City Council · morning

4:55Good morning.

4:56Welcome to the Wednesday, March 4th meeting of the Portland City Council.

5:04Can we—.

5:04Keelan, can you please call the roll?

5:06Councilor Good morning.

5:07Avalos?

5:09Present.

5:10Smith?

5:11Here.

5:12Kanal?

5:13Here.

5:14Pirtle-Guiney?

5:15Here.

5:16Ryan?

5:17Here.

5:19Koyama Lane?

5:20Here.

5:21Yunfi?

5:23Here.

5:26And can we please read the rules of decorum?

5:33Welcome to the Portland City Council.

5:35To testify before council in person or virtually, you must sign up in advance on the council agenda at www.portland.gov/council/agenda.

5:44Information on engaging with council can be found on, on the council's webpage.

5:49Individuals may testify for 3 minutes unless the presiding officer states otherwise.

5:54Your microphone will be muted when your time is over.

5:57The presiding officer preserves order.

5:59Disruptive 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.

6:08If you cause a disruption, a warning will be given.

6:10Further disruption will result in ejection from the meeting.

6:13Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass.

6:18Additionally, council may take a short recess and reconvene virtually.

6:21Your testimony should address the matters being considered.

6:24When testifying, state your name for the record.

6:27Your address is not necessary.

6:28If you are a lobbyist, identify the organization you represent.

6:32Virtual testifiers should unmute themselves when Council Clerk calls your name.

6:36Thank you.

6:38Thank you very much, colleagues.

6:40At the top of our agenda here, we, uh, I will be continuing to hold time to hear updates about the federal response that we are, uh, facing and, uh, any other emergency matters.

6:51Um, and we'll continue to try this at the beginning of council meetings.

6:53But City Administrator, um, we— would you prefer to give us an update on the federal situation as part of your city administrator report a little bit later on the agenda?

7:00Okay, great.

7:02We will do that.

7:02But before we move on, I want to give council and the public an update on Resolution 37734, our oversight hearing, um, on the information sharing around Portland Housing Bureau funds in the fall 2025 TAO.

7:15Um, that resolution requires that the council president set a date for the initial oversight hearing by March 6th.

7:21Today is March 4th.

7:23Pursuant to that responsibility, the initial oversight hearing per Resolution 37—.

7:29734.

7:29734 will be at the Committee of the Whole on April 23rd, 2026.

7:33That meeting will run from 9:30 until 12:30 PM.

7:37Thank you for— thank you, Committee Chair Kanal, for working with the sponsors of this legislation to make that time work.

7:45Colleagues, our next item is agenda approval.

7:47There has been a— first, I will ask to see if my colleagues have any requests for amendments or changes.

7:54I will note that item 8 has been pulled from the consent agenda and will be heard.

7:57Are there any other requests?

7:59I had a request to swap items 11 and 12 on our agenda.

8:05There's a posted amendment to item 11, and which I had scheduled as a block of 3 quick second readings.

8:14But because of that, I'd like to be able to get staff from item 12 out of here sooner since that is a second reading.

8:20So I'd like to move item 12 before item 11.

8:23If there's any objection, please let me know.

8:25Second.

8:27Otherwise, do I have unanimous consent to approve the agenda?

8:31The agenda is approved.

8:35Thank you.

8:36Can we please call public communications?

8:39First up, we have— excuse me— John Hollister.

8:47Good morning.

8:52And, uh, introduce yourself for the record.

8:57Uh, you have 3 minutes.

9:00My name is John Hollister and I live in District 4.

9:03Um, I'd like some help on how to put together a public records search of Commissioner Lane's cell phone on 1/28 from 9:30 AM on.

9:17She received a text with a picture of my cell phone and I promised the person who told me about it and actually sent it to her that I wouldn't use his name.

9:31I'd also like to request video footage from 1:28, 9:30 on to document the behavior that Commissioner Lane gave to me during my testimony.

9:46Commissioner Lane, I actually would like to thank you although you didn't mean to, you actually helped me get in touch with some of my undiscovered childhood issues.

9:58So, so thank you very much for that.

10:02Um, um, Raymond Lee, if you could, if you could pass the word on to Mayor Wilson that, um, I thank him so much for everything he's doing, and he is completely redefining patience and tolerance regarding the disrespectful behavior that he receives from several council members.

10:22I am so happy that you are here, that we have a professional running this.

10:27And I think that you're going to find a lot of bureaus that have extra money because for so many years they have been run by city commissioners that their previous expenses— experience was things like running a bookstore.

10:48Someone who's run a bookstore is not qualified to run PBOT.

10:53And so the— so I believe these bureaus have been able to just run over and say whatever they want in very complicated terms beyond the ability for non-professionals to do this.

11:06With Portland being the last major metropolitan area in the country to have a city manager form of governance, thank you for being there.

11:17I have heard great things about you.

11:19Thank you.

11:19And continue your great work.

11:24I also wanted to say really quickly, I'm set to give testimony on the storefront project, but I have to leave.

11:32My wife needs the car.

11:35But we all want to live in a place where Portland has a vibrant storefront.

11:44And that's the fact why many of us moved downtown, was to have that vibrant storefront.

11:49So I really am in favor of the storefront project.

11:55And my last comment, and I'll talk about it more next month when I come back, the Blazers are leaving Portland and it's a result of the policies that you've put in place.

12:06They are leaving.

12:06Thank you for being here today.

12:08Okay, thank you very much.

12:13Next up we have Guy Frankenstein.

12:20Morning.

12:21Morning.

12:22Uh, again, my name is Guy Frankenstein.

12:27That is my real name.

12:29That is not a joke.

12:31Um, this morning I wanted to talk about something from last week's meeting that bothered me very greatly, um, but on my way here I changed my mind.

12:44I wrote down some thoughts really quickly that I'd like to share.

12:49Last night I came across a social media post by a councilor here that unintentionally was being discussed positively in some very specific local right-wing spaces.

13:07And I understand that was unintentional, but you know, that's how these words were perceived.

13:15So I tried to think of an opinion that I have or something that I would say that could be construed positively by a group of abject degenerates.

13:29And that made me realize that I share affiliation with some of the same groups as you.

13:36Right.

13:37I have political memberships to some of the same organizations as you, but we are all not fighting for the same things.

13:49We're just not.

13:50I'm coming here and screaming into a void.

13:53A lot of people are coming here and screaming into a void.

13:57History has done the actuarial work of the paths that we are currently on.

14:05That work is done.

14:07We know where these paths lead.

14:12I just want to say that when we get to where we're going, I hope that you're comfortable with the decisions you've made.

14:20I'm comfortable with mine.

14:21Thank you.

14:23Thank you for being here.

14:27Next up, we have Mitchell Sheridan.

14:33Good morning.

14:35Morning.

14:36Uh, my name is Mitchell Sheridan.

14:38Um, hello, council members and city administrator.

14:41Um, I want to begin by thanking you for your service to our city.

14:44I know the work you are doing is not easy, and I appreciate the time and energy and responsibility that comes with representing our community.

14:53Um, I am a Portland resident and a nursing student at OHSU, and I'm here this morning to advocate for my neighbors who are struggling to access healthcare.

15:00This term, my nursing program is focused on population health, and I was fortunate to be placed in the clinical rotation with Portland Fire and Rescue's Community Health and Assess and Treat program known as CHAT.

15:12As many of you know, CHAT was created in 2021 in response to a clear and growing problem.

15:17911 Is increasingly being used for preventable healthcare needs, and hospital emergency departments have become the catcher's mitt for everything from opioid overdoses, residents seeking a hot meal, and folks experiencing and chronic illness flareups who just need basic healthcare.

15:33Teams of highly trained firefighters are being called on lift assists and overdoses, and the reality is that none of these systems were designed to function in this way, and using them as such is a massive waste of taxpayer dollars and not helping solve the issue.

15:48This is where I've seen CHAT come in and make a huge difference.

15:51I've watched firsthand their 2-person response teams respond to medical calls and support clients in the field without the use of expensive transport or diverting them to our overcrowded emergency departments.

16:04Then I've watched them identify upstream barriers that could prevent these clients from dealing with these same situations in the future.

16:11Their teams are trained to connect people with primary care, behavioral health services, housing, insurance enrollment, or whatever is standing in their way.

16:21I personally have never been in a position where I've hit so many roadblocks to accessing healthcare that I felt like emergency services were my only option.

16:30But many Portlanders are in exactly that position right now, not because of their own failures, but because of the injustices that are woven into the fabric of this country.

16:40Since 2021, CHAT has generated well over $10 million now in estimated healthcare savings to our system.

16:47It has paid for itself many times over while improving health outcomes, preserving fire and ambulance availability for true emergencies, and reducing strain on our hospitals.

16:57My request this morning is simple.

16:59Please reinstate CHAT's funding in your next budget cycle without cuts and move that funding from temporary to permanent.

17:08This program must continue the work it is doing if you believe in achieving the goals you have all outlined for this city.

17:14We all know that this program has the potential to do even more with stable and sustained investment.

17:20I recognize that all of you have many difficult budget decisions ahead of you.

17:25Luckily though, the data here is really clear.

17:28CHAT improves health outcomes by holding up Portlanders who are falling through the cracks in this system.

17:33They do all this while saving the system money and using public resources wisely.

17:37Thank you for your time and for your commitment to the health and wellbeing of Portlanders.

17:42Thank you very much for being here.

17:44Next up, we have Caroline Skinner.

17:47She's joining us online.

17:50Hello, thank you for having me.

17:53My name is Caroline Skinner.

17:55I live in District 2, and I'm here to comment on, uh, Home Forward.

18:04I want to thank Willamette Week writer Sophie Peel for laying out the situation so clearly.

18:11And by the way, before I proceed, I want to say what he said— I'm seconding what he just said.

18:16Thank you.

18:19The article, the coverage of Home Forward is just so revealing.

18:26I hope every city councilor reads it and is thoroughly familiar with the points that it raises.

18:32The most recent coverage: Home Forward's real estate portfolio is fast approaching financial distress.

18:40I was a renter for 40 years.

18:41I know what it's like to be a renter.

18:41Councilwoman?

18:42I didn't buy my house until I was 58 years old.

18:46I managed a 32-unit apartment building for more than 20 years.

18:50I also used to own a small rental house out by the airport, so I have some insight into the situation.

18:59When I managed the apartments, it took typically 1 to 2 weeks to turn over a unit, nearing an effective vacancy rate of zero.

19:07According to this article by Sophie Peel of Willamette Week, It took an average of 185 days for Home Forward to fill an empty unit in 2025, despite long waitlists across its properties.

19:24So I'm coming to you with a simple 5-point plan of suggestions for possibly ways to improve the situation where Portlanders in urgent need of housing are not being well served while executive pay rises to an extent that should be a gross embarrassment, frankly, to all.

19:45One, decrease rents to $200 below market rate.

19:50Use unspent housing dollars to make up the difference.

19:55The Willamette Week coverage talked about people that had such a bad experience with Home Forward that they just went out and had got a rental on the, um, the They said that the intake process was so convoluted and difficult, there were so many hurdles to becoming a tenant at Home Forward, and the price difference was so minimal that they just went out and rented, uh, on public— private housing rather than going through Home Forward.

20:26Decrease vacancy rates.

20:28Prioritize empty unit readiness.

20:313, Speed up application process, uh, new tenant intake, keep waitlist updated.

20:374, Improve rent collection, do more to connect tenants with rental assistance programs.

20:42And 5, keep executive pay frozen or cut to $150,000 per year.

20:49Anything above that must be earned using performance-based metrics.

20:53Willamette Week says that Phil Kiesling, former Secretary of State, I urge an audit.

21:00I think I'm out of time here.

21:02It's hard to know what that chime means, but I'm urging all of you to don't make a blame game of old, old city council, new city council.

21:11Thank you very much.

21:15Thank you.

21:15Next up we have James Yarger.

21:21Good morning, Council.

21:24Good morning, Councilman Kanal.

21:27Thank you again for your open house or a meeting that I got to meet you at at Sabin.

21:34My name's James Yarger.

21:36I live in District 2.

21:38Coming to you today with concerns that we have about development on our street at 1926 Northeast Liberty Street.

21:45The lot was purchased off market by a developer who intends to develop a cottage cluster on the site.

21:53Using PP&D's code under Title 33 concerning cottage cluster development.

22:00The Woodlawn Neighborhood Association last night signed off with us to delay the permit of demolition of the existing 1927-built cottage that's on the property.

22:14The reason we're doing this is developer of this lot has done 3 other cottage clusters in our neighborhood.

22:24None of them seem to be appearing to meet what the code requirements show for cottage clusters in so much as providing green livable space that's shared by the units and also providing ADA visibility.

22:40I've contacted Planning and Development to ask if waivers were given for the other Developments in our neighborhood, and I haven't heard anything back from them.

22:52We're not against development.

22:54In fact, we're for the idea of development.

22:56What we really want is to protect the 125-foot Doug fir tree that's on the property.

23:03I've looked after this property for the last 15 years for the current owners.

23:08They're currently outta state taking care of elderly parents who are the tree's pretty important to me because it provides livable— makes a neighborhood livable.

23:26The thing that's most important, like I said, is for us is to try and make sure that development of these cottage clusters actually does provide green space for residents.

23:38Councilor Smith.

23:38For people and make the space livable for everyone who is currently living there and who will be living there.

23:49Some of the units that have been put into our neighborhood, as I found out last night in our neighborhood meeting, were so poorly constructed that they had to have renovations made to them in order for people to get loans to purchase those homes.

24:05Okay.

24:06So again, what we're trying to do is to make sure that the development of cottage clusters is adhered to by the building code.

24:19Another thing that's happened too is a lot of these units are purchased off market by— from elderly couples who've allowed their homes to fall into a state of disrepair.

24:32And we don't really feel that the— that my neighbors whose properties have been bought up were given fair market value for the sale of their house.

24:42Thank you for your time.

24:43Thank you so much for being here.

24:44Yeah, thank you.

24:47That completes communications.

24:49Thank you very much.

24:50Thank you for everybody who came today.

24:52Colleagues, next on our agenda is the committee referral report.

24:56I referred 3 items to the Climate and Resilience and Land Use Committee.

25:01Those are available online at portland.gov/auditor/council-clerk/committee-referral-list.

25:10Our next item is the City Administrator's Report.

25:14City Administrator Lee, oh, please call item number 5 first.

25:18Thank you.

25:18March 2026 City Administrator Report.

25:23Good morning, councilors, and Council President and Vice President.

25:27Rather than walk through every update in the written report, I want to frame this month's report around 3 themes: operational stability, enterprise modernization, and a disciplined fiscal stewardship.

25:43Across all service areas, the organization continues to move from reaction to structure.

25:50From fragmentation to alignment.

25:53Under operational stability and public safety, recruitment continues with new firefighters hirings and ongoing police and emergency communications onboarding.

26:04Portland Street Response is now 5 years into operation and continues to mature as a core component of our first responder system.

26:13In public works, winter readiness protocols were activated and transportation funding engagement is underway in every district to gather community input on long-term funding strategies.

26:27In community and economic development, public engagement continues on housing bonus alignment to support affordability and family-size unit production.

26:38Overall, the organization is operating with continuity and coordinated execution.

26:44Thank you.

26:45Enterprise modernization.

26:47We engaged with a vendor to develop our roadmap for transitioning from SAP to a cloud-based enterprise resource planning system.

