Portland City Council Public Works Committee 07/28/26

Transcript
Automatically generated transcript. It may contain errors and includes testimony in languages other than English that is not individually marked up for assistive technology.
Olivia Clark 6:30 - 6:42
6:30Good morning, everyone.
6:31Uh, I'm going to call the meeting of the Public Works Committee to order.
6:35It's Tuesday, July 28th, at 9:32.
6:41Deanna, can you please call the roll?
Gabe Graff 6:43 - 6:44
6:43Good morning.
Unidentified speaker 6:44 - 6:45
6:44Koyama Lane?
Tiffany Koyama Lane 6:46 - 6:47
6:46Here.
6:47Green?
Mitch Green 6:48 - 6:48
6:48Here.
6:49Smith?
Loretta Smith 6:50 - 6:51
6:50Absent.
Shoshana Cohen 6:51 - 6:52
6:51Kanal?
Sameer Kanal 6:52 - 6:52
6:52Here.
6:54Clerk?
6:54Here.
6:55And Claire, can you please read the statement of conduct?
6:59Thank you, Chair.
7:00Good morning and welcome to the meeting of the Public Works Committee.
7:03To testify before this committee in person or virtually, you must sign up in advance on the committee agenda at portland.gov/council/agenda/publicworkscommittee or by calling 311.
7:14Registration for virtual testimony closes 1 hour prior to the meeting.
7:18In-person testifiers must sign up before the agenda item is heard.
7:21If public testimony will be taken on an item, individuals may testify for 3 minutes unless the chair states otherwise.
7:27Your microphone will be muted when your time is over.
7:29The chair preserves order.
7:30Disruptive conduct such as shouting, refusing to conclude your testimony when your time is up, or interrupting others' testimony or committee deliberations will not be allowed.
7:38If you cause a disruption, a warning will be given.
7:40Further disruption will result in ejection from the meeting.
7:43Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass.
7:47Additionally, the committee may take a short recess and reconvene virtually.
7:51Your testimony should address the matter being considered.
7:53When testifying, please state your name for the record.
7:55If you are a lobbyist, identify the organization you represent.
7:58And finally, virtual testifiers should unmute themselves when the clerk calls your name.
8:02Thank you.
8:03Thank you, Claire.
8:05Uh, colleagues, uh, for today's meeting, we have 2 updates from PBOT, uh, on topics where there is a lot of interest and a lot of anticipation.
8:15First, we're going to hear about the implementation of the TUF and the street damage restoration fee based on direction that the council gave them that passed this year.
8:25And then we'll have a discussion of automated vehicles, including in-progress rulemaking, and I would like to entertain possibly policy concepts.
8:35But before we get to our main items, we need to adopt committee minutes for our meeting of June 9th and June 23rd.
8:45Let's see.
8:47Diana, can you please read the first item?
8:51Item number 1, June 9th, 2026 to June 23rd, 2026 Public Works Committee meeting minutes.
9:02Great.
9:02Do I have any comments, objections, support?
9:06Seeing okay, so, um, the minutes are approved by unanimous consent.
9:10No objections.
9:12Great, let's move on.
9:15Uh, Diana, can you please read the first item?
9:18Item number 2, document number 2026-265, update on local transportation funding.
9:28Terrific.
9:29So colleagues, uh, as you recall, when we passed the transportation utility fee and the street damage restoration fee this spring, seems like so long ago at this point.
9:42We included there lots of concerns, lots of work to be done by PBOT.
9:52So my understanding is that there is specific methodology on some of those concerns is still being determined, but we're going to get an initial status update today.
10:03As well as a preview of some of the more detailed information that we're going to get in the fall before implementation.
10:10So with that, I would like to hand this off to— I see Director Williams is here and Shoshana Cohen and Gabriel Graff.
10:20Welcome.
10:20Thank you for being here this morning.
10:22We're happy to see you.
10:24We're really looking forward to this update.
Millicent Williams 10:31 - 12:36
10:31Good morning.
10:34Thank you so much for having us.
10:37Give me one second, please.
10:39Shift some things around this morning.
10:41So good morning.
10:42My name is Millicent Williams.
10:44I am the director of the Portland Bureau of Transportation, and we'd like to thank you, Council Vice President Clark, and members of the committee for having us here today.
10:54I'm pleased that we're here today to provide a report back to the progress of setting up our new local funding next slide, please.
11:03Our Public Works service area delivers clean drinking water, maintains an award-winning parks and recreation system, provides reliable sewer and stormwater services, and keeps our transportation system safe and accessible so people can get to where they need to go.
11:18For years, funding for the maintenance of a safe and accessible transportation system has been eroding and unable to keep up with the needs of the system.
11:26Thanks to you and your council colleagues, PBOT's transportation funding is now a bit more stable.
11:33The transportation utility fee and street damage restoration fee have already helped to stabilize this year's PBOT's budget and helped our staff to plan for the year with a certainty that we have not had for many, many years.
11:46While these mechanisms are helping to stabilize transportation funding, rolling them out is a collaborative Public Works project.
11:53We are 5 months away from implementation of the transportation utility fee and street damage restoration fee, and we're working together as a service area on communications and many structural preparations.
12:05This is an exciting opportunity for cross-bureau collaboration, and I'm pleased to be here today with our first implementation update.
12:13As has already been mentioned, we've had challenges across all fronts at the federal, State and local level.
12:20One could say PBOT's financial foundation is standing on a wobbly stool.
12:25And if you'll advance to the next slide, I'm sorry I didn't mention that.
12:28And even though this graphic, which I am not a huge fan of, shows one wobbly leg, we've had really 3 wobbly legs.
12:36Great graphic.
12:38Thank you for whoever did that.
12:40Your compliments to the chef.
12:44Next.
12:45So thank you.
12:45The local funding for our work has been coming from the local gas tax and the heavy vehicle use tax.
12:51The local gas tax now buys half of what it did when it was established in 2016, and our ability to fund our work has been steadily decreasing.
13:00Next slide, please.
13:02Thanks to all of you, we now have a much more solid foundation at the local level.
13:08There will be another attempt at a statewide transportation package during the 2027 session, and PBOT's ability to continue to stabilize our operations and maintain our transportation system will still be dependent on a successful transportation package.
13:22However, today we are here to focus on the implementation work that we have begun around these new local funding sources.
13:28Once again, I wish to thank all of you for making this work possible.
13:33If not for the transportation utility fee, PBOT would have faced very significant reductions in services this fiscal year.
13:40Thank you for preventing this loss of critical services and for providing funding for maintenance, operations, and safety work on our transportation system.
13:49Today, we are here to provide our first update on the progress we are making to implement the Transportation Utility Fee and the Street Damage Restoration Fee.
13:57Implementing these new revenue sources and delivering this work is a bureau-wide and, as has already been mentioned, really a service area-wide effort.
14:05It involves teams from maintenance, engineering, project management, Vision Zero, Finance, our utility partners, and others.
