you stand in some of the parks across our cities who occupy larger blocks and larger areas.

2:18:32And the reason I bring that up is sometimes the behavior that happens in and around our parks is the kind of thing that you can't get away from when you're in an urban area park in the downtown area, that you will just choose to leave that park.

2:18:46And sometimes, and a lot of times in our district, that is what I've noticed is it's toileting, and it is, you know, it's the porta potty getting dumped over.

2:18:56Right?

2:18:57It's the it's the it's that kind of stuff that's you can't just go to the other side of the park when that park is only one square block and think that you're away from it.

2:19:05So I am I am hearing folks.

2:19:08I would still support and hope for some support on this.

2:19:12I know it's a tiny amount, but I am I'm pretty worried about the future of this levy and and where we're going with it, and I think.

2:19:23So thanks for the questions, and I, and I recognize it's not everybody's cup of tea, but I appreciate consideration.

2:19:33Councilor Morillo.

2:19:37Thank you, Madam President.

2:19:38Um, thank you, Councilor Zimmerman, for bringing this forward.

2:19:41I, uh, I think I share the same concerns, uh, that some of my colleagues have already brought up, and just the fact that restrooms were already referenced, I think, is a good thing.

2:19:51But I did just want to say, put it on the record right now, that whenever you want to work on opening more restrooms and repairing our restrooms in the city together, I'd be happy to work on that with you.

2:20:01I do think it's a really critical issue, and I think that in the coming years, frankly, we're going to be experiencing more housing and homelessness issues because of everything happening economically at the federal level and locally.

2:20:16And this is going to be a really critical resource for people who are on our streets and just for anyone who wants to use our parks.

2:20:22So I hope that this is signaling some legislative intent to move this forward and that maybe in the next budget cycle we add some specific budget notes as well to direct the Parks Bureau to have a specific focus on this.

2:20:37Thank you, Councilor.

2:20:37Councilor Koyama Lane.

2:20:39Thank you, Madam President.

2:20:42This is a helpful discussion and Thank you for clarifying, Councilor Zimmerman.

2:20:47That does refresh my memory, and I remember you saying you appreciate specificity.

2:20:51I would be interested if any colleagues are interested in sharing if you voted no on that last amendment specifically around concerns around specificity but are considering voting yes on this one.

2:21:02I'd be interested if you're comfortable hearing a bit of your thinking there.

2:21:07Um, I, I said in my last vote I'm interested in specificity, and so I And I want to make— I make my voting decisions based on what I think makes the most sense and what's going to be best for Portlanders.

2:21:21And so I am also interested in this a bit.

2:21:24I am wondering, Councilor Zimmerman, if you might be interested, if you might be open to a friendly amendment that Council President and I were just whispering about over here about it saying bathrooms, playgrounds, and other small structures.

2:21:40Okay.

2:21:40Or if the Parks Bureau has a more— a better word besides small structures, insert that.

2:21:47Would you be open to that, Councilor Zimmerman, adding in playgrounds and other small structures?

2:21:53Thanks.

2:21:54So, I know, I'll just remind folks, we have a maintenance budget in the Parks Bureau outside of this 3 cents in this levy.

2:22:02And so nothing would stop them from doing those projects that you're referencing, Councilor.

2:22:09And so I appreciate the nod, I think, to get there.

2:22:14The reason I actually value including the term restroom in this one solely is because I don't think that those— the prioritization for restrooms actually exists within the thought process within the bureau structure as it currently is.

2:22:30So that was actually part of the reason why I think calling it out individually was important because the other aspects of park maintenance— excuse me, the other park maintenance funds seem to already be trying to keep up with some of the other areas.

2:22:47I'm noticing what I think is an inequity in terms of how they apply those maintenance dollars, and this is a signal to one of those areas that I think has been on the lowest end of the decision-making.

2:22:58So So it's not that I, you know, I think some of the framing here has been like, for some reason this is against playgrounds or something of that nature.

2:23:09And that's certainly not the case.

2:23:10I obviously was supportive in the regular budget and continue to be.

2:23:15I'm just talking about this in this one.

2:23:16So I wouldn't quite be there for that friendly amendment, but I do appreciate the nod.

2:23:22Okay, thank you so much.

2:23:26Thank you, Madam President.

2:23:30I just wanted to say that, um, I agree with you, Councilor Zimmerman.

2:23:36I think that, uh, bathrooms should be, um, pointed out, and I will be supporting this amendment.

2:23:46Thank you, Councilor.

2:23:47Councilor Ryan?

2:23:48Yes, thank you, Madam President.

2:23:49I did second this because I wanted to have this conversation.

2:23:53I was I was equally challenged with the last one by Councilor Kanal.

2:23:59All of us have heard from countless constituents, especially parents, who tell me their frustrations with bathrooms being closed.

2:24:06And so clearly this is an operational issue that this council must stay on top of from— for oversight reasons.

2:24:13But because I voted no on the last one, there's some similar themes on this, and that's where I'll land to stay consistent.