26:57This will be a multi-year enterprise transformation focused on systems alignment, efficiency, and change management.

27:06Human resources has also launched 2 classification and compensation studies affecting roughly 2,100 employees.

27:14Thank you.

27:15This work supports workforce equity, retention, and structural clarity across the organization.

27:23At the same time, Public Works continues implementation of smart meter technology and a new customer engagement portal to modernize water service and customer access tools.

27:36Under fiscal stewardship, the city recently secured approximately $2.7 million in federal funding for housing, Safety and infrastructure priorities.

27:46Citywide grant management remains strong with roughly $567 million in active grant funding being managed across the enterprise and nearly $57 million in pending funding requests.

27:59Year-to-date closed claims total around 180 with approximately $186,000 in settlements paid and roughly $387,000 in total incurred costs.

28:09Included legal expenses.

28:11Claims above $50,000 continue to return to council for approval.

28:17We also anticipate receiving $400,000 from the Visa and MasterCard interchange settlement.

28:23My intent is to apply those one-time funds towards payment system security and PCI compliance upgrades.

28:30Finally, FY25-26 budget note tracker reflects the majority of items are either complete or on track.

28:39But if there are additional things that council are seeing not hitting on the budget note, please feel free to reach out to me at any time so I can bring that to the top of my radar.

28:50As we look through strategic investments, the city continues advancing discussions around the Moda Center renovation framework and the social housing feasibility study.

29:01Both represent long-term strategic investments in Portland's economic vitality.

29:06Thank you.

29:09Under the federal response, the administrative rule is in effect regarding deployment of gas munitions.

29:16Staff is still working on the permanent rule and will follow up with council on the timeframe of that permanent rule to be in effect.

29:24We did get notice an appeal has been filed with the hearing officer for the notice of land use violation at the ICE facility.

29:31This is still pending.

29:32Thank you.

29:32Brand new news.

29:34The hearing has not been scheduled yet.

29:37As we have more information, we'll be following up with council with that schedule.

29:42And closing, in summary, the organization is steady, moving forward with stability.

29:47Major modernization efforts are underway.

29:50Fiscal oversight mechanisms are functioning and new ones are being developed.

29:55And enterprise alignment across service areas continues to strengthen.

29:59We remain focused on operational clarity, accountability, and forward motion, and I welcome any questions that council may have at this time.

30:09Thank you, City Administrator Lee.

30:10Colleagues, is there any questions or follow-up for City Administrator?

30:13Councilor Kanal.

30:16Thank you, Administrator Lee.

30:17Thank you, Council President.

30:18Um, there's a lot of good news in here.

30:20I'll just, without getting into the details, the info on chat, on PHP for Claravista, the, uh, hiring of the Immigrant Affairs lead, uh, happy birthday to PSR turning 5.

30:29All the new folks in public safety.

30:31I also wanted to quickly shout out the work that OGR, Office of Government Relations, has been doing as well.

30:38I wanted to ask a couple questions here.

30:40I'll start with the budget notes since you mentioned it.

30:43One, I need to make this for the public.

30:47There was a budget note to look at the director and deputy director classifications, and it says in the report that that it's based on this, that there is a class comp study going on for the entire supervisory management level employees of the city.

31:07That's not what was asked for in my note, and it expanded it in a way that actually has both delayed it and I think given a false sense to the employees out there of what exactly was being asked for.

31:18I'm going to give you the exact number in a second here, but it's Canal 08.

31:24Councilor And so in the description for it, it talks about doing a class comp study that there was no request for a class comp study at all.

31:33The idea was to look at and see, do 30-person bureaus, 20-person bureaus need deputy directors at all?

31:40And if so, whether they should be 1s, 2s, et cetera.

31:44Do bureaus that are that small need a Director 3 instead of a Director 1?

31:49And as this is related to the entirety of the conversation around—.

31:53Yes.

31:55You know, the, the whether or not our org chart is a pyramid or a pillar and whether or not our layoffs last year were really targeting the top as proportionate to the rank-and-file employees who do a lot of the work of the city.

32:10So that was the purpose behind it.

32:12And I just wanted to take a chance to clarify that for the folks who might be wondering, you know, why did you get this?

32:19I know a lot of us have received emails about with the surveys around this budget, sorry, around this class comp study.

32:25Thank you.

32:26Which has been portrayed as related to the budget note, but is separate.

32:29So I just wanted to take the chance to clarify that.

32:34I'll do 3 things now and then I can get back in the queue if others want to go.

32:37But I did want to ask, it's noted in here that the body camera footage from the shooting of Eric Scherer was released 2 weeks after, which is policy.

32:48And I wanted to just note that after the release of the body-worn camera footage for the death of Damon Lamar Johnson last June.

32:56Our office had several conversations with DCA Causie, with the Portland Police Bureau, and the mayor's office around the process of that release and several improvements that we wanted to see in terms of narration, editing, things like that.

33:09And also ensuring that council continued to have the opportunity to review the footage, which was a good process that was put in place for that particular For that particular release, talking again about Damon Lamar Johnson, we actually feel that that has gone backwards in my team around, you know, we didn't have that advanced conversation this time and the narration and editing remained.

33:35I think it's good to just release the footage and let the public make their own justification.

33:42I'm mentioning this now because fortunately police shootings are actually a rare event in Portland.

33:47But for the— because of that, I think it's easier to implement a standard practice for how council's notified and how the release is actually structured.

33:57And I wanted to specifically mention the introduction narration is designed to frame the conversation as opposed to just letting people see what happened, which is, I think, the purpose of body-worn camera footage and its release.

34:09Thank you.

34:11And then the third question I had, and this one I think I would like to understand.

34:17There was a Portland Mercury article on February 27th about a February 24th employee town hall in which the quote from you, Mr.

34:27Administrator, was, I will tell everyone we are committed to that facility staying open, as it relates to the ICE facility on McAdam.

34:35And I just wanted to give you the opportunity to clarify When you say we, who's we?

34:42City leadership.

34:43And that's on the administrative side.

34:45Okay.

34:47I think, yeah, it might be helpful in the future to just be a little clearer because I think people may have misunderstood that to include the folks on the City Council who have not made a commitment either way as an entity.

35:00And I certainly individually have not.

35:02Yeah.

35:02And that's a quasi-judicial matter.

35:04As well too.

35:05So I wouldn't have been making any comments as it relates to council.

35:09And when I was making that comment, that was related to the access, as we have thousands of citizens within our community that are still trying to seek through citizenship that are required to still go to that facility to actually report.

35:27From that standpoint, that's what I was making comments to.

35:30Thanks.

35:30Yeah, I just, I wanted to make sure people understood, you know, who we're talking about here.

35:35Thanks.

35:35And then I'll have a couple other things, but I don't know if anyone else is in the queue, so I'll wait.

35:39Thanks, Council President.

35:41Councilor Morillo.

35:44I didn't really have a comment, or I didn't have a question.

35:48I had more of a comment on one of my budget amendments.

35:50So if you want to continue, Councilor Knoll, that's fine, if that makes sense for flow.

35:56Sure.

35:57Thanks.

35:58The other piece relates to some of the appendices.

36:03So first I wanted to say that the, the, on the budget note tracker, the long-term vacancy fee notes were both due back on Saturday.

36:19I want to shout out to Jonas Beery for the package delivery fee information and everybody else who worked on that.

36:24That was on time.

36:25I appreciate it immensely.

36:26I think PBOT was I was pretty heavily involved in that one too.

36:29I just wanted to note for the record that there has been conversation.

36:32I am aware why the long-term vacancy fee ones have not come back yet.

36:36I'm looking forward to seeing that when they do come, but I also don't have the exact date yet for when that's expected back.

36:46So just wanted to flag for those who've been asking my office about it.

36:50The second piece was that there is a, An overtime-related note, and it's not actually in this.

36:58It's related to PPB overtime.

37:00I put out a press release on it showing that the overtime prioritization note was not followed by PPB.

37:07So there was a reporting so that the technical definition was report back and show it, and the reports back were done but showed that the actual guidance was not followed on that.

37:17I just wanted to highlight that as well.

37:19And then 2 requests for more information, 'cause I think this report has gotten better over time, both during previous administrator and your tenure.

37:29So 2 pieces of information I'd like to know.

37:31One is about contracts.

37:34We have a tracker showing new contracts, but I'd love to know the contracts that are continuing beyond the fiscal year.

37:42And if you wanted to narrow it down, you could say the, you know, above $500,000 or something like that.

37:47Mm-hmm.

37:47There were a lot of contracts that were either entered into or extended in the last few months of 2024 by the outgoing council that I'd love to get more information on that are not documented in a single place.

37:59There is a searchable form, but you have to know what you're searching for in order to find it.

38:04And even for council, we don't have that unless it's listed out.

38:07Gotcha.

38:08So I think the same way you've done it with IGAs, which is really helpful, just applying that to contracts too.

38:14And then the last question I had was if in closed claims data, the Appendix If we could get a little bit more information about the claimants and the ultimate— I think the word would be disposition.

38:26So whether there was litigation, those sorts of information, the case number, just to have a better understanding for the public and as well as for council as to what we're potentially getting sued over or not.

38:38And I think as we go forward, we've seen that the appendices have become the longest part of this by far, and I think that's good.

38:43Thank you.

38:44'Cause there's a lot of information here and I think you do a good job of summarizing it in the early stages.

38:49But I really do appreciate this.

38:50There's a lot of good news in here and thanks for the time.

38:52Thank you, Council President.

38:53Thank you, Councilor Kanal.

38:54Back to Councilor Morillo.

38:56Thank you so much.

38:57Thank you, City Administrator.

38:58I appreciate this report.

38:59It was really helpful to me and I appreciate Councilor Kanal talking about the police body cam footage as well.

39:06I think that's something that's deeply important to a lot of us here.

39:10My, uh, I don't really have a question for it.

39:12I just wanted to talk about my Morillo 11 budget amendment from last year.

39:17We've been working very closely with the administrative side to implement this, and I want to thank you for the updates on the council budget notes.

39:27So I want to speak a little bit about my budget note because it was titled Budget Transparency and Information Access Framework, a very wordy title but very important and descriptive.

39:37Thank you.

39:38And I wrote this budget note last year with a desire to encourage transparency and collaboration, especially between the council and the administrative side, so that we can get role clarity and information access as the legislative body when we're trying to create policies for bureaus.

39:54And with regards to budget, we need to be able to have access to information equally so that we can be good, strong legislators.

40:02So as we enter into the budget season and as the communications working group continues to find a pathway for how Council offices can and will engage with city staff.

40:11I want to reiterate the 3 guiding tenets of the framework that council has requested when they approved my budget note 11 to 1.

40:19The framework is supposed to acknowledge the placement of executive authority with the mayor and the city administrator while affirming council's right to independent access to information necessary to fulfill its legislative duties.

40:32Second, to prohibit the imposition of communication protocols So restrictive that they excessively delay, limit, or obstruct council's access to factual information, staff expertise, or documentation relevant to pending oversight, to pending legislation or budget decisions.

40:50And finally, allow council members and their staff to submit information requests directly to bureau personnel with appropriate notice to executive staff and permit bureau staff to respond without requiring real-time oversight or prior approval from executive staff.

41:03Second.

41:04So I look forward to continuing to work with the executive side on this and to the proposal that, but I wanted to provide clarity for the public who's listening on this, you know, as we're structuring this new form of government and implementing these rules and make sure that we are all being engaged as councilors and that these are the core things that I will be looking for in the implementation phase.

41:27I know that council is very anxious for clarity on this matter as our city and so I'm really grateful to everyone who's invested time in this proposal, and I look forward to working with you on implementing it.

41:37Thank you.

41:38Thank you, Councilor Morillo.

41:39Councilor Knell.

41:41I just wanted to correct something I'd said earlier.

41:43I noticed there is an email from DCA Oliveira on the long-term vacancy fees.

41:48It says that we're going to get info back by April 30th.

41:51I will say that that is a lot later than we wanted to be able to have a conversation about it in this year's budget.

41:58The reason that we picked February 28th to do it on was so that this council have the right and ability to review that information and potentially do something in line, not necessarily as part of the budget, but in parallel to it timing-wise.

42:12So I'm hoping that we can get that closer to the original deadline for at least the residential side one.

42:19Thank you.

42:19Thank you, Councilor Kanal.

42:22Councilor Koyama Lane.

42:24Thank you, Council President.

42:25I just wanted to quickly welcome Gerald Skelton, who has started his role as our new Tribal Government Relations Manager.

42:33I've had the pleasure of getting to sit down with him.

42:36I look forward to supporting his work here, engaging government-to-government relations— relation, yeah, relations— and the relationships with our tribal nations are really essential to our work ahead as a So welcome, Gerald.

42:53Thank you, Councilor Koyama Lane.

42:56Seeing no one else in the queue concludes our city administrator report.

43:00Thank you very much, CA Lee.

43:04Colleagues, we now move to the consent agenda.

43:07Keelan, I don't know what you have to call for the consent agenda.

43:10I don't remember.

43:11Um, we had one item pulled which you announced earlier, and we'll need to do a roll call vote Okay, colleagues, are there any objections to approving the remaining 3 items on the consent agenda?

43:28Right, okay, we'll have to do a roll call.

43:29Just looking.

43:30Okay, cool, great.

43:31Please call the roll.

43:32Okay, thank you.

43:33Avalos?

43:34Aye.

43:35Smith?

43:36Aye.

43:37Kanal?

43:37Aye.

43:38Pirtle-Guiney?

43:38Aye.

43:39Aye.

43:39Koyama Lane?

43:44Aye.

43:45Aye.

43:46Aye.

43:49Aye.

43:52The consent agenda is approved with 12 aye votes.

43:55Thank you very much.

43:56Can we please call item number 10?

44:01Amend the Portland Clean Energy Community Benefit Fund Climate Investment Plan, document number 2026-01.

44:09Thank you, colleagues.

44:11This is the second reading of a non-emergency ordinance.

44:14Is there discussion?

44:15I see Councilor Green.

44:18Thank you, Mr. President.

44:19I'm going to move to divide the question on this amendment, which I think is not debatable.

44:26But what I'd like to do in the division of the question is divide it into 2 parts.

44:32The first would sort of take a vote on all the approved amendments to the underlying.

44:37So everything that we approved last time we talked about this with their conforming attachments, with the exception of amendments related to Strategic Program 14, Access to Fair and Flexible Capital.

44:49Those are— that specific amendment is in page 9 through 11 of the Exhibit A.

44:54So I want to take a vote on everything except for that.

44:58And then part 2 would be to vote on that.

45:00So moved.

45:00Second.

45:02Looking to our clerk and city attorney.

45:06Yeah, so this item right now is up for a vote.

45:09There is no motion on the table, so there is nothing to divide.

45:15Okay.

45:16Okay.

45:16Okay.

45:17Apologies, Councilor.

45:18No problem.

45:21Colleagues, is there further discussion?

45:23Would you like to discuss what your concern was specifically?

45:27Yeah, thanks for that opportunity.

45:29Let me turn the mic on.

45:30Thanks for that opportunity.

45:33Strategic Program 14, Access to Fair and Flexible Capital, when we went through the very thorough CIP process, was designed to provide access to liquidity and loan capital for folks who traditionally don't have access to it.

45:50That's the spirit of it.