14:14Some of our work in the first few months has been focused on setting up an internal structure that will ensure we are coordinating this large body of work across teams and delivering in a transparent and accountable way.
14:26To that end, I'd like to introduce Gabe Graff, who will be— excuse me.
14:30I'd like to introduce Gabe Graff, who you will be hearing from during this presentation.
14:35He is taking on this overall project management of delivering this work.
14:39Gabe is a seasoned project manager.
14:41He works in some of the most difficult environments to deliver on amazing work, and he is, uh, he is respected throughout the community, and he's respected throughout the bureau, and we're excited to have him on board for this critical project.
14:55As you know, the transportation utility fee and the street damage restoration fee will both go into effect on January 1st.
15:02We're still building the program and getting ready.
15:05Today we are here with the initial updates because we want to bring you along on our process.
15:09However, we still have additional work to do, and we will be back again both in September and November to go deeper.
15:17So here's our agenda for our presentation.
15:18We'll share an update on the implementation timeline and a reminder about the transportation utility fee directives that we are working on.
15:25We'll provide an overview of this year's budget allocations and then discuss the implementation work that we're doing around communications, Billing, financial assistance, methodology updates, utility outreach, and accountability.
15:37Now I'll turn it over to PBOT Chief of Staff Shoshana Cohen to begin with the timeline for our work.
15:43Thank you, Director.
15:45For the record, I'm Shoshana Cohen, PBOT Chief of Staff.
15:48This implementation schedule before you includes upcoming milestones for both the transportation utility fee and the street damage restoration fee.
15:56We have a busy 6 months or so ahead of us.
15:59It's already been a busy 6 months, but continuing.
16:03We have a special Fixing Our Streets Oversight Committee meeting next week on August 4th.
16:08And then we will be back, as has already been mentioned, before this committee again in September with a more detailed update.
16:14And then we expect to return to council again in November with a code alignment ordinance and to ensure the code reflects all the directives related to the transportation utility fee.
16:23And as directed, we'll be holding a rate hearing for the non-residential methodology by February 15th.
16:29And we also plan on hosting district open houses in February.
16:33This is the time when people will be receiving their first bills early in the year for the transportation utility fee, and we want to be out in community at that point making sure that people are able to learn about the work that is being funded.
16:46Currently, the Street Damage Restoration Fee team is drafting revised administrative rules to incorporate the damage fee into the current permitting process.
16:54As part of the drafting process, we're engaging impacted utilities to help inform, review, and refine these rules.
16:58Thank you.
17:01We also have permitting software updates that we're working on to allow for the coordination and assessment work that's required with the street damage restoration fee.
17:09And for both the transportation utility fee and street damage fee, we have ongoing outreach and communications work.
17:18So this is a summary of the directives that were included in the transportation utility fee ordinance.
17:23And these directives, you know, thank you for all of them.
17:25They really are driving our implementation work.
17:28You provided guidance around revenue allocation, establishing a low-income discount for multifamily housing residents, developing a commercial appeals process and an impact-based rate methodology for the commercial side, and a number of directives around accountability.
17:45And we really are working on all of this.
17:48And now to sort of jump more into the details, I'll hand it over to Gabe Graff.
Gabe Graff 17:52 - 25:43
17:52Thank you, Shoshana, and thank you, Director Williams, for that kind introduction.
17:56For the record, my name is Gabe Graff.
17:57I'm a capital project manager at the Portland Bureau of Transportation, and I am newly assigned to manage the standing up of this transportation utility fee and street damage restoration fee.
18:08I'm just a little over 2 weeks into this assignment, so I still have a lot to learn, and I may lean on my leadership here for questions that I can't answer.
18:17That said, I'm very excited about the work ahead and appreciate the opportunity to provide you all with an update.
18:27So this slide shows this year's budget allocation aligned with the direction from the Transportation Utility Fee Ordinance and the Street Damage Restoration Fee Resolution.
18:36And we will talk about each of these revenue allocations over the next few slides.
18:40But before we do that, I want to highlight for you that we plan to be back in front of this committee in September with a more detailed Local Funding at Work investment strategy, which will really dive into each of the buckets, including more detailed prioritization criteria, reporting metrics, that kind of thing.
18:57Today will be more of a high-level overview.
18:59You'll note that at the bottom it says initial estimates to be refined.
19:04These estimates will change.
19:05Some of the factors that will affect our estimated net revenues include fine-tuning our collection costs, the implementation of the low-income discount, working out the appeals process, and other policy and implementation details that will get refined along the way.
19:19Next slide.
19:20The Transportation Utility Fee, or TUF, funding is split out per council direction with 75% of the funding for maintenance work and 25% of the funding for safety.
19:29And the Street Damage Restoration Fee funds are dedicated to pavement maintenance.
19:34Next slide.
19:37So here we are in the pavement maintenance category, which is where the majority of the new local funding will be invested, with funds coming from both the Street Damage Restoration Fee and the transportation utility fee.
19:48You'll see a range of investment levels here from $15 million to $26 million for this fiscal year.
19:53And this range is driven by uncertainty on the level of funding that the street damage restoration fee will generate at this stage of our work.
20:01This category of work is— this year is focused on basic pavement maintenance, including grind and paves, where we take off the top 2 inches of worn pavement and replace it with a smooth new layer of 2 inches of asphalt.
20:13Seals, including crack seals and slurry seals, essentially treatments that prolong the life of existing pavement by preventing water from getting through the pavement and eroding the base layer below.
20:24Base repair, where we tackle specific segments of the road where water has gotten through and damaged the supporting road structure underneath.
20:31And potholes, which are generally self-explanatory.
20:34In all of these categories, the team has put considerable time into thinking through how to prioritize projects and maintenance activities and you can see here we've got some criteria for how we select streets to pave or potholes to patch.
20:48Work in this category will be spread across all 4 districts with a focus on streets of citywide significance.
20:53These are streets that play critical roles in moving people and goods across Portland.
20:57These streets support transit, high-volume travel, freight, emergency response, and neighborhood greenways are prioritized pedestrian and cycling routes.
21:06We're also looking for opportunities to further our safety work and leverage opportunities with our sister bureaus across Public Works and other partners.
21:15On all categories of work, we are committed to transparent reporting on our progress, and you'll see here our reporting metrics are lane miles paved and number of potholes filled.
21:23Next slide.
21:26Okay, the streetlights and signals bucket of work is also in the maintenance category, also funded by the transportation utility fee, with $1.8 million invested in this fiscal year.
21:36This work will be focused on repairing streetlight knockdowns and vandalism, applying protective coatings to streetlights, and signal and rapid flashing beacon maintenance.
21:46And like all of our maintenance work, while this is in the maintenance category, there are clear safety benefits to these investments, and we're coordinating closely with our Vision Zero team to leverage opportunities to enhance safety alongside these maintenance efforts.
21:58Work in this category will also be spread across all 4 districts with work prioritized based on asset condition, the length of the disrepair, and whether the infrastructure is on one of our high crash next slide.
22:15Thanks.
22:16This slide just gives a little bit more flavor for the type of work that will be funded with the transportation utility fee in the signals and street lighting category.