2:24:19Thank you.

2:24:19Thank you, Councilor.

2:24:22Is there any other discussion to the amendment?

2:24:27Okay, seeing none, Rebecca, can you please call the roll?

2:24:31Koyama Lane.

2:24:33Aye.

2:24:34Murillo.

2:24:35Aye.

2:24:37Novick.

2:24:37No.

2:24:39Green.

2:24:41Aye.

2:24:42Zimmerman.

2:24:44Aye.

2:24:46Um, no, no.

2:24:54No.

2:24:58Aye.

2:25:00No.

2:25:07No.

2:25:07No.

2:25:11The amendment fails with 5 aye and 6 nay votes.

2:25:18Colleagues, those were all of the amendments that I had noted folks said they were bringing.

2:25:25If there are any other amendments though, please feel free to put yourself in the queue.

2:25:29And in addition, because we are trying to not give our speeches with our votes now, if there is anybody who would like to If anybody would like to speak to the now amended resolution and attachments as a whole, this would be the time to get in the queue to make those comments.

2:25:48Councilor Dunphy.

2:25:49Thank you.

2:25:50Yeah, first, colleagues, thank you for this conversation.

2:25:53I think that the debate back and forth has been great to add some value and to continue to work with you all.

2:25:59Thank you to everybody who's been involved in this so far.

2:26:01I'm eager to support the renewal of the Portland Portland Parks Levy.

2:26:04And I'm really thankful to everybody who has— and all the work that's gone into the compromise proposal before us.

2:26:11You know, as I said just a little bit ago, and I've mentioned repeatedly, in my brief time on City Council, I've insisted that we treat parks as a vital public safety infrastructure, especially in East Portland, where far too many residents lack access to safe, accessible places to play, gather, and connect.

2:26:29I believe strongly in investing in these spaces, not just to maintain what we have, but to grow and transform what our parks can be.

2:26:37But let's be clear what we have heard from every part of our community.

2:26:41This cannot just be business as usual.

2:26:44We're asking Portlanders to dig deeper into their pockets.

2:26:47If we are asking Portlanders to dig deeper into their pockets, especially in my community in District 1, we must demand more in return.

2:26:55Holding ourselves and parks and recreation to the highest standard of fiscal stewardship, accountability, equity, and imagination.

2:27:03Our parks should be more than vibrant or more than beautiful natural spaces.

2:27:06They should be alive and vibrant with youth programming and cultural celebrations and music and food and community events that bring neighbors together and activates these public spaces year round.

2:27:17And where the bureau can't do that on their own.

2:27:20Then we must be bold enough to pursue partnerships with community organizations that can, like the Sellwood Community House and others that have shown us what is possible if— when our public assets are community-powered.

2:27:31So I support this levy, and I'm— let's also use this moment as a call to action, a challenge to ourselves and to the Bureau to raise the bar, to build a Portland where our parks reflect the vibrant, diverse, thriving communities that they are meant Thank you.

2:27:48Thank you, Councilor.

2:27:49Councilor Kanal.

2:27:52Thank you.

2:27:52I actually have a couple questions for the park's leadership.

2:27:56I separated this out so I can propose my amendment, and it's related to some specific testimony that we had here.

2:28:07Both Mr. Ohendoff and Mr. Weinstein referenced an audit that they said had not been released publicly.

2:28:13Could you speak to that?

2:28:16Yeah, I don't quite know what that is.

2:28:18I know there are a couple of audits underway with the city's Audit Services Division, none ready for release.

2:28:25I think one is maybe scheduled for fall and one's a little earlier in the sequence, but those are released publicly and contemporaneously by the auditor.

2:28:34Right.

2:28:34And then there's— when you say in the fall, before the election?

2:28:40Up to the auditor.

2:28:41I kind of think so, but I don't know.

2:28:43Okay.

2:28:44And then last year there was a conversation when I was on the Parks Board about the— not by the auditor, but an independent look into the levy, specifically the current levy, and that that had, as far as I'm aware, been publicly released.

2:28:59I've seen it.

2:29:00Yes.

2:29:00And I was on it as a volunteer, so I assume if I could see it, anyone can see it.

2:29:04Correct.

2:29:04Yeah, I'm seeing nods over there for the record.

2:29:07So that's helpful to know.

2:29:08And I might just, for the record, it was a clean audit.

2:29:10Like it was a very positive audit.

2:29:13Thanks.

2:29:15Second, is there any current strategic planning process underway at Parks or for that matter in the Public Works service area?

2:29:27Or in the city?

2:29:28Yes, in the Parks Bureau.

2:29:30I might ask Sarah to come up.

2:29:32Briefly, I think the Healthy Parks, Healthy Portland framework is really the strategic conversation about directional priorities for the Bureau, and within that, how to get there.

2:29:45Could you give us 30 seconds on that?

2:29:48Thank you.

2:29:48Certainly.

2:29:49Thank you so much.