45:51It's very much in line with the kind of sort of banking the unbanked approach to development finance of the last It has been amended in this amendment process to sort of validate this idea that we can use that for office-to-residential conversions, among other things, which I don't think is in line with that.

46:14I think it's very much an ad hoc justification for trying to pay for things that seem expedient right now.

46:22I think office-to-residential conversions sound nice in theory, but they're one of the most expensive ways to build housing.

46:30You will not find a more costly way to develop housing than office-to-residential conversions.

46:34And so I think if our climate nexus and objective is to say we need to build a lot more housing in the city of Portland in transit-rich areas, you're much better off raising those old buildings to the ground, scraping the surface parking lots, and building superblocks and doing something like that.

46:51That's what we should be doing instead of trying to do a conversion project.

46:52Thank you.

46:54A couple, 2, 3 retrofits.

46:58So I don't support it.

47:00I should have brought this motion to divide, I suppose.

47:04Well, it's difficult because we didn't vote on the underlying last time, so it's a little confusing.

47:10So I guess maybe a standalone amendment would have been more appropriate.

47:12I didn't do that, so I guess that opportunity has passed.

47:15But I have to raise that because we are going to be faced with increasingly more ad hoc Strained justifications for the climate nexus on trying to reallocate PCF dollars as other expedient opportunities present themselves.

47:30So that's why I wanted to do it.

47:32Can't do what I want to do today.

47:34So for that reason, I will be a no.

47:36Okay.

47:38Thank you, Councilor Green.

47:40Councilor Novick.

47:42I just wanted to say that I appreciate Councilor Green's concerns and want to apologize to this body for not focusing more on this issue when we had the amendment Thank you, Councilor Novick.

47:57Colleagues, anybody else in the queue?

48:01Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

48:02Thank you, Council President.

48:03I will be supportive today, but the debate that we had at the last meeting was around the movement of funds away from a transportation bucket to a housing bucket, and I just want to take this opportunity to Councilor Smith.

48:16I just wanted to say clearly to our PCF committee that I hope that they heard the interest from council last week in making sure that we make more progress on decarbonization of our transportation sector, and that that is, I hope, a focus of their continued work so that while we are moving money away from that bucket today, that is not a loss of of traction, not a loss of progress in decarbonizing our transportation sector.

48:49Thank you, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

48:51Councilor Knoll.

48:52Thank you.

48:53I, I have a question, I think, for the people that seem to be addressing the question over there, so I will wait, about why we can't divide it.

49:01So I'll wait.

49:03Okay.

49:03Oh, thank you.

49:05Good.

49:07My question was why it's not possible.

49:10This, this is a motion that could stand— there's 2 parts that could stand separately.

49:15Um, the, the motion is the, the ordinance as a whole.

49:18We've divided ordinances before, so I'm curious why that couldn't be divided and have 2 separate pieces voted on.

49:24It's in front of council.

49:26Robert Taylor, City Attorney.

49:27It's, uh, before council now on final passage on second reading.

49:32It would be possible.

49:34You can't divide that.

49:35You can— if there's a separate amendment that wants to be offered now, that could happen.

49:42If that amendment's adopted, then that could, uh, council could do that, and then would have to go to second reading next week.

49:50So it is possible to change this right now.

49:54Thanks.

49:57Thank you, Councilor Knoll.

49:58Councilor Green.

50:01Okay, because I like everything else about the CIP and I do want to vote on those things, I am going to offer an amendment.

50:07And apologies, colleagues, that I have to do this verbally because I was prepared to just divide the question.

50:10I wasn't prepared to introduce something.

50:12So my— I would move that we move Green 1 to remove all of the red lines in Exhibit A for the CIP amendment.

50:24Second.

50:26Such that it just removes that part of this amendment process.

50:32So we would not be amending SP 14.

50:35So the amendment itself would be to not amend SP 14 in the underlying amendment, which is a hell of a mouthful, but that's what I want to do.

50:42Okay.

50:43Councilor Green has introduced an amendment, has moved amendment.

50:46Is there a second?

50:49Can we see the language of the amendment?

50:51I think also it was—.

50:52Yeah, if you pull up— if you go in the item under, um, today's agenda, item 9, Exhibit A, it's page 9 through 11.

51:12So my amendment would just remove those pages.

51:17From this document, or rather just convert them to the original pre-amended language.

51:25But my thinking is, since this is an amendment to an existing thing, if you just take these out, then you're not amending that, so the underlying stays.

51:33Does that make sense, colleagues?

51:41Yeah, we will move to some questions about this.

51:44Second.

51:45And there has not been a second at this moment.

51:48Councilor Novick— well, actually, I'm sorry, I'm lost to track the queue.

51:55Councilor Kanal.

51:56You're not in the queue.

51:57Councilor Novick.

52:00Yeah, I just want to get a couple of things clear.

52:04If we adopt this amendment, does that mean that we have to push this final vote onto next week?

52:09Yes.

52:09Is that right?

52:10I'm interested if there's— I know that there was some time sensitivity to some of the technical amendments here, and I just wanted to know if there's any BPS or PCF staff here that can tell us if this would really upset the apple cart if we lost another week.

52:33Welcome up, friends.

52:34For the record, Sam Brosso, program manager for the Portland Clean Energy Community Benefits Fund.

52:38I'm gonna turn over to my colleague James Valdez with the team as he's been closely involved with some of the more time-sensitive items to chime in.

52:46Yeah, thank you, councilors.

52:48James Valdez and PCF strategic pro— I'm sorry, strategic partnerships and policy manager.

52:55To address your question, Councilor Novick, there are some pieces related to strategic program 7 Which is the Transportation Wallet and Biketown for All program, including some investments to be able to improve the fleet of the Biketown, the rolling stock or the bikes that are out there.

53:14And so there is some time sensitivity to that.

53:17I think an extra week probably would, you know, would still be possible.

53:22But yeah, there is some time sensitivity to make those improvements in order to get the equipment in a timely manner.

53:29Thank you.

53:30But a week doesn't give you too much heartburn?

53:34I would say it's not a material amount of difference there.

53:38Okay, thank you.

53:40Thank you, Councilor Novick.

53:41Councilor Murillo.

53:44So you guys might wanna just stay up here 'cause I suspect we're gonna have a lot more questions, sorry.

53:51So to clarify, if we remove SP 14, What happens to the dollars that are allocated there?

54:00Does that go into like a limbo and then it has to be debated?

54:02Because we're changing committees up soon as well.

54:08So right now we're working, we do have a market study we're working on with an external contractor on some of the program we anticipate launching there.

54:18We're probably going to go back and evaluate some of that scope.

54:21As in, and see to what extent we can, to what extent we can understand how we can pivot that towards the original CIP language.

54:33So some of the work will continue as it was in that that was like, I think this has been the challenge there.

54:41And I just want to maybe restate that program always had a broad amount of flexibility within it.

54:47And so some of the program would continue, but obviously as the red line would, as we'd revert back to the original, we'd have to go back and scope out and scope out what are the other programming we would wanna run out of that.

54:57So it would bring us back to the drawing table on some of the programming, certainly.

55:01Okay.

55:04And so if we push this back another week, similar to Councilor Novick's question, I just wanna be very clear 'cause there were some housing projects that we were told are dependent on some of these funds and on these timelines.

55:17I don't believe so, in part because we would, we would still have to collaborate with our colleagues at Portland Housing Bureau to develop the NOFAs for that Strategic Program 1 solicitation.

55:32So no, our expectation is to turn around, work with our colleagues so that we can set up the solicitations for those other resources.

55:39Okay, thank you for that clarification.

55:41I think with those clarifications, we can move on to the next I item on the agenda.

55:42Feel comfortable supporting Councilor Green's amendment.

55:45Appreciate that.

55:46Thank you, Councilor Murillo.

55:47Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

55:48Point of order, Council President.

55:49So is that a second?

55:50Don't we need a second to have this discussion?

55:55We do need—.

55:55Second.

55:56There we go.

55:56All right, that's all we needed.

55:58Thanks.

55:58Thank you, Councilor Ryan.

55:59Good catch.

56:00Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

56:01Thank you, Council President, and thank you, Councilor Ryan.

56:03I was going to ask that as well.

56:06My questions are Similar to some of the questions from Councilor Morillo.

56:12So it sounds like the redlining in Strategic Priority 14 is an addition and not a subtraction of anything currently in SP 14.

56:22Is that accurate?

56:26It is, it is a clarification and allowance.

56:30So it would be an expansion.

56:31I think that'd be fair to say it would be an expansion and a clarification.

56:35Let me ask this a little differently.

56:40What we have posted in our exhibit only shows red being added to SP 14.

56:47It does not show any redactions.

56:50Are we removing the language currently in SP 14?

56:55As the amendment before you all today would remove it at this time, yes.

57:00Top, it says the section would be deleted in its entirety and replaced with that redline.

57:05Um, so, uh, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney, yes, we would be.

57:10And, and part of that was just an exercise of how much editing we were doing in line, and it felt easiest to strike the whole section and rewrite.

57:19Okay.

57:20Um, Council President, in the future, I would love to have us get full information about the redlining of items.

57:27I did not notice before that This was removing an entire section, so I'm now not sure what we are moving back to if we remove this.

57:36That's my oversight for not bringing that up earlier, but I think that we need full information and the public needs full information about what these changes are.

57:46Um, what changes either way here would be occurring to SP 14's current Current uses.

57:59So does this language remove any uses?

58:04If we pull back this language, what does that mean for utilization of SP 14?

58:10Will you be here in a few months saying that this is an underutilized bucket, or will you be here saying, absolutely, we were able to use this for very important things that we wouldn't have been able to fully fund if you, Council, had made that yep.

58:24Help me understand where we're at with this bucket broadly.

58:27So at the moment, if we were to revert back to the original language in the climate investment plan, in a few months' time it would likely be the case that yes, we would come back and say that we've got planning around this, that we'd have to have those conversations, but it would be underutilized in part because we have to— we'd now be starting back a little bit at a not quite zero, but we'd be starting back to begin a process to reprogram those resources.

58:53So the PCEF committee has planned utilization of SP 14 assuming this change and assuming these uses for that bucket?

59:02Correct.

59:03We have, we have, uh, we have, we have a sense for based on these changes.

59:09Correct.

59:09We have programming that we understand and we expect to move forward with.

59:14So in the same way that we were asked whether or not we wanted to change the PCEF recommendations around housing, and PCEF had already made plans for use of the housing dollars based on their recommendation to us, PCEF has already planned SP 14 based on this recommendation to us as well.

59:35I'm trying to think how to— because the correlation is maybe not one for one, but yes, we We've, we've, we've outlined programming based on this recommendation here.

59:45Okay, thank you.

59:47That's a lot to chew on.

59:50Thank you, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

59:51Councilor Smith.

59:57So here we go again, and you can check the record on this.

1:00:02It's so true.

1:00:05Every time we try to allocate funding for underserved Organizations, community-based organizations that are trying to develop properties, organizations of color.

1:00:15People want to separate the question, add an amendment late to try to delay those kinds of activities.

1:00:25And it is not lost on me that it happens every single time.

1:00:31I need PCF to step up and say what it is that they want.

1:00:35This is going to cause an issue.

1:00:37This is going to cause a delay in some of these programs.

1:00:40Tell the truth.

1:00:43Speak up.

1:00:45I disagree with this wholeheartedly.

1:00:49I disagree with the maker of it and the reasoning behind it.

1:00:53This is just unacceptable.

1:00:55You cannot, on one hand, pass an amendment or pass a resolution Um, that says you're going to support racial justice when you can't even support racial justice by dismantling something that's going to go to underserved organizations, and you're going to delay it again for another week, just like you delayed the talk on the slow the flow of homelessness.

1:01:20Again, you need to stop.

1:01:23We need to stop.

1:01:26We need to pass this as is.

1:01:28With, with Candace's amendment today on the second reading and stop playing games.

1:01:41Thank you, Councilor Smith.

1:01:42Councilor Green, back to you.

1:01:45Yeah, I want folks to understand that what this amendment would do is revert it to Strategic Program 14 language that already exists.

1:01:55If we did not pass this at all, which says it is $45 million allocated to fair and flexible capital, which goes on to describe the use of funds as deploying funds through loans, credit line mechanisms, matched savings, or community funding pathways with flexible terms to help grow the number of climate-focused projects and businesses in Portland that serve PCF priority populations.

1:02:17So it does not change the money that would go to the priority populations.

1:02:21So it's not a change in the amount of money that would go to the priority populations?

1:02:22The original intent of this was to make sure that we're overcoming, and I quote, a legacy of discriminatory and predatory practices by traditional banking institutions that have created distrust in many low-income communities of color.

1:02:34That is what I'm restoring.

1:02:36I'm taking out language that diverts a chunk of it towards some developers who have some commercial properties downtown who want a little help to turn those into residential.

1:02:45And that actually moves us away from the initial intent.

1:02:48So if we pass my amendment, we strengthen or we reaffirm the original point and purpose of PCEF, which is to provide capital to overcome a legacy of discriminatory and predatory practices by traditional banking institutions in communities of color, full stop.

1:03:04That's what this does.

1:03:06I'm not taking money away from any communities of color with this.

1:03:09I'm not redirecting it towards any other sort of use.

1:03:13I'm simply restoring Language that already exists today that I think has been muddled.

1:03:19So that's what's happening.

1:03:21Let's be clear on what's happening.

1:03:23Thank you, Councilor Green.

1:03:23Councilor Novick.

1:03:26Yeah, following up on those— the prior 2 councilors, um, I can't remember, is there anything in the amendment to SB 14 that says that, uh, the money that goes to office-to-residential conversions will result in I've got to check the details of this particular amendment as it reads.

1:03:52I can speak to the initial pilot work that had been done there.

1:03:57It was intended to support households that fall in the moderate income, 80 to 120% area median income.

1:04:06So it was to support market-rate housing development in those areas.

1:04:13Also, I just want to say that I'm personally torn on this because although I tend to think that Councilor Green is right, given that I didn't bring this issue up in a committee that I chaired, I feel kind of guilty changing my mind on it at this point.

1:04:26So just wanted to, just wanted to point that out.

1:04:30Thank you, Councilor Novick.

1:04:31Councilor Smith.

1:04:33I know exactly what this is.

1:04:35This is just a ploy to delay again.

1:04:37We're postponing it.

1:04:38That's what I'm saying, Councilor Green.

1:04:40We're postponing it again for organizations that are putting dollars to help communities of color to develop housing.

1:04:52And I know what you're saying, but you don't think a week delay is a week delay.

1:04:55Anything can happen within a week.

1:04:57We went to war and we didn't even know we were going to go to war this weekend.

1:05:00We woke up, woke up in the morning.

1:05:01Councilor Smith, Anything could happen.

1:05:04If you want to change this, this, this thing that the mayor is doing, write your own, um, write your own proposal and put it forward and add it.

1:05:19Uh, I think next in the queue is Councilor Avalos.

1:05:28So from, so from what I'm, um, understanding of how the original SP 14 was written and the difference between that and how this now redlined version, you know, the $15— there was $15 million a couple years ago.

1:05:45I'm trying to like piece the timeline together.

1:05:47So a couple years ago, there was some announcement from the city.

1:05:51This was like under Mayor Wheeler that $15 million was being put aside for office-to-residential conversions, right?

1:05:58And it mentions that a little bit here in this red line.

1:06:03So when that happened, what was that under?