22:25So you can see example projects like rebuilding of signals, addressing vandalism, and repairing or painting streetlights throughout the city.
22:34Next slide.
22:37Okay, we're moving on to the safety categories of investment for the transportation utility fee here.
22:42In the Vision Zero category, we've got $2.9 million in this first fiscal year focused on both programmatic work and capital improvements.
22:50On the programmatic side, we're investing in safety analysis, project identification and development, community engagement, and safety evaluations to ensure our capital investments are having the desired results.
23:01The capital investments in the Vision Zero category are focused on high-crash intersections where we can make cost-effective improvements to make intersections safer.
23:09We're also looking to leverage that existing maintenance work we talked about earlier to gain additional safety benefits.
23:15So for example, when we know we'll be sending crews to do routine signal maintenance, we can also have them install reflective signal backplates, no turn on red signs, or pedestrian head starts, all of which will make intersections safer.
23:26Our Vision Zero work is data-driven at every level, including in the project prioritization, and work will be focused in this category on our high-crash network and high-injury road segments.
23:37Next slide.
23:39The SIP, or Sidewalk Alternative Pathways category, is our final category of investment, also in the safety bucket.
23:46We've got $2.9 million here in this first fiscal year and will be focused on sidewalk infill projects similar to this one shown in the slide on Southeast Flavelle.
23:56Project selection for the SIP is building off of our existing plans such as PedPDX with a careful look to project readiness so we can stretch our limited dollars as far as possible.
24:07In this category, we are identifying early deliverable small projects in Districts 1 and 4.
24:13And looking forward, we are drafting a larger 200% list of potential SIP sidewalk projects building off of previous planning and engagement efforts.
24:20We'll be sharing those longer lists and gathering feedback through community engagement and at our February open houses that Shoshana mentioned early next year.
24:32Next slide.
24:36Now I'm going to shift gears a little bit and talk a little bit about some of the other program implementation work we've been doing.
24:42Next slide.
24:43Thank you.
24:45On the communication side, we have launched our Fixing Our Streets, Your Local Funding at Work website.
24:51We're going to continue to build out the website, but each of the local funding sources now has a page that can be found at www.portland.gov/fixingourstreets.
25:02We're working closely with our partners on the utility customer service team to develop communications that will go out to customers and help them prepare to respond to questions from customers as we get ready for the utility fee implementation date.
25:15Next slide.
25:19January is coming up quickly, and as we've mentioned, one of the critical path tasks is making sure that our Public Works colleagues— that with our collaboration with our Public Works colleagues, that our implementation is going smoothly and we're prepared for January rollout.
25:33I just specifically want to thank Customer Service Director Becky Anneker and her team for the support and this process.
25:41And I'll turn it over to Shana to go over the next couple slides.
25:45Thank you, Gabe.
25:47So we're also doing a lot of work on the non-residential side of things in alignment with the direction in the Transportation Utility Fee Ordinance.
25:54This work includes developing an appeals process for the first year of the program from January 1st, 2027 to January 1st, 2028.
26:02During this period, the transportation utility fee for commercial and non-residential residential non-residential properties will be 4.3%— excuse me— of their water, sewer, and stormwater bill.
26:14The appeals process will be developed to provide relief for non-residential users where the water, sewer, stormwater bill is disproportionate to the transportation impact based on regional averages for similar types of businesses.
26:26We're currently developing regional average commercial rates that will serve as the basis for the appeals process.
26:32We're also working with city billing staff to analyze administrative and financial implications of this work.
26:37Thank you.
26:38We'll use this information to develop a draft process, and this work will include feedback from businesses with a special consideration, as I believe you asked for, for the impact on small businesses.
26:50In addition to the work on the appeals process, we're working on developing draft recommendations for an impact-based transportation utility fee methodology for non-residential and commercial properties that can be presented at a rate hearing by February 15th.
27:04Approved by City Council by April 1st and implemented then by January 1st, 2028.
27:09At a minimum, the approaches will include a trip-based transportation utility fee that's similar to 31 other Oregon cities and a land use-based methodology with a combined per unit and parcel square footage rate model.
27:24In order to meet the ordinance's intent, again, that special consideration will be given to impacts on small businesses.
27:30We'll be meeting with representatives from small businesses and other interested parties in advance of the rate hearings and fair this is again just sort of an initial touch, letting you know we've gotten started with this, and we intend to provide a more significant update on this work when we're here in September to ensure we're on track to implement an effective and efficient appeals process and successful rate hearings on discussing a next methodology.
27:58We've also been exploring pathways for a transportation utility fee discount for income-qualified market-rate multifamily residents.
28:04Another thing that we know is clearly important is As we brought this TUF forward.
28:11As you probably remember, the utility bill includes a discount already for low-income single— low-income customers in single-family housing, and that will be extended to the transportation utility fee.
28:21However, there's currently no way for individual multifamily households to directly receive a discount through the existing system.
28:29This is because multifamily resident— residential properties typically have an overarching water sewer bill account, and individual tenants don't pay their own water bills.
28:37Thank you.
28:38The city doesn't have a direct connection to the individual household, so it's pretty complicated to find ways to give them a discount.
28:45This is a challenge that our utility bureau and utility bureaus nationally have grappled with for years.
28:50However, I'm really pleased to say that we have a team who's very excited to be digging into this and looking forward to making progress and really being a leader in this complex area.
29:01This team has been researching low-income discount programs that exist within the city, regionally, and nationally.
29:07There are 3 approaches that have emerged from the research, and they're shown on the slide.
29:13The first is a property-based discount pass-through model.
29:17In this model, the utility discounts the sort of overarching master metered property account with the expectation that the owner will pass the discount along through to tenants through rent reductions, credits, or service enhancements.
29:31However, there are some significant limitations with this model.
29:34The model relies on the property owner or manager to comply and pass the discounts along to their tenants, and it can frankly be hard to know if the discount ever reaches the tenant.
29:43Additionally, in market rate units, the model may put tenants in a situation where they would need to disclose personal income information to their property owners or managers to prove eligibility for the discount.
29:55Another utility discount approach we looked at is a cross-utility crediting model.
30:00For this model, another bill that the tenant does receive, such— and what we've seen is on an electric bill— is used as the vehicle for delivering the discount.
30:10Our team met with staff from the City of Austin to learn more about this model.
30:14It has proven effective there.
30:16However, Austin's utility environment is much different than Portland because the city controls the municipal utility services, the electric service.
30:27There are not many cities that we've seen, Austin, maybe one or two others, but not many that do this.
30:31And we don't believe— we haven't found yet anyone that does it with non-municipal utilities.
30:35So again, it shows promise.
30:37It's working well in Austin, but we think in our environment it would be pretty challenging.
30:43The third model is a direct-to-tenant rebate or credit model.
30:47Tenants apply to receive a discount and they're sent a rebate in a number of ways, either via mailed check, loaded debit or gift card, a digital app, or potentially another delivery model.