1:06:05Because that was— were we in the CIP at that point?

1:06:08Help me refresh my memory.

1:06:09Thank you.

1:06:10Councilor Avalos, so when— and that was, I believe that was earlier last year, and this started in earnest Yes.

1:06:19We had in earnest under the existing Strategic Program 14, which, as I just to restate, it was $45 million for a broad range of programs where the focus was financing.

1:06:28Yes, underlying it was certainly about supporting underserved communities and underbanked communities.

1:06:33As part of that effort, we had in earnest started an effort to try to understand office-to-residential, engaged in 2 projects with Prosper Portland under the existing program.

1:06:44The The question fundamentally was, if we were to lean further into office to residential, we would need clarification of this program to support that, because once you go further, then you're talking actually a larger portion of this program as opposed to a small, a small portion of the program.

1:07:00Does that make sense?

1:07:00It was this question of, is it going to function as the majority of this program or larger than that, at which point we need to clarify the language to fully enable that.

1:07:09So that's what the amendment was intended to do, but the initial couple pilot projects that we were engaged in were done under the existing Strategic Program 14 guidelines.

1:07:20So this effort is being led by who?

1:07:23Did the mayor request that there be an amendment so that he could use more PSF money for office-to-residential conversions?

1:07:31We had worked with our colleagues at Prosper Portland to understand the demand there, and so they'd— through work Working with them and understanding their pipeline of projects, they'd clearly communicated there was a clear lane of demand for these office-to-residential projects.

1:07:47Sure.

1:07:48But what I seem to recall from the $15 million pilot is that it is— it was meant to— like, we haven't even fully seen the pilot come to fruition, right?

1:07:59Because is that— we haven't spent the money for that.

1:08:02We were still waiting for the pilot So we're essentially moving forward with making a change with an assumption of the outcome of a pilot we have not completed, and therefore that assumption being that we're going to need more money for office to residential.

1:08:19But it doesn't— it seems like the timeline's out of whack.

1:08:22Can you help me understand?

1:08:23It's the language in— it's a good question, Councilor Avalos.

1:08:26The language in here is it presumes that as councilor Smith.

1:08:29Thank you, Mayor.

1:08:29I think we agreed as we work through the pilot effort that there'd be a stage gate and bringing back the reporting to the committee before we design that next stage of work with Office of Residential and evaluate how do we tweak it in order to make sure that we're getting those community benefits.

1:08:43So in a way, what this does is it gives us the go-ahead that should the pilot efforts prove fruitful and there's value there and there is the community benefits, the climate benefits, then there's a discussion, a Stage 8 with the committee to adjust the program and continue to move forward with that expanded program.

1:09:00So it writes it out such that we go through the pilot, have a pause, bring that evaluation back to the committee, and then roll out the subsequent programming.

1:09:09Sam, and for the record, Eric Engstrom, Director of Planning and Sustainability.

1:09:14I think part of the reason this amendment moved forward was transparency too.

1:09:17We had some criticism last year that this This program was very broadly written and it wasn't obvious that office-to-residential conversions could be part of it.

1:09:28And so this amendment makes that very clear.

1:09:31But Sam's right, the intention is still to evaluate the pilot project before moving to anything deeper.

1:09:38Right, but this amendment makes a move before we have the outcomes of the pilot project.

1:09:43Am I understanding that correctly?

1:09:44Councilor Avalos, I would say that this amendment would allow that opportunity Opportunity for the funding to be used if the evaluation of the pilot projects yield positive outcomes and would help us design, along with the committee, Prosper Portland, and PCF staff, a more robust and ongoing opportunity for officer residential.

1:10:09But only if that was the result of those studies.

1:10:13If I may read language from it, it says, This is towards the end of that section.

1:10:17PCF staff, PCF committee members, and Prosper Portland staff will work together to define key success measures for the pilot to help determine whether a full program should move forward, and if so, how it should be structured and implemented to maximize climate and community benefits.

1:10:30That was the work that we did to kind of create that space with the committee, with Prosper, with staff to have that stage gate.

1:10:38Okay.

1:10:39And then if I read a little bit ahead of that, it talks here, you know, To— I, I don't know whose question, maybe it was Councilor Green's questions, um, about— hold on, let me read this.

1:10:53So I'm not seeing a clear, um, what's the word, maybe intent in the way that this is rewritten to honor the original right where it was again flexible capital, priority communities, This, the way it's written, doesn't seem that that language and intent has been transferred over.

1:11:14This is, this is just my read of it, so I'm curious your interpretation.

1:11:18That's how I'm seeing it.

1:11:19So am I missing something?

1:11:20Because I feel like that is the gap that Councilor Green is raising that I'm also concerned about.

1:11:25Because if we're already predetermining, uh, putting money towards an outcome that we have not decided will benefit priority communities, will be cost effective— because yes, office to residentials are incredibly and often, and if we look across the country, often not worth it.

1:11:41And in fact, I rose those questions back in that day when the program was first announced.

1:11:48You know, as a community member, I was pretty vocal about that.

1:11:51So that's why, you know, it's kind of retriggering my memory of like how I was feeling about that then and now realizing that this is what it seems further baking in an outcome we have still not determined.

1:12:02How long is the pilot supposed to take?

1:12:04Because we're about to be— we're on the verge of a new CIP, and I could see the outcome of the pilot landing nicely timing-wise for us to talk about whether it's worth investing in the next CIP.

1:12:16Am I understanding the timing correctly?

1:12:18The timing, um, I'll turn it to my colleague James Valdez to speak to the timing of some of the results that we're getting from our studies there and our climate impact analysis we're doing on the first 2 projects.

1:12:28But before I just— before I I'll turn over to James to speak to that timing.

1:12:32What I will say is there is other clarifications in here focused on, for instance, consumer-facing financing product, and that was part of our work of finding some of those gaps as we've implemented the current CIP.

1:12:46So while yes, some of the broader language around just underbanked communities has been removed because in no small part, part of it is We've got a range of, uh, programming that already is providing full subsidies for businesses, for households, for multifamily properties, that the, the financing component wasn't what we were seeing as most relevant for our underbanked communities, if that makes sense.

1:13:11We were, we were, we are already providing deep subsidies to the extent of $50,000 for households earning up to 80% area median income.

1:13:19So the rationale there, and what we've is that financing isn't what's needed in that space.

1:13:24So let's focus the financing on where we do have gaps.

1:13:28I'll turn it to James to speak to where the pilot evaluation currently is, 'cause we are close to getting some of that initial data.

1:13:35Yeah, thank you, Councilor Avalos.

1:13:39The pilot study really focuses on 2 different elements.

1:13:42One is evaluating the embodied carbon savings of not I guess demolishing and rebuilding a building, but instead keeping the structure intact and the carbon savings of that.

1:13:56And then there's an operational carbon savings based on the efficiency of equipment and measures that are installed in the building.

1:14:04And so the analysis is being done basically right now.

1:14:07There's a 2-step process where we worked with an outside firm to—.

1:14:12Yeah.

1:14:13Provide that analysis of both those components.

1:14:15And then there's a third-party evaluation of that.

1:14:18And we do anticipate in about a month and a half or so to be able to report more on that.

1:14:24And the pathway there would be for us to report probably to the committee to then look at those results and determine whether or not the savings really warrant launching a more full program.

1:14:37If the savings warrant it, Strategic Program 14 as written were to move forward.

1:14:43What is the correlation between these supposed savings in carbon emissions and their impact on priority populations?

1:14:50And the reason I ask that is because, as we know, PSEF is not just about reducing GHG for the sake of it.

1:14:57It is about specifically people who have lacked access to climate-resilient infrastructure, dollars, resources, So an example I like to use is if people don't have clean water and clean air, then maybe that's more important than making sure rich people have solar panels, right?

1:15:18So where can you help me understand how that goal is going back to the original intent of making sure that priority populations are benefiting from the GHG reductions, right?

1:15:29Because again, there's lots of GHG to reduce everywhere, but that does not equally impact and it definitely doesn't impact East Portlanders if you're reducing GHGs in downtown, but we still don't have clean air and our community members die 10 years younger than everywhere else because of the lack of clean air.

1:15:46Do you see what I'm asking?

1:15:48I do, I do.

1:15:50Yeah, I would say on the structure of office to residential, there are requirements in terms of affordability for the units, but as Sam had mentioned earlier, it's not focused on low-income housing is focused on sort of the middle income from 60 to 120% AMI.

1:16:09But that is part of the requirements for the entities that are developing and rebuilding into office residential.

1:16:16I think you bring up a much broader range of environmental justice and community impacts though than just the ability to be housed.

1:16:24Yeah, I think that this is, there's always gonna be a range.

1:16:28And if you look across our CIP, You're, you're not incorrect in that some of that intent, but there is a broad range of how we look at community benefits across our programs.

1:16:36In this program, it is about some of those community benefits are the local economic activation of the central city.

1:16:42But without a doubt, there's also just the job creation, the workforce development.

1:16:45These are prevailing wage jobs.

1:16:48And then I think— I'm sure I'm missing a few other things, but I want to name it's broader here in that it's maybe There are some programs where it's very targeted, and here it's broader, but we certainly have the workforce development opportunities.

1:17:04Thank you.

1:17:04I appreciate your answers.

1:17:06Yeah, I think overall how I'm feeling about the amendment, I definitely— it gives me pause.

1:17:12It's something that, again, I have been vocal about over the years.

1:17:16You know, I was, I think, so focused on worrying that we were going to I think I was so focused on how to allocate money to, you know, out of housing production goals that I didn't put a lot of energy into this.

1:17:28So I'm grateful to Councilor Green for raising it because it is something that does concern me.

1:17:33I think obviously the process is, you know, a little bit janky and we're working on that as we continue to understand our legislative powers.

1:17:43But I think hearing your answers, I mean, I think my biggest concern is I think that's the whole point of pilots.

1:17:53It's like, let's test the concept and then decide if it's worth investing more.

1:17:57$15 Million, I don't know how far that's going to get with office-to-housing residential, because again, it is super expensive.

1:18:03So I don't even know how many units we're going to get out of that, that small $15 million.

1:18:07And I'm concerned that if we're going to again predetermine this outcome and set up the path for Many, many more millions to be going to downtown buildings to convert to housing.

1:18:18You know, that concerns me for what my constituents are gonna be missing out on.

1:18:23They're already missing out on so much.

1:18:25We've already made so many changes to the CIP that I do not like, as again, I have been vocal about for years.

1:18:30So that's, it's giving me pause.

1:18:33I don't know right now how I feel.

1:18:34I'm curious to hear the rest of the discussion, but I do appreciate raising this.

1:18:40And I think ultimately, Councilor Smith.

1:18:42You know, when it comes to making decisions in the legislative process, stopping it, slowing it for whatever reason, for the outcome of being helping communities of color, that's always going to be worth it to me.

1:18:52Thanks.

1:18:54Thank you, Councilor Avalos.

1:18:55Councilor Murillo.

1:18:58Thank you so much, Councilor Avalos.

1:18:59Really appreciate your line of questioning here.

1:19:01I think it was very clarifying for me, so just appreciate your expertise in this space.

1:19:06And Councilor Green, I appreciate you bringing this I know Councilor Novick said he feels a little nervous about supporting this because we were chairing this committee.

1:19:17It was both him and I, 'cause it was multiple sessions, and we didn't catch this.

1:19:22And I think that the beauty of the form of government is that we have a lot of people up here with a lot of different expertise, and it is okay when sometimes our colleagues find something to make something better, and we get to do that right now.

1:19:34Councilor Smith.

1:19:36And I want to reaffirm what Councilor Green said because he is correct.

1:19:40It is only a week delay if we make this change.

1:19:44Sam has already stated for us very clearly that that is not going to harm any of the projects that are on the table right now and that the existing set of PCF dollars, PCF programs in the CIP will continue unpaused while the amendment process proceeds.

1:20:01So I just want to reaffirm that I don't think that this is going to cause undue harm to communities of color.

1:20:07And I think that as we're having these big discussions about PSF and how those dollars are going to be used, I'm also thinking very heavily about the precedent setting of these things that we're passing now and how that changes how those dollars can be used from the original intent, which was to help low-income people of color who are primarily going to be in District 1.

1:20:27Thank you.

1:20:27And who deserve for these dollars to go towards them in the most holistic way possible.

1:20:33So, Councilor Green, I really appreciate you catching this and pivoting quickly under, you know, short notice.

1:20:41And I think it is good that we have so many councilors who care about the community, who have different levels of expertise, who can show us things a little differently, even if they don't sit on a committee.

1:20:50That's the purpose of us being here together.

1:20:52So I will be very firmly Thank you, Councilor Murillo.

1:20:59Councilor Knoll.

1:21:00Thank you, Council President.

1:21:02I want to also appreciate— I mean, again, following Councilor Murillo, I'm going to say ditto to most of that, and in particular the line of questioning for Councilor Avalos, the responses from PCF staff.

1:21:12And, you know, Councilor Green's point about the— last week we talked about this issue about office-to-residential.

1:21:19I'm broadly supportive of that.

1:21:20Conceptually in it, but I think your point about the cost-effectiveness of it is really well taken by me.

1:21:26And in terms of what is actually going to do more, not only for housing, but for the people that are ultimately benefited by it, access to capital is really, really important.

1:21:36I think anyone who has paid a lot of attention or any attention to the needs of people, but particularly low-income people and people of color in accessing capital, Will know that that is a huge issue, and the importance of maintaining that is something that I appreciate Councilor Green bringing up as a champion for those communities.

1:21:57And I just wanted to make sure that that was brought into this conversation.

1:22:01I love the idea of opening up a conversation around superblocks as well, and I think it's important that we have that conversation in a different agenda item at some point soon.

1:22:10But I appreciate that being brought up, and I'm going to vote yes on this.

1:22:12Thank you.

1:22:13I probably wouldn't have had it come up last week, so I appreciate that.

1:22:16Thanks.

1:22:18Thank you, Councilor Kanal.

1:22:19Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

1:22:21Thank you, Council President.

1:22:22I heard last week loud and clear that we needed to follow the PCF committee recommendations.

1:22:27I do think that at times we need to assert ourselves in this work, but last week I voted on an amendment because I was asked to honor the PCF committee recommendations and to recognize that when we had projections of underutilization of funds, we had an interest in making changes to move forward quickly to take advantage of those funds during this 5-year period.

1:22:48Frankly, I am not convinced that office-to-residential will work here.

1:22:54I agree.

1:22:55And while I have long supported work to expand access to capital and would like us to find more opportunities to do this work at the city so that we can make Portland a great place, an affordable place for everyone to live.

1:23:07I'm actually not sure how capitalization of the unbanked, the other thing many of my colleagues are discussing, fits within our carbon reduction goals in the first place.

1:23:18PCEF projects are supposed to hit 3 goals.

1:23:23They don't all hit all of them equally, certainly, but I'm looking at how we reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, How we make sure that those who have faced the most impact from climate change benefit the most from the use of the funds, and also how we expand access to good jobs through workforce opportunity provisions.

1:23:44I have questions about both versions of SP 14 before us today and their ability to meet all 3 of these goals.

1:23:51Frankly, I don't think either version does, and that's concerning to me on a broader level.

1:23:55Thank you.

1:23:56But because I'd like to be consistent with the ask last week to support the PCEF committee recommendations, and because I'd like to be consistent with the ask last week to make sure that we are looking early at where there might be underutilization of funds, I will support the PCEF committee recommendations today.

1:24:13I do look forward to moving upstream in our discussions with the PCEF committee moving forward, however.

1:24:19Thank you, Council President.

1:24:20Thank you, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

1:24:23Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

1:24:26I'm going to come at this a little bit differently than what the discussion has been so far, though I really appreciate what Councilor Pirtle-Guiney has just said.

1:24:35I don't want to discuss the merits of office conversion to housing.

1:24:40I don't know if it'll work.

1:24:41I know it's controversial.

1:24:43I know it's expensive, but it's worth exploring.

1:24:46And I think that's exactly what the piece of recommendation is, and I want to give them the flexibility to pursue this.

1:24:56And for me, this really sends a signal to the community about the downtown.

1:25:02Are we interested in turning the downtown around?

1:25:06The downtown is an economic engine for the entire city.

1:25:09It benefits just all the districts, not just the downtown or District 4.

1:25:14So I'm interested in that local economic activation that Sam mentioned, and that we send a signal that we're looking into this, uh, we're interested in revitalizing the downtown.

1:25:27So I'm a no vote on the amendment.

1:25:31Thank you, Councilor Clark.

1:25:32Uh, colleagues in the queue, everyone has spoken at least once.

1:25:35I'm going to extend the courtesy to Mayor Wilson.

1:25:41Council President, Council Vice President, thank you for the opportunity.

1:25:43Council colleagues, I appreciate I'd like to take this moment to talk primarily about office-to-residential conversion.

1:25:50It is something that I've been researching for years, and Sam has been gracious enough, and Donnie and Eric, to kind of review how the strategic plan and program fits with office-to-residential conversion.

1:26:03But there's so many other value propositions that are at play at this particular moment.

1:26:08We've inherited the Central City Task Force.

1:26:11From the previous administration, from the governor, and from all those stakeholders in the downtown core who wants to see our vibrant community and the renaissance that we're all hoping to create.

1:26:24With that Central City Task Force, we now have the roundtable, and one of our key goals is net office absorption, converting these offices into different purposes.

1:26:36Office to residential is one of those purposes that—.

1:26:38Thank you.

1:26:39We're committed to doing.

1:26:41And I think some of the questions that you brought forward were very salient.

1:26:44Councilor Avalos, you're exactly right.

1:26:47Who's moving forward with these projects?

1:26:49Is it a viable way to bring capital and housing online, which is what you had noted?

1:26:56Councilor Kanal, how do we get capital involved in this?

1:26:59In Calgary, they have a successful Office of Residential Program.

1:27:02In New York City, they have dozens upon dozens of conversions going on.

1:27:07But they have a vibrant core where they have capital ready to go to work to make those conversions.

1:27:12In Portland, we lack capital.

1:27:14A lot of it's self-inflicted on the city that we have right now, but we're making meaningful changes to our city to attract capital.

1:27:21This is a chance to use this SP 14 as the catalyst to show that Portland's open for business and we're going to invest in these office conversions.

1:27:32Thank you.

1:27:33To hit those 3 key priorities, which is reduce emissions.

1:27:37Embodied carbon in these buildings is something we lock in, but we're changing the purpose to reduce energy usage.

1:27:46We're bringing the most high-tech sort of HVAC systems and LED lighting and new programs and technology into these buildings.

1:27:54And then third, how do we benefit communities in need?

1:27:57These office towers are along transportation oriented design or villages that we create.

1:28:02We already have a mall, a bus mall.

1:28:05We walk out there every day and we see the inactivity in that bus mall, and we're cutting bus lines and TriMet times and hours of service.

1:28:14This is our way to just continue to focus on that mixed-use in the downtown urban core so we bring that community back.

1:28:20And without a dense urban core, without an active mixed-use core, We're unable to really show ourselves open to the nation for business.

1:28:30And so office-to-residential activates our office towers.

1:28:33It brings in mixed income housing into our urban core, and it really hits on all of those metrics that we're trying to build in our city.

1:28:42So thank you for this opportunity.

1:28:44Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

1:28:45Colleagues, there are some folks in the queue who have spoken at least once, many a couple twice.

1:28:52We are 35 minutes over on our calendar, so we will not be finishing the full agenda today.

1:28:58And I hope we can wrap up, move on to a vote on the amendment, and then move it to— or vote on the second ordinance.

1:29:05So, Councilor Green.

1:29:08I'll be brief.

1:29:10This pilot project will not convert office space in the downtown core with those towers have really thick floor plates that do not— they're not amenable to conversion.

1:29:25It's very expensive.

1:29:26It will never happen, not with $15 million at least.

1:29:29This is going to be intended for 2 pilot projects I think that Prosper Portland has already been working on.

1:29:34One is the Casket Building in Old Town, and there's probably some other opportunities.

1:29:39I think at one point in time I heard that maybe the Pine Street Market one was another contender, and that would be adding a floor, not converting, but adding a floor.

1:29:46I think the one in the So these are not the same.

1:29:50I mean, the vision that you've laid out, Mayor, I want that too.

1:29:53But this doesn't do that.

1:29:54This does— this provides gap funding, for lack of a better term, for projects that have already been identified but that the private sector is not going to bring forward.

1:30:03We can have a debate about whether we think that's good or not, but I'm worried about the signal we send to say that if you want to do business in this town, you can expect the public sector to pony up the entire capital cost.

1:30:12Councilor Smith.

1:30:12I don't think that's good use of our taxpayer dollars.

1:30:19The other piece here is it's talking about community benefit and priority populations in the context of 60% to 120% AMI.

1:30:2760% AMI is already unaffordable.

1:30:30It's already at market.

1:30:31People are not renting 60% AMI affordable housing units because they can just go to the market and pay the same rate without all the headaches.

1:30:38I think that's a good point.

1:30:38120% AMI is way above market.

1:30:41So what this is, is a— this is a play to develop, um, with public dollars, um, high-income housing, frankly.

1:30:52Um, and I don't support it.

1:30:53So I think, um, I've said what I'm going to say.

1:30:55I think we should probably just move to a vote.

1:30:57But if you're— colleagues, if you're— if you're being sold, uh, an 80 to 120% AMI story like it's going to It's going to be housing for janitors and teachers.

1:31:09You need to look at what those rents are.

1:31:11Those are in the many thousands of dollars per month for a single one-bedroom.

1:31:16So that's— this is not it.

1:31:17So thank you, Councilor.

1:31:19Thank you, Councilor Green.

1:31:20Councilor Smith.

1:31:21Thank you, Mr. President.

1:31:22I just want you all to know that all projects in this proposed ordinance are stopped until there is clarity.

1:31:30We are so bogged down by paralysis of analysis Regarding this ordinance's process and procedures, it's pathetic.

1:31:37Democracy delayed is democracy denied.

1:31:40Justice delayed is justice denied for poor folks, underserved residents, communities of color, and community-based developers.

1:31:48And that's who we're talking about.

1:31:50I don't ever vote against my interests or my previous support of Avalos 1 from last week to this week.

1:31:57I am still in support of it.

1:31:59And it needs to be voted on today and approved, not delayed until next week.

1:32:03And then we'll find something else next week to, to delay it again.

1:32:06So, so no, I will be voting no for this.

1:32:10Thank you, Councilor Smith.

1:32:11Councilor Kanal?

1:32:14Yeah, I'm, I'm a little, I'm, I'm a little puzzled by a couple of the pieces of information I got here.

1:32:19The 60 to 120%, this is last year's data, shows that, um, 120% AMI, the max rent Mm-hmm.

1:32:27Is, uh, this is from Portland Housing Bureau, $2,606, um, for a studio.

1:32:33Um, so that, that to me is, is pretty alarming.

1:32:36Um, there, I, I also, I, everything I agree with 100% what the mayor said in terms of the, the goal here.

1:32:44And I, I've, I think I've been on the record several times as saying that downtown needs to be a neighborhood where people live in.

1:32:49I don't know that this does it, but I would love to hear a little more information on the particular— what is this $15 million going to go to specifically?

1:32:59I heard the Casket Building and the Pine Street Market Building, but I wanted to understand it a little better from the administrative side or from the mayor, if that's okay with you, Council President.

1:33:10I'll be quick.

1:33:12Thank you, Council President.

1:33:13Thank you, Councilor Kanal, for the question.

1:33:16Like the first $15 million tranche, What we really tried to do is not spread it thin and put little amounts into a lot of buildings that never got done.

1:33:25It's only 2 projects that the first tranche went for, and that's the goal for this tranche as well, just 2 projects.

1:33:32And you're right, Office of Residential is not a candidate for every building.

1:33:36It has to be specific.

1:33:37But we do have about a dozen buildings that have potential.

1:33:41We want to match that capital with external capital to get 2 more buildings funded to get going on the construction.

1:33:53Sorry, thank you for that clarity.

1:33:54That doesn't— I think that means we're not ready to say which 2 buildings yet, and that's okay.

1:33:59But can you speak to the AMI levels?

1:34:03Certainly.

1:34:03And, and I don't want to misspeak, and so Sam, if I do, and/or Eric, if you would please jump in.

1:34:09The AMI is the focus on a mixed-use downtown core.

1:34:13Downtown already has an abundance of affordable housing.

1:34:17We have to create that mixed-use environment where we're not just focused on 60% AMI or 30% AMI.

1:34:24We need all types of housing.

1:34:26This is middle-income housing, so we have that mixed-use core.

1:34:33Thanks.

1:34:36Thank you, Councilor Kanal.

1:34:37Councilor Novick.

1:34:39I'm gonna vote for the amendment, not because I'm necessarily convinced that the office at residential idea is a bad idea or a bad use of PSF funds, but because I think that it's worthy of further discussion.

1:34:51And maybe if somebody wants to, I mean, we don't have to do all the CAP amendments now.

1:34:55I mean, somebody could bring one forward like in a few weeks.

1:34:58So to me, it's a matter of like ensuring there's further discussion.

1:35:01And there's been a vigorous discussion here that like I also wanted to note that the mayor has reminded me that I've been meaning to go to Calgary to find out about their Office to Residential program.

1:35:12I've hesitated because Calgary is so well known as a paradise on earth that I know that I get criticism of doing a junket far exceeding that of our colleagues doing it to Vienna.

1:35:20But I think it's probably a good idea to do so.

1:35:22If anybody's willing to join me in taking the risk of that kind of criticism, I think I would like to take that trip.

1:35:29Councilor Sounds fun.

1:35:33Colleagues, uh, Councilor Kanal, are you still in the queue?

1:35:36Okay, thank you.

1:35:38Seeing no one else in the queue, Keelan, can we please call a vote on Green 1?

1:35:47Okay, if I may, I would like to restate the motion to make sure.

1:35:51Okay, thank you.

1:35:52Um, motion to amend Exhibit A to delete pages 9 through 11 to restore Strategic Program 14.

1:36:03Yep.

1:36:03Moved by Councilor Green, seconded by Councilor Murillo.

1:36:08Sounds right to me.

1:36:09Thank you.

1:36:12Avalos?

1:36:14Aye.

1:36:15Smith?

1:36:16No.

1:36:17Kanal?

1:36:21Feeling we're going to need to revisit this at some point soon.

1:36:23Aye.

1:36:25No.

1:36:30No.

1:36:33Aye.

1:36:36Aye.

1:36:36Aye.

1:36:37No.

1:36:38Aye.

1:36:39No.

1:36:48Aye.

1:36:48The amendment is approved with 7 aye votes and 5 no votes.

1:36:58Colleagues, seeing no one else in the queue, this item now moves to second reading next week.

1:37:07Can we please call item number 12, noting we rearranged our agenda?

1:37:13Item 12, document 2026-052, authorize Bureau of Transportation to acquire certain permanent and temporary property rights necessary for construction of the Northeast MLK Boulevard Safety and Access to Transit project through the exercise of the city's eminent domain authority.

1:37:35Colleagues, this is the second reading of a non-emergency ordinance.

1:37:38I will also note that we are 35 minutes late.

1:37:44Colleagues, is there any further discussion on this item?

1:37:48Seeing no one in the queue, can we please move to a roll call vote?

1:37:54Avalos.

1:37:55Aye.

1:37:58Smith.

1:37:59Aye.

1:38:00Kanal.

1:38:01Just clarifying, we're on item 12?

1:38:03Yes.

1:38:04Aye.

1:38:07Aye.

1:38:09Aye.

1:38:22She may be unavailable.

1:38:24Absent.

1:38:28Aye.

1:38:30Aye.

1:38:31Clerk.

1:38:31Aye.

1:38:32Green.

1:38:33Aye.

1:38:34Zimmerman.

1:38:35Aye.

1:38:36Dunphy.

1:38:37Aye.

1:38:38The ordinance passes with 11 aye votes and 1 absent.

1:38:41Thank you.

1:38:42Can we please call item number 11?

1:38:49Item 11, document 2026-053, amend the FY 2025-26 appropriation schedule to reallocate $150,000 from the Legal Priorities Reserve Fund to support refugee and immigration legal services.

1:39:07Colleagues, this is the second reading of a non-emergency ordinance, but I understand there is an amendment.

1:39:13I will look to Councilor Avalos.

1:39:17Yes, thank you.

1:39:20All right, so colleagues, um, Funding legal aid and deportation defense is one of the most direct and critical ways we can support immigrant, refugee, and asylee communities right now.

1:39:34The federal administration is weaponizing our broken immigration system to advance a mass deportation agenda.

1:39:40Since taking office, we've seen a staggering increase in detentions.

1:39:44Portlanders are being taken off our streets and rapidly moved into deportation proceedings.

1:39:48Portlanders who are mandated to attend ICE check-ins are part of their, uh, as part of their legal obligations are being detained.

1:39:57Organizations like Innovation Law Lab and Clear Clinic are on the front lines defending immigrants and their right to due process.

1:40:04These legal clinics are doing the bulk of representation work as part of our rapid response system, including at the Portland Immigrant Immigration Rights Coalition's Resource Center near the McAdam ICE facility.

1:40:14In fact, these are the only 2 organizations doing this work in the Portland area.

1:40:19In many cases, the legal representation they provide has been the difference between deportation and keeping families together.

1:40:25It has been the difference between life and death.

1:40:28Let me be clear: this amendment continues to support SOAR and the important preventative work they do to help people pursue lawful status and stabilize their families.

1:40:37That work is critical, and it absolutely deserves support.

1:40:40But prevention alone is not enough for the moment that we are in right now.

1:40:45People in our community are being detained and placed into removal proceedings.

1:40:49And when that happens, the only thing standing between someone and deportation is access to legal representation.

1:40:55Deportation defense is fundamentally different work.

1:40:59It is courtroom representation, bond hearings, emergency filings, and preventative rapid response when someone is taken into custody.

1:41:07Critically, we have seen immigrants, refugees, and asylees targeted for deportation even as they are fulfilling their legal obligations, like attending mandatory check-ins at the ICE facility.

1:41:16The Trump administration has used the information they have to target people with legal status, including a Gresham family outside of the same East Portland Adventist where they shot Luis and Yolenis.

1:41:27The family had a pending asylum case and they had work permits, and they were still taken by ICE.

1:41:33The Crespo family was released and safely returned to Oregon after significant media attention, work done by attorneys at Innovation Law Lab, and the advocacy and oversight of Congresswoman Maxine Dexter.