30:57We believe this model is the most promising at this point because we could reach tenants directly and it works in our utility environment.
31:05Any of these options will require new administrative processes.
31:08However, we'll be looking to find opportunities to streamline and find efficiencies through program design.
31:17Again, we're sort of giving you— bringing you along.
31:19That's where we are right now.
31:20We still have more work to do before we can come back with a clear recommendation.
31:24The ordinance directed us to be back with our study in December.
31:26However, we We plan to be back with a clearer recommendation in September in order to ensure we can get your feedback in time to implement a program next year.
31:36We're on a tight timeline here.
31:39In doing that, we're continuing to work closely with a variety of city partners, revenue, city data office, all sorts of folks, and really thinking through implementation feasibility.
31:51We'll also be doing more outreach with organizations that can help us better understand how to make this work for the people who need it most, and also can help us to make sure that people know about benefit once we make it available.
32:08We also have staff who are hard at work thinking through the new pavement coordination and utility assessment processes and how we update our administrative rules for the street damage restoration fee.
32:17Next slide.
32:19We want this work to be informed by utilities, and one of the things we've just completed is a survey that was sent out to utility representatives to gain their input on things like how best to improve coordination and incentivize reducing the number of street cuts.
32:32Next slide.
32:34PBOT is still assessing the survey responses, but initial utility feedback includes encouraging us to provide more advanced notice of paving and capital projects, improving the visibility of planned work by PBOT and other utilities, and providing centralized coordination versus project-to-project communication.
32:52They've also asked that the administrative rules clearly outline how the fee will be calculated, ensure the permit requirements are consistently applied, and PBOT provides dedicated staff to support utility coordination.
33:05We really appreciate this feedback that we've been getting both from our external utilities and our partners in water and BES, and it's truly helping us to ensure we're able to put together an efficient program that is grounded in minimizing street damage.
33:23The existing Fixing Our Streets Oversight Committee, which used to be primarily over the 10-cent local gas tax, is expanding its oversight to include the transportation utility fee and the street damage restoration fee.
33:34We really appreciate the volunteers on this committee embracing this larger scope and responsibility.
33:41At their next committee meeting on August 4th, the committee will review some updates to the bylaws to reflect this new responsibility and review an overview of our implementation progress, very similar to what you're seeing here today.
33:55Finally, as we've mentioned already a number of times, we'll be back again in September with more details on all of this.
34:01And we also— staff, we wanna make sure you all know, 'cause there's a lot of details here, that staff are available between now and September for any additional feedback or engagement on these items.
34:12And we encourage you all to be in touch.
34:14And then finally in November, we will be back to have a conversation about some things we'll have to put back in code with an ordinance.
34:22And next slide, please.
34:23And I believe that concludes our presentation.
34:25Thank you.
34:27Terrific.
34:27Thank you all, and welcome, Gabe.
34:30I imagine this is a little more complicated than a capital project.
34:34I don't know.
Gabe Graff 34:36 - 34:37
34:36It's a lot to learn.
34:37A lot to learn.
34:39Well, thanks, and welcome to the team.
34:41We really appreciate this update.
34:45I know you can't dive too deeply, but we appreciate at least getting the skeleton of what's going on.
34:50And I know we're going to have lots of questions and comments here today.
34:53So why don't we start with Councilor Kanal?
34:56Thank you, Chair Clark.
34:58Thanks everybody for being here.
34:59I appreciate the presentation.
35:02I, as I listened through the first, let's say, 18 slides, I appreciate, and the end as well, a lot of what's been done here.
35:10And it seems like the core function process is going forward.
35:15Councilor Avalos and I put up an amendment to the original ordinance back in— what was that, April?
35:21And it doesn't appear like a lot of work's been done on that yet.
35:27I appreciate, Shoshana, you saying that we're going to be coming back with more information in September, but my understanding is September is when you're also going to be asking us to vote.
35:37And so I don't know how we're going to have the opportunity to provide— if there's going to be the opportunity for a feedback loop.
35:43And I'll be more specific about what I'm looking at, but just from a process perspective, Are there going to be 2 different touchpoints in September, or is those going to be on the same— are those going to be on the same date?
35:52We're happy with you to work sort of as you sort of would like us to do.
35:58We can come with 2 points.
36:00I think that's why we were laying out sort of right now where we were, that we have those 3 options.
36:06So happy to follow up and make this work as you see.
36:11I think that we're also looking for some feedback on what we've what we presented today.
36:14So I think this is sort of one of the first, um, points, but again, happy to continue working with you as much as you would like.
36:21Yeah, I think in terms of the SDRF, it feels like I have no immediate concern there.
36:25I'll, I'll, um, follow up if anything comes up, but that, that feels like it's, it's going well.
36:30In terms of— and if you could go to slide 19, please.
36:33Um, the, uh, it'll be 19 and 20 primarily, but it'll start at 19.
36:39So the understanding that I have from how that amendment went is that the intention was to actually increase the amount of research and not limit it to what we already had.
36:54Actually, we should start with slide 20.
36:56I apologize.
36:58I'm a little surprised.
37:00I don't know if anyone else here is a renter, but I rent a market rate unit.
37:05The idea that it may require tenant to disclose income to owner, and that's a new thing, Is a little bizarre to me.
37:12You already have to do that.
37:14That's how you get approved for an apartment or rental.
37:18That's not a new thing.
37:19That happens just about everywhere around the city for 47% of us who rent.
37:25And so that being a concern there, it, you know, the second one having primarily seems to only have been based on a conversation with Austin, but also we— and the idea that we don't run electricity, so we can't— we run water and sewer though.
37:42We have that billing authority.
37:43So it seems like we're just— we've already decided that we want to go with the third option.
37:48And I want to be clear, I won't vote yes on anything if I don't get another option besides that in September.
37:54I am very opposed to that being the only thing that we explore.
37:58And it appears that's all that's been explored.
38:01Can— oh, go ahead.
38:02If I may, Councilor, thank you for raising your concern and referencing these are but 3, and we've not made a determination about which one.
38:15We're just talking about for implementation the challenges or lack of challenge with implementation if we chose one path over another.
38:25We're not suggesting that we wouldn't do the most involved resource— research-driven solution, but our team does need a little bit more time to continue to do the work.
38:35Thank you.
38:35Councilor Smith.
38:38Work to get to both the answers that you're wanting in terms of looking at a full panel of options and weighing that against the ability for us to do that implementation in a way that supports both the goals of this initiative as well as supports community that's being served by it.
38:56Yeah, and just to be clear, I am perfectly fine with the idea of taking more time on it.
39:02I'm also fine— I'm not saying I necessarily want to pursue either of these first 2 options.
39:07The challenges of associating this with a water bill.
39:10I am concerned that there was one opportunity, one option presented back in April for a specific, a specific not only methodology but vendor.
39:20And that's the only thing that has a green under it right now.
39:23So by putting a red and green up here, that's a thumb on the scale as far as how I interpret it and how I think the public will interpret it in terms of challenging and moderate.