1:41:44I bring up the story of the Crespo family not to cast doubt or disparage the meaningful preventative work of SOAR, but to demonstrate that preventative work alone does not mean people are safe from deportation.

1:41:55While the state is making investment in deportation defense, the demand far exceeds the available resources.

1:42:01The organizations doing this work locally are experiencing enormous strain.

1:42:06Clear Clinic alone has seen a 600% increase in workload while staffing levels have remained the same.

1:42:12And last October, this council unanimously adopted the Protect Portland initiative and committed to identifying ways the city can act to safeguard Portlanders from federal overreach.

1:42:21Supporting deportation defense and legal representation is one of those ways.

1:42:26This amendment simply recognizes that a comprehensive approach requires both preventative legal services and deportation defense for those already facing removal.

1:42:36Legal representation keeps families together It stabilizes communities, and it prevents the devastating consequences of separation that ripple across our social safety net.

1:42:45I urge this council to treat deportations like the emergency that they are and to support this amendment.

1:42:53I have a couple of questions as well.

1:42:57One of the requests that I received from a member of the MPCC was that any other organization considered for funds should present a proposal in the same way that SOAR has, outlining that they would use those, how they would use those funds and what the impact on the immigrant and refugee community would be.

1:43:12I agree that this information should be put on the table so that the public is informed and councilors can make a fair assessment of this amendment.

1:43:18And I believe that representatives from Innovation Law Lab and Clear Clinic are in the audience, and I'd like to call on them so that they can explain more about what their respective organizations could achieve with the $100K in additional funding.

1:43:29Councilor Do you want me to go first?

1:43:46Go ahead, please answer the question.

1:43:47Thanks.

1:43:48Thank you, Councilor Avalos.

1:43:49Good morning, councilors.

1:43:50Thanks so much for having us here.

1:43:53Um, the CLEAR Clinic and Innovation Law Lab—.

1:43:55No, for the record first.

1:43:56Oh, I'm sorry.

1:43:57Thank you, Councilor Mitch Green.

1:43:58My name is Lainey Tupper.

1:44:00I'm the executive director of the CLEAR Clinic.

1:44:04The CLEAR Clinic and Innovation Law Lab provide rapid response legal assistance at the McAdam ICE field office, which means that we have attorneys and often paralegals as well who remain at the field office to provide legal advice to anyone, any Portlander.

1:44:23I think really importantly for councilor— the councilors to consider is that any Portlander who walks into, um, the PERC Resource Center, which is outside across the street from the ICE McAdam Field Office, is entitled to receive legal advice and assistance from our attorneys.

1:44:40Um, we also have paralegals and outreach workers who are present there to help people get, um, connected with other resources and services.

1:44:48Um, we estimate that for $100,000, we could provide 125 rapid response legal shifts.

1:44:57And conservatively, we estimate that we assist a minimum of 3 individuals at every rapid response legal shift.

1:45:06Often it's been closer to 4 to 8, but the conservative estimate would be 3 individuals that we assist with legal screenings, Sometimes up to and including habeas corpus petitions for relief for unlawful or unjust detention.

1:45:24So that would be a total of 375 folks that we could assist with that funding.

1:45:36Sure.

1:45:38Council, my name is Isa Peña.

1:45:40I'm the director of strategy at Innovation Law Lab, and I will just echo What Lainey has shared, we have been doing this rapid response collaborative work over the last year and hoping to provide that rapid response for individuals who are coming to the facility, as well as, you know, we are organizations that are funded by the Equity Corps of Oregon program.

1:46:08And I'd like to just clarify what so the Universal Representation Program, which is the Equity Corps of Oregon program, actually started in 2017 and 2018 by an initial investment from the City of Portland that was geared at making sure that people who were in removal proceedings or facing deportation had access to an attorney.

1:46:37Thank you.

1:46:37And so that was a really important investment.

1:46:39People are 5.5 times more likely to win their case if they have an attorney alone.

1:46:45So it felt very critical at the time to make this investment.

1:46:51And since then, in 2022, the state of Oregon made it so that the Equity Corps of Oregon program could be a state-funded program.

1:47:02Right now it receives It's about $15 million per biennium, and it is funneled through the Oregon Worker Relief Coalition as well as the Oregon State Bar.

1:47:16And it provides a series of different things, including a statewide clearinghouse that provides logistical support, a universal navigation and support system, which includes a call center, to streamline access to immigration attorneys, a client service fund to assist with fees like filing fees or interpretation costs.

1:47:43It also provides— individuals who are seeking services need to make sure that they are both program and income eligible so that they have access to attorneys.

1:47:59And then overall, it provides resources to attorneys.

1:48:02So it's not just deportation defense.

1:48:06It's also not just immigration legal services.

1:48:09It is navigation.

1:48:11It is support services.

1:48:13It's a statewide call center.

1:48:15It is much larger than that.

1:48:17And so none of the actual rapid response shifts that we are doing are funded.

1:48:22They are only funded if an organization takes on the case.

1:48:27The Equity Corps of Oregon program believes that people who are eligible should be able to access an attorney, and the funding goes to the attorney once the services are provided.

1:48:40And so us being at the McAdam facility is not funded unless we are actually helping an individual.

1:48:47Happy to answer any additional questions too.

1:48:50And I'd just like to add— Lainey Tepper again for the record— I'd just like to add that that that includes individuals who are not necessarily ECHO eligible.

1:48:59So people who live across the river in Vancouver are also eligible for our services, whereas they might not be— our rapid response legal defense services, whereas they might not be eligible for Equity Corps of Oregon.

1:49:13And our time, our attorneys' times that they spend sitting there providing legal advice and, you know, being available for anyone who has an ICE check-in is not remunerated through the Equity Corps of Oregon program.

1:49:29So I think that's an important distinction.

1:49:34Thank you.

1:49:35Were you going to say something too, or are you just coming along for the ride?

1:49:39Thank you so much for having us.

1:49:41My name is Whitney Phelps, and I'm the Immigration Justice Program Director at the CLEAR Clinic, and I am one of the attorneys that is providing rapid response on a weekly basis.

1:49:49So I'm happy to answer questions, but I would say that on a weekly basis, I have the opportunity to support people as they go into their ICE check-ins, provide them with at least a little bit of legal advice.

1:50:02And in the worst case, I get to meet with them once they're detained, provide them with information, potentially help them to understand what their rights are if they don't already, and then avenues for potential relief.

1:50:14We're, like Lainey said earlier, we're evaluating is there a habeas corpus petition that could be filed to prevent this person from being long-term detained.

1:50:24And we are— it's an honor to serve people in that capacity.

1:50:31Thank you for being here.

1:50:33Lastly, members of this board, I want to say thank you to the NPCC who has been working with me in the last few days to adjust this amendment accordingly.

1:50:42Luckily, the board and I share the same goal of getting support to our immigrant communities that they desperately need, and I'm glad to hear that they are supportive of my amendment.

1:50:50So, uh, I hope that the council will consider this urgent need and act accordingly, and I ask for a second for my amendment.

1:50:59Second.

1:51:02Councilor Avalos moves.

1:51:03Councilor Morillo has seconded the amendment.

1:51:05Councilor Councilor Avalos, are you— thank you.

1:51:09Councilor Morillo.

1:51:12Thank you.

1:51:14I just want to start off by saying how appreciative I am of the work of all of the community organizations and of all of the councilors that are trying to do right by our communities.

1:51:23I think that these discussions are so difficult because we're working with such limited dollars and we're trying— I think what people are seeing in the community is that everyone is trying to do right by our communities that we love and care for under very pinched and difficult circumstances.

1:51:39So I just want to name that before we begin this discussion and ground us in that.

1:51:46I do have questions from the— and I really appreciate Councilor Avalos's amendment and the changes to it.

1:51:54I see that it was increased from $150K to $300K, and I just want to make sure, because this is the city's legal defense fund as far as if we pass a policy and it needs to be defended in court, do we have funds available to defend our own policies that we pass when they go through court scrutiny?

1:52:14And it's my understanding that fund was already on the lower end of what it should have been.

1:52:20And so this would be an additional amount taken out.

1:52:22Can anyone from the City Attorney's Office maybe, or whoever is meant to speak on that, talk about the potential impacts of $300,000 versus $150,000 Hi.

1:52:42For the record, Robert Taylor, City Attorney.

1:52:47You're correct, the fund is intended to help the city defend council priorities or other judgments that are not covered by the risk fund.

1:52:58The— our preference in this fund is to have at least $1 million in it every year.

1:53:04As the fund is drawn down over the course of the year, our preference would be to have that replenished every— in the budget cycle.

1:53:15Currently, there's about $820,000 in that fund.

1:53:24If you take $150,000 out of it, I think that sort of puts us in the yellow risk category.

1:53:31I think if you take $300,000 out of it, we're probably still in the yellow risk category, but bordering on the, the red.

1:53:39I would not want to go below $500,000 if we can avoid that.

1:53:45And if the, if the plan is to replenish In the next budget cycle, going down to about a $500,000 level, it's a short-term risk, right?

1:53:58You just have to do it for the remainder of the fiscal year.

1:54:01If council's intent here is to draw it down to $500,000 and not replenish it and just keep it at that $500,000 next year, then I think we're, you know, we're in a difficult, um, We're in a higher risk situation.

1:54:19And then just to kind of put this conversation in broader context, there's at least one other, you know, there's other items coming before council today where if council adopts the policy, we may look to the risk, to the legal priorities fund to help cover that.

1:54:39So, you know, there are trade-offs that council is going to have to make as the policymaker and the budget writers here.

1:54:44Thank you.

1:54:46But I think if you take $300,000 out, we're getting very close to the level where we're putting other things at risk.

1:54:55But again, if council is just going to replenish it in a few months, that's a short-term risk.

1:55:00Okay, thank you so much, Robert.

1:55:01I really appreciate that.

1:55:03I think I had heard from Councilor Avalos that the intention was to replenish those funds in the budget cycle.

1:55:10I trust that we can try to do that.

1:55:12I'm also just cognizant of the fact that we're going into a massive budget cut season.

1:55:17We're not, uh, so we're going to be making very difficult choices about beloved things that the community cares about.

1:55:25Um, so I think we can all say it's very easy to find $300,000 right now, and we will find that that is a lot harder later, um, as we are all put in the pressure cooker of trying to defend things that are constituents care about.

1:55:40I do have a few questions about the original proposal, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney, about the $150,000 that would be allocated.

1:55:51And I was wondering if we could get more details on the types of roles and services or which programs specifically it would fund.

1:56:00I was curious about how much of this $150,000 is expanded services versus backfilling programs that were previously funded by state or federal grants that have lapsed.

1:56:10Um, I have a few questions, so maybe I'll give them to you one at a time so I'm not overloading it.

1:56:16Council President, is it appropriate to bring somebody from SOAR up to answer these specific questions?

1:56:21I don't want to misrepresent any of their intentions with these dollars.

1:56:25Um, I know that she wasn't able to be in the room, but Carrie Babin from MPPC is online as well, if that's an appropriate Speaker at any point.

1:56:34And Councilor Murillo, I'm happy to answer questions, but I'd prefer on the, the technical spending details to make sure I don't get any details wrong.

1:56:42That makes total sense to me.

1:56:43I feel comfortable with that if everyone else does.

1:56:45Absolutely.

1:56:46Yeah, I think we are getting access online for whoever is online, but if anybody from SOAR is in the room, also happy to have them come up.

1:56:57I see some folks from SOAR and Ecumenical Ministries standing up.

1:57:01They may be able to help us.

1:57:05Good morning.

1:57:11My name is Britt Conroy, and I'm with Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon.

1:57:14Uh, to the question about whether these funds will be backfilled or represent, uh, new investments in the community, um, it's true that SOAR Legal, our, our Immigration Legal Services program, uh, lost $300,000 And a federal cut when the Trump administration came into power.

1:57:35This is, as you may remember, 3 different levels of investment were presented to the Newport-Lewis Policy Commission.

1:57:43The highest level was $300,000 that would have made investments in naturalization.

1:57:48That would've been some of those, that backfilling.

1:57:51In fact, at $150,000, the focus is—.

1:57:54Councilor Herbold.

1:57:55Not in that space, but rather to protect those that have lost protections or are at risk of losing protections.

1:58:07The focus of this amendment is to— the focus of this proposal is on that preventative work that would help, again, about 75 individuals and then plus benefit on average another 3 family members.

1:58:18Councilor Smith.

1:58:20Through that preventative work.

1:58:21So Councilor Morillo, if there's any other questions, I'm happy to answer those.

1:58:26Okay, I think that's helpful.

1:58:28I have a question.

1:58:30I don't know if this is— well, you should stay up here 'cause I think I'll have more questions for both of you, but I don't know if this is for you or for Councilor Pirtle-Guiney, but I'm curious why $150K was the number that was chosen as opposed to $140K, $185K.

1:58:45What is the, Like, are there specific things that were— does that make sense?

1:58:52Also, why is half our council gone?

1:58:54Council President, do you mind if I take that question?

1:58:56Please.

1:58:57Councilor Morillo, I can't speak to why the recommendation from NPPC was at $150,000, but when I looked at the recommendations which came in at $15,000, $150,000, or $300,000, I initially made an thank you.

1:59:12We did an ask of our CBO and our finance director about where we might be able to find funds at the $300,000 or the $150,000 level.

1:59:22There were not many options at the— there were no options that our administrative team felt comfortable with at the $300,000 level.

1:59:32But this legal fund was identified where Mr. Taylor said that he was comfortable with us moving into what he just described as the yellow zone at the $150,000 level.

1:59:42So I chose that mid-level to bring forward so that we could at least make progress.

1:59:49Gotcha.

1:59:49Okay, that's helpful.

1:59:51So it was less about specific programs and more about like what that fund could withstand.

1:59:56So if $15K, and I'm sorry to be so pedantic about that, you know I love you, Britt.

2:00:03But it— sorry to be pedantic about the different individual pieces of these programs, but I think— so $15K covers the screenings for 75 individuals.

2:00:14What is the rest of the funding going towards?

2:00:17And yeah, let's start there.

2:00:21Yeah, so this proposal— thank you, Councilor.

2:00:23This proposal seeks to screen and provide legal services to at least, conservatively, 75 individuals.

2:00:30And their families.

2:00:31So someone would be provided legal screening to see if they have a remedy that could protect them, provide them with a different status to keep them and their families together and safe from deportation.

2:00:43That remedy could look like applying for asylum, applying for adjustment of status, or a different remedy under federal law.

2:00:55So that's where the investment goes, is actually that Then attorney time and, if necessary, fees to help someone secure that protection.

2:01:06Okay, that's helpful.

2:01:08Councilor, just sorry to jump in.

2:01:11We have to be careful that we are limiting debate to the amendment.

2:01:14And so clarifying what the underlying versus the amendment is totally germane, but just wanted to let colleagues know that we are I see.

2:01:27The problem is I can't vote on Councilor Avalos's amendment unless I understand the contrasting proposal.

2:01:35Is there a better way for me to go about it?

2:01:36I don't think you've done anything wrong.

2:01:37I just wanted to make sure that everybody is on the same page.

2:01:41Makes sense.

2:01:44So, okay, a follow-up question for you then.

2:01:47So to be clear, is any of this $150K my understanding is that no, that we've worked really hard over the last year to secure funding from other sources to replenish funding for naturalization that's been lost by the cut under the Trump administration.