39:32So I really want I want to be clear, I need a second option besides the one vendor and option that was brought up in April.
39:39I also want to be very clear that a couple things, just, and again, we are happy to sort of continue this conversation as much as possible.
39:48And I think we had reached out to your office last week to try to get some of this feedback.
39:52We're happy to, you know, we're here sharing sort of what is emerging, but we have no— we'll take as long as it needs.
39:59I do want to clarify that a couple things.
40:02We have done more research.
40:04It's been, in some ways, I think the team on this has dug in the most quickly and done, you know, this is just a hard area.
40:11As we said, there's not a lot of solutions nationally.
40:14So I think what we saw early on, we are continuing to see.
40:19I think if it was easy, if there were a lot of good solutions, more people would've done it.
40:23But I do want to be very clear that it wasn't, I know there was an earlier Water Bureau report.
40:27We've done more of our own original research.
40:28We really have been digging in.
40:31And then also on that third option, I think what we're saying is some sort of direct payment to people seems like the thing that people would want most.
40:44Like, send me a check.
40:45That seems like, you know, send me a check.
40:47Or for people who don't have bank accounts, send me a debit card, something.
40:51I know there is some conversation about a particular vendor.
40:54We are not saying that this is a recommendation for that particular vendor.
40:57We're saying that some sort of an app thing is still on the table.
41:01Some sort of a direct check is on the table.
41:02Some sort of a debit card.
41:05Something like that.
41:05And that's where we also are trying to talk to community organizations and people and say, what would you prefer?
41:11Would you like a check?
41:12Would you like, you know, would you like an app?
41:15Those are the things we're trying to dig in.
41:16But we are not saying— there's been no sort of conversation about this is, you know, this is what we're presenting.
41:23Again, I think the research so far did— has continued to lift up some of the challenges that we saw earlier.
41:29But we can go back.
41:31I think we also felt like we were under pressure to deliver by the beginning of the program or as close to that as possible, which means there's some limits.
41:40So I understand that.
41:43And I think just to correct the record here, the time was offered.
41:47My staff did meet.
41:48We asked if more research had been done.
41:49And in that briefing, we were told no.
41:52So I just want to get that on the record here.
41:55Secondly, I'm perfectly content to have other ways of doing the direct-to-tenant.
41:59Like, that can be subdivided into different options, and I get that.
42:04In terms of SEAMS, I do want to note, you know, I'm having a picnic and other events.
42:08We offered that to your staff to come to do the community engagement so that SEAMS can be verified by data, right?
42:16That's August 9th from 12 to 3 at McCoy Park.
42:18Anyone interested?
42:19But I just wanted to make sure that that's on the record here because I do understand the time crunch and I am content to look at potentially offering legislative flexibility to ensure that we're able to do it right.
42:39I'm concerned about being sort of shoved into the only option that was identified in April.
42:46And so that's what I'm trying to avoid here.
42:48Councilor, I think that we've clarified that there's actually a lot more going on or has gone on.
42:54And I think some things get lost in translation.
42:57So I would encourage you to personally discuss this with Shoshana or somebody else from the team if you can.
43:04My team did, and I'm happy to do it again.
43:06But I have the dates on that.
43:07You can check the team's records, public records there.
43:09Thanks.
43:10Thank you.
43:12Councilor Koyama Lane.
43:16Thank you, Chair.
43:20Sorry, I am virtual today.
43:24I wanted to say, as I was hearing this presentation, I wanted to say that I could really see that you all at PBOT really have taken close notes of what councilors are serious about and asking.
43:41So I know we don't have all of our answers and solutions yet, but I wanted to start with that, that I could really see that.
43:48And I can't see the faces of those who were presenting.
43:53It's kind of like teaching virtually on Zoom, but just know that I have appreciation there and hope you feel that.
44:01For my questions, you know, I'm just— I'm thinking about the limited Thank you.
44:05We just received tough revenues.
44:06It's really exciting.
44:07And we also have, you know, especially when thinking about Vision Zero, we have a lot to accomplish.
44:14There's a lot of different projects from capital projects to reporting, community engagement.
44:20I'm wondering how we can make sure that we're really strategically deploying those funds to make sure that projects that are going to save the most lives possible are prioritized, and I'm wondering if whoever is the best-suited person could kind of speak to some of the thinking and planning around that.
Gabe Graff 44:42 - 45:18
44:42Sure.
44:43I think in this first fiscal year, we're really focused on intersection improvements and using our data-driven approach.
44:52It's a limited amount of funding that we have available, so we're both looking to do, you know, proven safety countermeasures at intersections that have a documented crash history and leveraging other maintenance activities at intersections that have a proven crash history to provide safety benefits.
45:13So that's that sort of double approach.
45:15I think we can stretch the dollars the furthest and have the most safety benefit.
45:19And maybe I'll just add, the project selection is all driven by our PBOT Vision Zero team.
45:24I know there's, you know, there's the citywide Vision Zero lead, but we also still have a number of staff who are dedicated Vision Zero staff in PBOT, and they're the ones who are using the data to identify the projects.
45:38That's great to hear.
45:39Um, you know, following up on a question from last week's Committee of the Whole when we were talking about Vision Zero, I am wondering if there's a funding source that could be used for safety assessments and studies when we're paving streets to improve high crash quarters, kind of like like when we were talking about Burnside and the questions of like, could we be conducting traffic safety assessments before we're doing big PBOT projects?
46:10Could TUF funds be deployed for those types of studies?
46:13Is that something that is possible?
46:18Thank you for the question, Councilor Koyama Lane.
46:22The safety assessment is something that we start with and we end with.
46:27So there's pre-evaluation.
46:27It helps to to inform which projects we select, the types of things, the types of treatment that we actually provide at locations.
46:38And then in many instances, especially those where we're making a very significant investment, and by that I mean capital projects, we do post-work assessment after a number of years to determine the effectiveness of that work.
46:52We use that to guide our efforts in ways that ensure that As Gabe has mentioned, we're making the most impactful choices in the ways that we deliver our work.
47:05With regard to us being able to identify funding within the TUF funding, based on the prescription that this body has provided for us, we would need to ensure that that would be something that we would be able to pull out.
47:23If we would define it as being a component of a project, perhaps that's a way.
47:28But— That is something that we would need to discuss further in terms of how to actually finance something like that.
47:34As you are well aware, we have very limited discretionary funding to be able to do other things.
47:42I don't want to say extra things, but other or additional things.
47:44And so we would need to be creative in figuring out how to best do that.
47:47I'm not saying it's a no.
47:48I'm just saying I think we need to have more time to be able to go back and do the assessment to determine how we might be able to do the work that you're asking for.
47:56Thank you, Director.
47:56That's really helpful.
47:58And what I heard you say is that before there are big projects, that there, there are safety analyses happening already.
48:05So that might be something that's, that's already part of the culture and part of the process.
48:11Is that what— did I hear you correctly?
48:12Because that is what I'm—.
48:13For the public to know that.
48:14Yes, that's what I'm saying.
48:15I think that there's a lot of behind-the-scenes work that happens before any project even breaks ground.
48:22And what we are actually excited about being able to do is to tell our story better because of the need for us to amplify this is what TUF is paying for.
48:33People need to know what goes into the choices that we make, that we aren't just arbitrarily deciding on a site and a plan to deliver, but rather that we're looking at any number of factors before making a determination.
48:46Before we cut once, we measure twice to ensure that we're doing the right and best things.
48:52And—.
48:53I think I agree that it's an important thing for a community to know.
48:58I know that we've had lots of conversations about people's impressions about some of the work that we do and the what and the why.
49:04So we are going to be able to use, we believe, this opportunity to better amplify the whole of what PBOT does as an organization and why all of those components are important in us delivering ultimately for the communities that we're serving.
49:19Thank you for that, Director.
49:20And if there's any way that I can help, my office can help with boosting some of that sharing, let me know.
49:27I know there's a lot of behind the scenes that the public needs to know more about, so let me know how I can help.
49:33And my last question is, looking at slide 14, it's really exciting to see, you know, different ways that those Vision Zero funds will be used and I'm just wondering, like, looking specifically at the capital improvements, is this— is that kind of a set list?
49:55I know the no turn on red is something that Councilor Smith and I are excited about and are working on.
50:02But I'm wondering, yeah, and how long will funds be reserved for that?
50:08Is it really the first 6 months?
50:11Into 2027.
50:14Is there— how flexible is that list?
50:17I know my team has— is in the beginning stages of exploring what it would look like to have 4-way stops on corners that are adjacent to schools.
50:28Is that something that can be added to that list?
50:31Is it something that would be considered in the next fiscal year?
50:34If someone could speak a little bit to Slide 14 in that list, that would be great.
Gabe Graff 50:41 - 51:22
50:41Sure, thank you for the question.
50:43Yeah, we're really— the list of capital improvements on this slide is for this fiscal year, for this $2.9 million.
50:53So I think looking forward to next fiscal year and future fiscal years, that list can grow and we can work in consultation with all of you on what the— highest and best use of those safety funds are.
51:10And I think in September when we come with our investment strategy, we'll look at not just the first 6 months but the first 18 months, year and a half, to sort of flesh that out a little bit more.
51:24Great.
51:24Thank you so much for your work on this, everyone.
51:26That's it for me for now.
51:29Thank you, Councilor.
51:30And I'm— I appreciate you bringing up Burnside because all of I want to come back to that in a moment.
51:35Councilor Green.
51:37Thank you, Chair Clark.
51:39Thank you so much, PBOT, for the presentation today.
51:44Big stuff and a lot to chew on here.
51:48I want to jump right into the tough kind of rate design question.
51:55Back in April when we were contemplating this ordinance, I had sort of signaled that I might bring an amendment to change the rate design, and then I pulled that back because I thought that was hazardous to do on the fly.
52:09I think it is still a hazardous thing to do on the fly, but part of my commitment for the ordinance and the fee schedule itself was understanding that we're going to work together to kind of look at taking another bite at the apple on how to design the rate structure.
52:25So it's not so impactful and regressive to particularly— I mean, the commercial side of the question is going to be pretty hard for a lot of our small businesses.
52:36So, and I know that on your implementation schedule, I see a non-residential rate hearing scheduled for February 15th.
52:42So that's good.
52:43But I guess the question I have is, where is that work happening now?
52:49Is that— is the rate design question Is there a discussion happening sort of internally behind the scenes now?
52:55How can I engage on this?
52:57Yes, thank you very much for the question.
52:59And we spoke to one of your staff just yesterday, I believe, about this.
53:02So to date, we've been doing some research, talking.
53:06We have a couple of, you know, super smart people on this stuff.
53:09So we've been doing a little bit of initial research.
53:13And then what we spoke to one of your staff about just yesterday is we would really like to engage more with your office because of the feedback you gave so that we can make sure that what the research we're doing is really reflecting what you and, and, um, you know, what, what you're interested in.
53:28Um, and again, have a touch point.
53:31So I think there is some sort of behind-the-scenes work, I guess, and then have another touch point on that publicly in September so that then we can be ready for the rate hearings in January or February, as we sort of said, by February 15th.
53:43But we— it was initial research today, and now I think we're ready to sort of start engaging and making sure we're on track and just dive in deeper.
53:49Thank you.
53:50That's great to hear.
53:51And I just kind of want to offer this, um, you know, council has a recess in the last 2 weeks of August.
53:57I will personally be on hand to dive deeply with, with you guys on that.
54:02So please consider my office a resource.
54:04Me personally, I, I'm actually kind of looking forward to literally rolling my sleeves up and maybe cracking open some spreadsheets and kind of working with folks to try to make it clear, like, what it is I'm looking for and raise any concerns that I might to have or present some opportunities.
54:18Because I think if we can do that together in that timeline and have that first look in September be something with some real meat around it, I think that's going to go a long way towards communicating to the public to say, don't worry, we're not pushing this off.
54:34We're being very proactive in understanding that there's going to be this sort of differential impact not only on your bottom line but the question— the broad question of fairness.
54:42And happy to clear my schedule and make myself available for that work.
54:47Thank you.
54:48Yeah, and, you know, thanks for talking to my staff about this.
54:51I got a little pre-brief on that this morning, and so just kind of bringing this into the public and making sure folks understand that we are talking about that.
54:59So that is good.
55:00There's a lot— as you all know, there's a lot of different ways to get to a number.
55:05There's a ton of ways you can design rates to get there, and they all they all have trade-offs.
55:08And so just being crystal clear about the trade-offs, who loses, who wins, I think is a critical matter of public interest.
55:17And I'll support that.
55:19The next question I have is related to SIP.
55:22Actually, first of all, I'm just going to say I appreciate on slide 8 just the call out to the oversight committee and recognize the importance of that.
55:32Thank you.
55:34I keep— I'm going to sound like a broken record, but every single meeting I'm at, at the dais now, I'm going to talk about this Metro polling that we received on the housing bond and why voters, if you were to put the housing bond out now, would say no.
55:46It's because they say that we don't do enough oversight in our public bodies.
55:50And so every opportunity that we have to say we recognize there's issues with trust in the public sector, with the administration of our dollars.
56:01We're going to hit that head-on.
56:03We're going to do oversight on ourselves voluntarily.
56:05That's a really good thing.
56:06I'm going to support that.
56:08So thanks for calling that out.
56:11Councilor, before you go to your next question, I just wanted to acknowledge that that oversight committee really is an active body.
56:19They're not just there to say that they're there and for us to check a box.
56:23We bring forward project work, we ask them to help us to make decisions about prioritization.
56:31If we have the opportunities to see savings on one project, we ask their guidance about where they would like to see the additional investment go.
56:39If we find that we have a gap, we ask if there are recommendations for how we might not just fill the gap but make different decisions and potentially even sometimes make a different decision about a project altogether, whether or not we would make a minimal investment or hope for something to happen and be able to— and on the other hand, be able to fully complete a project.