2:02:09This is broader preventative work.

2:02:13We do hope that every single client that we have eventually goes down the path of citizenship, that we make, that this is a first step to help people remain here and become citizens.

2:02:25Okay, thank you.

2:02:26This was really clarifying because I think part of the confusion started because there was a discussion from a well-meaning colleague that was talking about some of this work as rapid response.

2:02:36And I think that this is a continuum, right?

2:02:38We need to make sure people don't get to the point where they need rapid response, but then that sort of changed the discussion about what we understood this funding would go towards.

2:02:48So this was very helpful.

2:02:50Appreciate that.

2:02:50Thank you.

2:02:51Thank you, Councilor Morillo.

2:02:53Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

2:02:55Thank you, Council President.

2:02:56And I just— I'm going to be a little long-winded here.

2:03:01I'm sorry.

2:03:02Go on ahead.

2:03:03Colleagues, I am going to ask you to vote no on this amendment, not because I I disagree with anything that my colleague Councilor Avalos said.

2:03:13The need she has identified is real, it is important, but because of a few other funding and broader funding environment pieces and because of the funding source, and I want to lay those out.

2:03:29I also will note that I am again frustrated by the lack of professionalism and respect in this body.

2:03:35I saw this amendment for the first time when it was posted this morning.

2:03:39I learned about it for the first time from a stakeholder outside of this body, despite my offering on the dais to be a partner in finding an additional funding source to move forward this different body of work, and despite my staff reaching out to my colleagues' staff to try to find a time to sit down and talk about this.

2:03:59I also, um, Was surprised to hear that NPPC might support this amendment since just yesterday they came by my office and said that they were in the building talking to some of you about their concerns with the amendment.

2:04:13So I'd like to allow them at some point to clarify their position so that we all are on the same page, regardless of what that position is, whether it's support or opposition for the amendment.

2:04:24Colleagues, we had an extensive conversation about this at the last meeting.

2:04:30The ordinance before us, the underlying, came from an official recommendation of the New Portlanders Policy Commission.

2:04:36They are the volunteer body that we charge under city code to center immigrant and refugee voices on our city policymaking.

2:04:45I asked them about 6 months ago now to evaluate options of places where council could step in to provide low- cost, high-impact support for our immigrant and refugee communities in Portland.

2:04:58They followed their formal review process with an email to all of us in the fall and testimony in the winter asking us to take action.

2:05:08When we ask a volunteer advisory body to bring us a recommendation, many of us have talked about the importance of genuinely working to move forward that recommendation.

2:05:20NPPC made a specific recommendation for preventative legal services, though I'll note that I believe SOAR also does deportation defense work.

2:05:31NPPC's recommendation, however, was for screenings, pathway identification, and direct representation for status adjustment.

2:05:39This upstream work stabilizes families and reduces the likelihood that people enter removal proceedings.

2:05:45It also protects vulnerable Portlanders from exploitation during rapid rate— during a period of rapid federal policy change.

2:05:54There have been some questions raised about deportation defense, and I heard today some comments around rapid response, but I'd like to focus on the deportation defense piece for a moment.

2:06:05That work is essential, and the state is actively investing in it, colleagues.

2:06:10This week, the Joint Ways and Means Committee in Salem advanced $8 million in new funding for universal representation, following $15 million passed in the middle of last year.

2:06:23While it is true that this is not all for deportation defense, I believe that a full $5 million of those funds are.

2:06:31The reason those allocations are so large is because deportation defense, not the rapid response piece, which we've heard is quite affordable, but the full suite of deportation defense services are expensive.

2:06:43What I've been told by our partners at SOAR is that that can cost about $10,000 per person compared to the $2,000 per person for the services that we are being asked to support today in the underlying.

2:06:56That doesn't mean that we should not look at our ability to support deportation defense or rapid response, which is of course much more affordable, but it does mean that on deportation defense our funds don't go as far.

2:07:08We simply don't have the level of funding that the state does.

2:07:13Additionally, there has been a significant gap in funding for preventative services that is not being filled at the state.

2:07:23SOAR presented their proposal to the NPPC based on those gaps and the need to fill the gaps in the preventative work that are not being filled at the state or elsewhere.

2:07:35On fiscal responsibility, I appreciate, Councilor Morillo, your questions to Robert Taylor.

2:07:42He also described to me the, the green, yellow, red fund status previously, and I felt comfortable asking us to move into the start of that yellow zone.

2:07:56I was not comfortable asking us, asking our legal team to move us close to the red zone.

2:08:05$300,000, A $300,000 allocation from this fund moves us to $520,000 left in the fund.

2:08:13Mr. Taylor said red lights start flashing for him when we reach $500,000.

2:08:18I wasn't comfortable So colleagues, here is my request.

2:08:27Let's pass this ordinance as drafted.

2:08:29Let's vote no on the amendment.

2:08:32Let's get these funds out the door quickly for the upstream work where there are huge gaps in the system.

2:08:40Then let's come back and discuss rapid response where there is additional work that it sounds like may not be funded.

2:08:46Councilor Smith, I think you're missing the point.

2:08:48That we might be able to support at a low cost.

2:08:51And finally, if we want to look at gaps in deportation defense after state funding is deployed, that far more expensive part of the work, let's have that conversation after we see where the state funding goes and what the gaps there really are and what the need there really is.

2:09:09Today is the first part of the conversation.

2:09:12That doesn't mean it has to be the last I'd encourage you to vote down this amendment and support the recommendation that was brought to us by the folks we appointed to the NPPC.

2:09:23Thank you.

2:09:24Thank you, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

2:09:26Councilor Knoll.

2:09:29Thank you, Council President.

2:09:30I also have questions for Robert Taylor, so I don't know where— sorry.

2:09:39Their follow-ups.

2:09:40My concerns, and I'm similar to Councilor Murillo in that these are concerns that also relate to the underlying.

2:09:46When I think about the needs broadly, I'm supportive.

2:09:49When I think about the people doing the work, I'm supportive.

2:09:51When I think about the concerns around the other potential uses and the opportunity cost of the funding is where I have concerns.

2:09:57And that's frankly, it's not just true about making it $300,000, it's true about $150,000 as well.

2:10:02So I appreciate you bringing that up.

2:10:04Thank Thank you.

2:10:04You for answering the questions from Councilor Morillo.

2:10:08And I wanted to add on, did the budget request— speaking as a bureau director— did the budget request from the City Attorney's Office include replenishing the fund?

2:10:21I believe it did.

2:10:22In fact, we were thinking of asking to increase the amount from $1 million to maybe $2 million, given the heightened risk profile of the city at the moment.

2:10:37Okay.

2:10:38And in the event, you know, we have 2 pretty— at least 2 pretty prominent, higher-profile policy proposals that might come before this council later on that your office is aware of.

2:10:52But I'll just summarize them by saying there are policy proposals that relate to ICE.

2:10:58And relate to federal response and relate and may theoretically create some, not risk of necessarily losing a case, but a case that we would have to defend against.

2:11:09Would passing this either the way it is now or as potentially amended, would either of those lead to you recommending something different on future policies related to federal response?

2:11:24Yes.

2:11:25To put a finer point on it, would passing this make you more likely to say, hey, hold off on a policy change in the future?

2:11:35No, I don't think so.

2:11:38My job really is just to advise you of the risk, and then if the risk exists and it comes to pass that we have to pay a judgment or we have to pay a fine, then we pay a fine.

2:11:50To hire a bunch of outside counsel and pay for it, then we need to meet those obligations, pay the judgment or pay the outside attorneys.

2:11:59And if we don't have the money set aside to pay for that, I have to come back to you and ask you to figure that out.

2:12:06And then at that point, you're going to have to figure out where to find that money in the budget.

2:12:12And that can be a very difficult thing to do in the moment.

2:12:15If you're responding to a judgment or responding to an urgent need to hire outside counsel, that is the situation the prior council found itself in a few years ago, and that's the reason they created this fund.

2:12:29But there is nothing stopping this council from going back to the way it used to be, and just you know taking on the risks.

2:12:37And if we have to pay somebody later, just figure it out in the moment.

2:12:42So it really is, to me, it's, it's a question for you as policymakers and budget writers how you want to balance that risk, and do you want to set money aside for that or not?

2:12:57But my job is just to tell you what the risk is, and then it's your job to make the policy and budget decisions to accommodate that.

2:13:04Thanks.

2:13:04In the context of this question, Just 2 follow-ups.

2:13:11One is, does anything you just said change if it's $150,000 versus $300,000?

2:13:18I mean, you mentioned that the risk to the fund itself being depleted gets towards the red if it's $300,000 earlier.

2:13:28But in terms of your legal advice for the legal risk associated with potential future decisions, I'm not sure that I follow the question, but I, I think, um, I think I've answered that in terms of 150 brings us into the yellow.

2:13:49300 Gets us much closer to a situation where I think we're exposed, and it's up to you if you want to replenish the fund.

2:13:59If you want If to take you a look at the budget and see what do, you can do.

2:14:00That's a short-term risk.

2:14:02If you don't plan to replenish the fund, that's a longer-term risk.

2:14:07And if that risk comes to pass and we don't have enough money in that fund to cover risks, then it just comes back to you and we got to figure out how to pay for that.

2:14:17And, and I, and I would, I would give you that advice now.

2:14:21I'll give you that advice in 6 months, and it's really up to It's up to you about how you want to balance your role as policymakers and budget writers.

2:14:30And that's really what this question is about to me.

2:14:33And it's up to you to decide where that balance is.

2:14:37Okay, and then last clarification.

2:14:38You said you'd come back to us in the event of a judgment.

2:14:40Could that, in terms of the when you'd come back, it wouldn't be at the time of adopting a policy then.

2:14:45It would be when there's a court case or a challenge of some variety, right?

2:14:50It would be, I mean, it could arise in a few different situations.

2:14:59It could arise in, we got a verdict, we need to pay the judgment, where are we gonna find the money to pay this thing?

2:15:06Uh-huh.

2:15:07It can arise in the setting of, we've got a case against the city, we would recommend that we settle it, Where are we going to find the funds to settle it?

2:15:19And this fund can provide a source of that, so that can help us get through, achieve a settlement in times.

2:15:26There's a policy coming before this council today that would give employees the ability to be defended if they are subject to retaliation by the federal government.

2:15:39If it's a criminal case, That's brought against an employee for retaliation.

2:15:45We would hire outside counsel to defend them in that, since we don't handle criminal matters.

2:15:51This fund would be a source of funding to hire those outside lawyers to help defend.

2:15:58So I think that's you know when I say you get down to $500,000, and if tomorrow we had to go hire.

2:16:07Outside criminal lawyers to defend city employees who are being retaliated against, that could draw that fund down pretty quick.

2:16:14So I think those are the— those are some examples of where that fund would be useful for the city to have.

2:16:22And we've heard a lot of testimony today about how useful this money would be for folks out in the community who are providing other services to people in the community who are likewise affected by the federal government.

2:16:38Those are all valid.

2:16:40And, and I think, again, that is just the, the difficult decision this council has to make as policymakers and budget writers about how you— how do you balance your needs as a city versus the needs of the community, and, and how do you balance your risk and whether you want to set aside money to accommodate that or not?

2:17:00If so, what level?

2:17:01So I think those are all things that you just have to make a decision about.

2:17:06Okay, I— what I'm taking away from that, given that you were very precise with several examples, and I really appreciate that, is that this would not be something that the City Attorney's Office would say in a— in the context of a policy that doesn't directly drain the fund or have a direct risk of draining the fund as a reason not to do that policy.

2:17:29That's what I took away from that.

2:17:30Well, let's say there's $0 in the fund.

2:17:37Sure, of course.

2:17:37And let's say, or let's say there's $500,000 in the fund and council wants to adopt a policy that is high risk and If we lose, we're gonna have to pay a bunch of money.

2:17:52The advice is, in that situation, we don't— you can do this.

2:17:57It's high risk.

2:17:59We just don't have a way to pay for this.

2:18:02And so if we have to pay for it, it's gonna have to come back to you, and you're gonna have to figure that out in the moment.

2:18:08That's how that would work.

2:18:11Thank you.

2:18:11That last piece is really helpful of we'll come back to you.

2:18:14Thanks.

2:18:15That's all the questions I have on this.

2:18:17I have a weird situation similar to Councilor Murillo in that I need to ask a question about the underlying in order to be able to vote on the amendment.

2:18:24Is that permissible?

2:18:25Absolutely.

2:18:26Okay, so the question that I've been asking here is effectively, is this going to be used later on to say I can't support a future policy that would stand up against the federal government?

2:18:41And I would like to— because there's no money to defend it.

2:18:45And I'm trying to be very transparent about that.

2:18:47I have 2 pieces of policy coming forward later on.

2:18:50And so I would ask if the sponsor would clarify that at either the $150,000 or $300,000 level, if that would be something that would affect— that would be a part of their decision-making factor on future ICE policies, because there are trade-offs associated here.

2:19:06And I'm just I'm not going to put you on the spot right now, but that's something I'd like to know before I vote on the amendment.

2:19:10Thanks.

2:19:13Council President, would you like me to respond to that now?

2:19:15You're welcome to.

2:19:16You know, Councilor, I hadn't made the connection between this policy and my votes on future policies related to ICE until your line of questioning to Mr. Taylor just previously.

2:19:28And as you were asking that line of questioning, it dawned on me which policies that you're bringing forward that that might apply to.

2:19:37I don't want to make any commitments about my vote on future policies until I see final language, but I will tell you that that's not something that I had previously even contemplated, contemplated until you brought up the connection today.

2:19:51Yeah, it had come up, just to be clear, not the lesser issue is this one.

2:19:55The greater issue is a later ordinance that we're going to be talking about.

2:19:58So probably not today.

2:20:02Thank you, Councilor Kanal.

2:20:05Vice President Clark.

2:20:07Thank you, Council President.

2:20:08I'm wondering if you would indulge us and have the NPCC representative who's online perhaps talk to us a little bit about their position, their concerns, since they were in the building yesterday and I don't know exactly the message.

2:20:27Absolutely, yeah.

2:20:29And maybe Council Member Alana Pirtle-Guiney would also have some questions here for them.

2:20:39Council President Carrie Babin is one of the— I'm not sure, Carrie, if you're chair or co-chair of NPPC, but Carrie is online if you're interested in calling her.

2:20:51Carrie, if you are available, I would love to have you respond.

2:20:56Hi, yeah, I'm right here.

2:20:59Great.

2:21:00So yeah, and I am neither chair nor co-chair of the MPPC, but I am a member and was on the policy committee and on the policy committee for the MPPC and was part of putting together the proposal that we presented to the city council that you're considering right now.

2:21:17And I just, I want to clarify a couple of things.

2:21:20One, I was Thank you.

2:21:21I was at City Council yesterday talking to individuals about this decision that you're making today, and I did that not as a representative of the MPPC, but just for— as a personal constituent.

2:21:34And so I wasn't there speaking for the MPPC.

2:21:39But I do also want to address one thing that I heard Councilor Avalos say, which was that the MPPC has endorsed the amendment to This ordinance, and that is not the case.

2:21:51MVPC hasn't met as a commission since February, and we, as far as I know, haven't seen the amendment.

2:21:59I have never seen it.

2:22:01And so we haven't had a chance to look at it, to discuss it, or consider it.