57:01We're asking for that type of guidance.
57:03And in addition to having the oversight committee provide the insight, and we report to them and work with them on a quarterly basis, we will also have, as we've discussed previously, dashboards for the public to be able to see exactly where we are.
57:19Exactly what we're doing, what the timelines are, just like we have project websites now, but it'll be in a centralized location to ensure that people are able to see exactly where their dollar is going, when it's going to be invested, and what the outcomes of that work will be.
Gabe Graff 57:35 - 57:35
57:35I appreciate it.
57:36As I remember, I think that the members of the Oversight Committee came during the hearings on the TUF too and testified before us, so we might want to have them yeah, at some point.
57:46Absolutely.
57:47We're happy to bring them with you.
57:49I'm sure they would be happy to come.
57:50And they, you know, anytime that we have, you know, big questions around rate design or anything like that, just, I'd love to hear, I'd love, I'd love to know what that oversight committee is, is, uh, how they're, how they're engaging on those kind of questions.
58:06They'd be happy to be involved with that as well.
58:09Um, thank you for interjecting.
58:11I'm just interjecting and kind of adding that there.
58:12Feel free to always interrupt me too, because sometimes I get on a rant.
58:15I'll try not to, but—.
58:17No, it's— you've never seen that before, have you?
58:19Um, okay, uh, I want to go now to the Vision Zero stuff.
58:24I want to pick up on something that Councilor Koyama Lane was asking about in the '26-'27 programming.
58:29There's the $2.9 million of Vision Zero programming, um, and there's some enumeration of the capital improvements.
58:39Uh, I see, I see some great stuff.
58:41I see no turn on red.
58:43I see, um, signal head reflective black back plates, pedestrian head starts, high-vis crosswalk mark, and protected left turns.
58:51I don't see daylighting on there, and I wonder why.
58:56Is that just sort of embedded, or is it implicit, or are we not thinking about that as a Vision Zero investment?
59:03No, it's not that we're not thinking about it.
59:04It's that this is a limited set of funding.
59:08And I think in this year especially, the team is focused on, you know, has lifted up these things.
59:16And I actually, we may have to double, we may have to follow up, but I'm pretty sure we actually have some other funding that we're continuing to do some daylighting with.
59:24So I think that work will be continuing through this year, just not with the TUF funds.
59:29But we can triple check that.
59:30Thank you.
Mitch Green 59:31 - 1:00:01
59:31Okay, thanks for that answer.
59:33I just want to note that Hoboken, New Jersey had some high success by doing like infrastructure, physical barrier-based daylighting.
59:43I mean, they had the flex posts, which are one tool, which are not very expensive.
59:48Also planters in a daylight zone.
59:51You know, there'll be some folks on that street who are used to parking in that spot and they'll be cranky about it, but I do also think—.
Shoshana Cohen 1:00:01 - 1:00:23
1:00:01I know because we have been doing daylighting, and I, again, we can double-check.
1:00:04I don't think we have the team in the room, but I think that we have done daylighting on most of our high-crash corridors already.
1:00:10So these are other interventions at our high-crash intersections, but I know with the daylighting work we've been doing, there's been already an emphasis on high-crash network areas.
1:00:21So maybe that in these places is already done.
1:00:23And I also think that daylighting is a good thing.
Millicent Williams 1:00:24 - 1:02:09
1:00:24I also wanted to mention that all of our capital projects, if they're visiting the streetscapes, it's incorporated in all of those capital projects.
1:00:35So we have several dozen projects where daylighting is a key component.
1:00:42That would not be something that's funded by TUF.
1:00:44That's funded through the capital program that we have.
1:00:47But that is something that we're thinking about all the time.
1:00:49Thank you.
1:00:51The concerted effort that we had earlier this year and found funding to support daylighting is something that— is what Shoshana was mentioning.
1:01:01We do have the opportunity to continue to do that.
1:01:03And I would dare say, while this is a good list, I wouldn't suggest that it's an exhaustive list.
1:01:11So there may be things that are not raising to the level of being mentioned in the slide that we'll be doing.
1:01:17Thank you.
1:01:18But we can certainly make sure that we keep daylighting front of mind.
1:01:21It is an important thing for me as well.
1:01:24I've mentioned it, I believe, before this body, having lived in other places.
1:01:29When I moved here, I was like, why are people parking up to the stop sign?
1:01:32That seems very strange to me.
1:01:34I've never seen that.
1:01:35I lived in a city that in front of my house I used to get tickets because I would be too close to the stop sign.
1:01:42And so that's a behavior change that we need to work on with folks, helping them to understand that it is safety that we're seeking.
1:01:49And we recognize that losing a parking space in the front of your house, if that's something that you're used to, may be hard for folks.
1:01:58But it is something that we look forward to being able to continue to do in places where it's a particular need, especially.
1:02:06Not that we don't need to do it everywhere, but where it's a particular need.
Mitch Green 1:02:10 - 1:03:49
1:02:10Yes.
1:02:10I appreciate you recognizing that.
1:02:11And I'll just note that, you know, it's even In some of the business district neighborhoods, it's just really common for folks who are visiting to park.
1:02:21Or I used to live in Brooklyn.
1:02:24When there's a show at the Aladdin, you get folks who are basically parking in the intersection at that point.
1:02:28And so I get that you want to find a place to spark, but it's unacceptable and people get hurt from it.
1:02:34So thank you for acknowledging that this is not an exhaustive list.
1:02:38Thank you.
1:02:39This isn't really— I do think it's actually relevant, and I don't know, what do like photo radar ticketing machines, how do they play into this?
1:02:50I know there's some— I certainly don't want flock style, you know, photo radar, but I've had constituents— we have constituents who live in like the Forest Park part of the city in the district, and Skyline Boulevard is increasingly used as a cut-through, a major cut-through.
1:03:08And it's not—.
1:03:10It's, you know, there's speed bumps on Skyline, but people go off into the ditch all the time.
1:03:16And what they've asked for— I don't know if you've had this conversation— No, I haven't.
1:03:20But they've asked for, can we get a ticketing radar system up front before they get into that part of the road and start to send some of that signal, that sort of like behavioral change stuff.
1:03:35If that's at all in the world of what you're contemplating now, I just want to lend my support to that.
1:03:40This is something my neighbors are asking for.
1:03:43And so it's not one of these things where it's like we're going to plop this in and now we're really mad at you.
1:03:47It's very much like, please put this on my street.
Olivia Clark 1:03:49 - 1:03:51
1:03:49Well, it's a preventative measure, right?
Mitch Green 1:03:51 - 1:03:52
1:03:51It's a preventative measure.
1:03:51Exactly.
1:03:52Sure.
1:03:53So thank you for that, Councilor.
1:03:56We will need to work together to identify how we can best deploy that tool to do that preventative work that we're talking about.
1:04:04Right now, our cameras are on the high-crash network, and we don't have the team here that's responsible for managing that system.
1:04:13We are always open to figuring out how we can more comprehensively provide that coverage that's necessary.