2:22:04And we— the only proposal that we have presented to the council is the one that's— that Councilor Pirtle-Guiney put forward.

2:22:12Thank you.

2:22:13Thank you, Carrie.

2:22:19Thank you, Vice President Clark.

2:22:20Councilor Green.

2:22:22I'll be brief because I know that we're trying to get through a lot of business here.

2:22:27Um, I support the amendments.

2:22:29Uh, I am sympathetic to some of the process stuff I've heard before.

2:22:33Um, it cuts a lot of different ways, and I've sometimes on either end of it, but I just needed to make a comment about— we've This amendment talks about allocating more money, and so I just need to comment that in the last year we've dismissed 4 bureau directors and had to pay them $700,000 in severance.

2:22:51And if this body wants to get serious about cost control, we can adopt a policy that clarifies when to use the no not-for-cause clause in those contracts that result in an automatic severance.

2:23:04And so there's money on the table there, and I'll leave it at that.

2:23:06Thank you.

2:23:07Thank you, Councilor Green.

2:23:09Councilor Smith.

2:23:11Thank you, Council President.

2:23:13I was fully prepared to support the underlying, um, ordinance request, and, uh, I just found out about the, the second request this morning, and it was great to hear some of those folks speak about what's going on.

2:23:28Having been a former immigration caseworker for Senator Whiten, I know how important that is.

2:23:35I'm prepared to support, um, Councilor, uh, Pirtle-Guiney's underlining.

2:23:40I was not prepared for the other today, and we can talk about that in an—.

2:23:44For—.

2:23:45In another different fund.

2:23:46Um, I think that's important too, but today I'm going to support, uh, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney's ordinance request.

2:23:56Thank you, Councilor Smith.

2:23:57Councilor Avalos.

2:24:01Yes, thank you.

2:24:02Um, well, first of all, uh, thank you to Councilor Murillo for sharing your concerns.

2:24:07And just to answer, since it wasn't directed to me, but I'll answer to you, um, we do intend to replenish the funding this budget cycle.

2:24:14I intend to bring forward amendments around that because, as we heard, there are many things actually that that fund is going to need to go to.

2:24:22We're going to need to replenish it anyway if we're going to pass thank you.

2:24:27And so that's absolutely a priority that I think that this council should take up.

2:24:32And I think, you know, it is a priority for us that this council continue to take bold action and protect our communities, in my view.

2:24:38And we can take on the short-term risk of maybe having to tap this fund beyond what was originally proposed.

2:24:44But I will note that Robert Taylor did say that the funding at the $300 million level is still in the yellow.

2:24:50So he said it gets close to the red, but it's technically still in the yellow, and that we have the ability to replenish that and minimize that risk, especially since we're almost through this fiscal year.

2:25:02I think at the end of the day, my East Portland constituents should not be forced to take on the risk of being detained and deported with no representation.

2:25:08That risk is more important to me, and I'm glad that we have this funding to do just that and look forward to securing more funding in the Legal Priorities Reserve Fund.

2:25:16Thank you.

2:25:17As it relates to timing, colleagues, first and foremost, definitely not the way I want to go about this policy.

2:25:22And I would have loved to have had more time to develop this proposal and to have introduced these changes earlier in the process.

2:25:29For context about why the amendment was posted last night, we were waiting on confirmation from the executive side on which was the fastest way to get the money out.

2:25:38And CBO confirmed this morning that a grant would be the fastest way to get them the money.

2:25:42I always try to avoid surprising my colleagues with last-minute amendments, which is exactly why I daylighted my intentions at our last meeting.

2:25:50I don't see how that is not enough notice to tell you that I— and I told you exactly what I intended to do.

2:25:56The technical legal language and getting that from the attorneys, from the executive side, that takes time.

2:26:02But I was very clear about my intent.

2:26:05And like I said last week, this is exactly what we're elected to do.

2:26:07Councilor Smith, to do— listen to our community and constituents, make changes to policy based on what they're hearing.

2:26:12And what I heard from my communities, the largest and most diverse immigrant communities in Portland, is that the original proposal doesn't go far enough to help immigrants.

2:26:19And so to my colleague Councilor Fernando Guinea, who felt caught off by this amendment, I am genuinely confused by that, considering that my office discussed this with your office ahead of last week.

2:26:29We put it on your radar, uh, and I made the effort to keep you in the loop.

2:26:34Because that is the courtesy that I expect.

2:26:36It's not a courtesy I have received throughout this body, and I'm not even gonna— I don't need to drop that tea, but if we're gonna talk about consistency, maybe let's evaluate that.

2:26:45As far as, you know, whether we need to continue to do this or if we should just pass this and introduce my own policy, I mean, I think, Councilor Smith, you like to say justice delayed is justice denied.

2:26:58You've said it a couple times today.

2:26:59I have not.

2:26:59And I think that's actually the crux of what you're asking us to do.

2:27:02You're asking us to delay action on helping immigrants, not me.

2:27:05And so if we pass this amendment today, we pass this ordinance next week.

2:27:08We could possibly pass it today if we want to do an emergency at the end, depending on what, what transpires.

2:27:14But if we don't and I have to come up with my own policy later, that adds several weeks at least to this process.

2:27:18So we're delaying getting dollars out to the frontline organizations helping to keep families together, and that is not acceptable to me.

2:27:24Councilmember Loretta Smith.

2:27:26I think at the end of the day, despite this tight turnaround, we are being responsive.

2:27:34We are adjusting this to, again, not diminish the work that SOAR does.

2:27:38That is very clear.

2:27:39If I didn't care about what SOAR does, I would've defunded it.

2:27:41I clearly did not.

2:27:43I clearly am trying to expand the level of legal services.

2:27:48SOAR has already answered their capability and what their scope of work is, and it is not the scope of work that I need for the constituents that I represent.

2:27:56And so that's why I'm proposing this amendment.

2:27:59At the end of the day, I believe that this is— if you bring legislation to this dais, it is not done.

2:28:06It is not done.

2:28:07Just because it's introduced does not mean it's complete.

2:28:10So I think we need to get away from that in general.

2:28:13And I think there's been a lot of conversations about consistency and all of that.

2:28:17And I think there is a severe lack of nuance That is being taken into account and that I hope my colleagues reflect on.

2:28:24I believe that I have been consistent.

2:28:25I believe that I am consistent in fighting for the communities that I represent, and that's what I'm doing today.

2:28:30So I really urge you to support this amendment.

2:28:32We made sure to get the language right with the attorneys so that we could get those dollars out directly to these groups right away.

2:28:40And I feel confident that this body will have the— feel the same urgency that I feel to continue to replenish that fund because we have many more thank you, Councilor Avalos.

2:28:58Councilor Khanal.

2:29:00One more thing, and, uh, just to be clear, uh, when I said that, uh, the MPCC endorsed it, I talked with Jorge and I talked with the chair.

2:29:07We discussed the amendment.

2:29:08They said that they agreed with it and were supportive.

2:29:11Uh, and so, uh, it sounds like the last speaker is not the chair and does not represent the MPCC.

2:29:15And said specifically they don't represent the NPCC.

2:29:18So I'm not familiar with that person's position.

2:29:20I spoke with Jorge and the chair, uh, and that's who I got to, um, support my amendment.

2:29:25Thanks.

2:29:26Thank you, Councilor.

2:29:28Councilor Kanal.

2:29:31Thank you.

2:29:33Um, just a quick question for, for SOAR.

2:29:37Um, is it one-to-one in terms of the scaling, meaning, um, $150,000, the quote you gave was 75 people would be helped.

2:29:48Is it accurate to say it's each $2,000 fits that?

2:29:53So if we were to go up to $200,000, it would be 100 people.

2:29:55If we were to go down to $100,000, it would be 50 people?

2:30:02Councilor Kanal, thank you for the question.

2:30:04That is something I'd have to get back to you on.

2:30:08My understanding is that typically When we invest in additional resources for the community, we have a baseline of staffing that enables us to do that work.

2:30:20But so it's my sense from having worked previously for 2 years and our Immigration Legal Services program that it's not one-to-one.

2:30:27So a drop in funding would result in a larger impact than just a one-to-one might imply.

2:30:34But I do not have the exact numbers.

2:30:35I'm happy to get them.

2:30:36Get those for you.

2:30:37Okay, thanks.

2:30:38And, and so when you went to, uh, NPPC, who we should know, NPPC is our, is our policy, New Portlanders Policy Commission.

2:30:46They're not actually generally a funding, um, related entity, so I don't know what the normal is there.

2:30:53Um, I had the privilege of visiting them too.

2:30:55I, I do have a lot of support for their, their members, their staff, their whole, um, vision.

2:31:01Um, but I also know that it's It's not— I don't think we've received any funding recommendations through this body before that I'm aware of.

2:31:07Um, but, uh, when there were— you had 3 options you gave them, um, at the time, right?

2:31:15Um, and I, I just wanted to, to understand a little bit more there, um, in terms of the— you mentioned the, the higher level one, um, but because the, the, the amendment here would reduce, uh, the funding, I have to ask about the other one as well, just to get a little bit of, of understanding about the, the lower, because I believe the $150,000 was the the middle tier.

2:31:34And I was just hoping you could speak to that as compared not to the higher— the upper end, but as compared to the lower end.

2:31:40Point of order.

2:31:41Are we talking about the amendment or are we talking about the underlying?

2:31:43We're absolutely talking about the amendment because the amendment would reduce the SOAR allocation from $150,000 to $100,000.

2:31:49Exactly right.

2:31:52Exactly.

2:31:52And so I'm asking for them to compare the $150,000 on the table to the lower option that they talked about.

2:31:57But that's talking about the underlying.

2:31:59Point of order.

2:31:59Colleagues, the amendment is being debated.

2:32:02I find the conversation germane.

2:32:05Hi, I'm Kayla Asakawa, and I'm a legal assistant at SOAR Immigration Legal Services.

2:32:11I can speak to the lower tier of the $75,000.

2:32:14That amount would be able to provide at least 75 consultations to people in the community.

2:32:23And then from the 75, the $100,000 We can take those people who were eligible from our consultations and help them apply for the appropriate process for their case.

2:32:35And then going up to the $300,000 ask, that was for naturalization specifically.

2:32:42As Brent mentioned, back in March of 2025, we had our federally funded naturalization program.

2:32:50Thank you.

2:32:52Ended.

2:32:53And so that would kind of, I think that's where the word backfill kind of came into the equation.

2:32:57That's, we would be able to breathe life back into that program again with the $300,000.

2:33:03And I would just add that I believe the initial tier was for just screening alone was $15,000, just to be clear on that point.

2:33:12Yeah.

2:33:12Oh, $15,000.

2:33:12Yeah.

2:33:14Yeah.

2:33:15Sorry, $15,000, 1-5 or 15,000?

2:33:171-5, 1-5 To provide screenings alone, which has tremendous value for the community as they know what risk they're under and what possibilities they might have, but is not the same as also receiving service to move to a state of protection.

2:33:36Thanks.

2:33:36Yeah, I just— colleagues, I don't feel particularly happy about the idea of pitting groups that are all doing good things against each other.

2:33:43I actually pretty much hate that.

2:33:47I'm not particularly concerned about the relative breakdown of dollars going to the different parts of the continuum here.

2:33:55My concern is entirely around the dollar, the aggregate total amount.

2:33:59So that's what I'm trying to get more information on and trying to make a decision based off.

2:34:03Thanks.

2:34:03Thank you, Councilor Kanal.

2:34:05Colleagues, I'll note we are more than an hour over.

2:34:07So for anybody waiting in the audience, if your item is at the end of the agenda, almost certainly will not hear you.

2:34:13Sorry.

2:34:15I'd love to get everybody a bio break.

2:34:16We are to the amendment.

2:34:19Councilor Novick.

2:34:21Thank you, Mr. President.

2:34:22I have a question for Councilor Avalos, which is you said that you intend to try to replenish the fund, and I just want to know if you have some initial ideas about where to find the money to do that.

2:34:34I don't, but it's on my list as I'm working with the budget office to propose my amendments.

2:34:38It's a high priority because Thank you, Councilor Novick.

2:34:48Councilor Murillo.

2:34:52I just want to flag for both the underlying and for the amendment that I think council is putting ourselves into kind of a terrible corner as far as how we do this moving forward, because council is essentially becoming a grant-delivering body to organizations that are already funded by the federal government.

2:35:08For what is a minuscule amount of dollars compared to the big budget that we have to deal with.

2:35:14Very important for organizations.

2:35:17I used to work at a nonprofit.

2:35:18I had to write, you know, not directly our grants, but we got money from DHS to do SNAP benefit work.

2:35:26And when I did that, I had to prove very clearly, this is exactly the amount of hours that I'm spending on this type of work.

2:35:34This is exactly what my deliverables are.

2:35:37This is exactly what I did last quarter to prove why I was handing— I should be given these dollars.

2:35:44The answers that I'm getting from a lot of these agencies feel vague.

2:35:50I would like— I should not be handing out dollars without having very clear answers as to what those dollars are going towards, and I'm not getting that type of breakdown.

2:36:01Councilor Loretta Smith, And again, I say that as someone who worked at a nonprofit that was struggling very much during a time where we were cutting federal dollars for anti-hunger policy work.

2:36:12But the idea, like, if someone were to go to a bank for a loan, they would have to prove deliverables and give very specific answers for what the work was funding.

2:36:22And I feel like I'm not getting that.

2:36:24So I, from a values perspective, We'll probably be voting for one of these proposals today because those dollars need to go out the door.

2:36:35I'm still unsettled with draining this fund, and so I'm just wrestling with that.

2:36:39I haven't made up my mind by the end of this meeting.

2:36:42I will have to.

2:36:43But moving forward, we need a formal RFP process for all dollars that go out.

2:36:48We cannot just be becoming a grant-giving body.

2:36:53It doesn't work.

2:36:53Councilor Smith.

2:36:54We need more specific answers, and I just don't feel like I'm getting that.

2:36:58So I will just leave it at that.

2:37:00As far as process, I'm not really happy about process on either side.

2:37:04I think that we're putting ourselves— we're setting a bad precedent for how we should be giving out dollars.

2:37:10Thank you, Councilor Murillo.

2:37:11Councilor Koyama Lane.

2:37:13Sorry, can I just really quickly—.

2:37:15Sorry, thank you.

2:37:19So I do wanna start by acknowledging that I genuinely believe that Councilor Pirtle-Guiney's efforts here are to support the work of SOAR because they're rooted in a genuine desire to support our immigrant and refugee communities.

2:37:35I think I remember when she was at your guys' meeting, I think we bumped into each other 'cause it's the same time as the Bike Advisory Committee.

2:37:43Yeah.

2:37:43Kanal was there.

2:37:45I remember them being like, how can we support?

2:37:47I think that's the energy.

2:37:51I can say last year as council vice president, I spent a lot of time focused on federal response work, something I continue to care a lot about.

2:38:00Like, through that work, a year ago, I was trying to map the different groups and understand histories and see who's doing what.

2:38:07Started convening a meeting weekly with different orgs doing on-the-ground rapid response deportation defense work, many of them part of Oregon for All, that big kind of umbrella of different folks working together.

2:38:22So like, I did spend time getting to know Immigration Law Lab, Clear Clinic, PERC.

2:38:28And so when, when I did hear from them that yes, in the grand scheme of things, that this amount of money seems small, I did pay attention when they said, hey, you know, we have been meeting with you guys.