1:04:22In the space of not having other tools available, we know that that works.
1:04:31And so what we want to be able to do is figure out how we can further enhance the camera network, ensuring that we're using it as a meaningful tool, not a punitive tool, but something that helps to, again, And do it in places where we would glean the most benefit.
1:04:54So happy to have that conversation.
Olivia Clark 1:04:55 - 1:05:38
1:04:55I just want to add to that, Councilor Green.
1:04:58I've had this conversation with Councilor Novick, who's really dug into it, and I think one of the problems is the judicial pipeline in processing the tickets, if you will.
1:05:11And he's thinking about maybe a legislative effort to help fund the judicial department to process our ticketing, and that there is the potential to expand it.
1:05:23We just have this little backlog at that end of the process.
1:05:28So I think there's a lot of support for expanding this program, absolutely, as an alternative to other kinds of things.
1:05:36So we might want to talk to Councilor Novick.
1:05:38And the revenue the funding that's received does cover the cost of the camera.
1:05:42So it's not like we would be having to identify additional funding.
Olivia Clark 1:05:45 - 1:05:47
1:05:45But it's not— we're not making money on it.
1:05:47No.
1:05:48And it's not intended to be a moneymaker for us.
Mitch Green 1:05:51 - 1:06:19
1:05:51Yeah.
1:05:52And this is just one of those situations where, I mean, I'll name some of the controversy around this style of measure.
1:05:57It tends to hit folks who are lower income and already suffer from a series of sort of overlapping oppressions.
1:06:05And of an economic and broad nature.
1:06:08But people who live on Skyline Boulevard tend to be a little more privileged.
1:06:13And so, like, the risk factor in that regard is different.
1:06:16So I think let us know how we can help.
1:06:19We've really grappled with the placement of the cameras and recognizing that they're on high crash corridors where the majority of the high crash corridors are, which means that the people who are harmed once are harmed twice are harmed and so, um, figuring that out will be, um, something we want to work together on.
1:06:38Uh, but there, uh, hopefully at a point, uh, those— the number of high-crash corridors and the things that we think to do on them, uh, to create a safer environment will, um, be fewer.
1:06:52So, uh, it'll give us an opportunity to be more judicious in the ways that we're spreading around yeah, that's one way to put it.
Mitch Green 1:07:02 - 1:08:24
1:07:02Thank you.
1:07:04One more question, if I may.
1:07:06Just turning to SIP now, thanks for having a slide on SIP.
1:07:11It's good to show what a muddy pathway looks like versus what we could have.
1:07:18And sending that signal to voters is pretty key when it comes to sort of saying, like, here's here's how your tax dollars are transforming into something that's good for you.
1:07:27Um, on that note, uh, I know that there's some sequencing and timing about the collection of our revenues from TUF versus when we can really start to do this work.
1:07:36And I know these are— this was a budget allocation that was put in the budget to get some SIP money going.
1:07:41Um, but I want to just raise again my support for bonding against TUF-related revenues for SIP.
1:07:49Because $2.9 million would support something like $27 million in bonds.
1:07:55And then if we were to sort of front-load that work in that kind of a way, we could do more at once and then put up a big sign that says, brought to you by SIP.
1:08:04And this is— and it's— and it's— these bonds are backed by this revenue that you are paying, by the way.
1:08:10And so that's how this transportation utility fee translates into not walking in the mud and actually having a and so I don't, I don't know if you guys are working on a— with Jonas to sort of put together a bonding proposal for council, but I, I would really like to see that.
1:08:25There are conversations that are happening.
1:08:27I also know that the city administrator is particularly keen on figuring out how we can bond against some of the investments that are planned or being made.
1:08:35And so we look forward to being able to come back and talk about that more.
Mitch Green 1:08:38 - 1:08:39
1:08:38All right, thanks so much.
Olivia Clark 1:08:39 - 1:08:53
1:08:39Thank you, Councilor Green.
1:08:42Great question.
1:08:43Now, I have quite a list, but they're short.
1:08:47We have a pothole backlog.
1:08:50I'm just wondering how you're prioritizing the potholes.
1:08:53So we're going to be doing 2 things.
1:08:55We're going to continue to take the reports that people provide for us on a daily basis.
1:09:01And when those reports come in, the team's measure is to fill those potholes or fill the potholes within that area.
1:09:10Within 30 days.
1:09:11And so we are within the frame of— we are within the limits of doing that.
1:09:16But we also intend to, on a quarterly basis, pick a district— not pick a district, but go district by district.
1:09:25I gotcha.
1:09:27And we will do some targeting work, targeted work on areas where we know that there are particular challenges.
1:09:35So it's going to be 2 things happening at one time.
1:09:38Kind of like driving a stick.
1:09:39We're going to continue to do the daily work that we're doing, but we're going to have some— I don't want to go so far as to call it pothole paloozas because that may turn my maintenance team— they may get a little upset with me when I say it.
1:09:54But mini paloozas all around to make sure that people are seeing the thing that they're wanting to see.
1:10:03Thank you.
1:10:05That's terrific.
Olivia Clark 1:10:06 - 1:10:09
1:10:06I imagine you have quite a backlog though, quite a list.
1:10:10We have a good number, but we also tick through quite a few on an annual basis.
Olivia Clark 1:10:14 - 1:10:20
1:10:14Terrific.
1:10:15That's so meaningful.
1:10:16You know, I talked about pothole vigilantes, and I hope we can prevent that.
1:10:21We would like to prevent that, but I think—.
Olivia Clark 1:10:23 - 1:10:42
1:10:23I don't think there's any in our district, Councilor Green.
1:10:27But I am interested in the idea of having a vigilante.
1:10:29In the possibility in the future, you don't have to answer this, but just is there the possibility of some sort of neighborhood association training for painting the sidewalk, not sidewalk.
1:10:42Vision clearance?
Olivia Clark 1:10:43 - 1:10:58
1:10:43Yeah, or any of that.
1:10:44Is there any potential?
1:10:46Because I've got folks that want to go out and paint the stripes on their street.
1:10:51You know, it's easy to do.
1:10:52Can we train them?
1:10:53Can we give them the right paint?
1:10:55Is there a multiplier?
1:10:56Is that a possibility to do a pilot?
1:10:58Sure, that is a possibility.
1:11:00We currently actually do work with an organization of volunteers that do some of that work with and for us.
1:11:06So we could look at how we could replicate that around the city.
1:11:10Obviously, that would allow us to do more.
1:11:12I hate to use the term do more with less, but it would help us to create the opportunity to do more with more, with more people.
Olivia Clark 1:11:20 - 1:11:27
1:11:20Can you send me a link to that?
1:11:22Because I think we've got neighborhood associations that would just love to be engaged in that kind of activity.
1:11:27There are a number of ways that we could engage volunteers, and you and I, Councilor, have talked about volunteer engagement.
1:11:34It is a little bit more difficult with some of the work that we do based on the fact that it's often union-represented staff that are doing those types of things.
1:11:43So we have to be thoughtful about which areas of we can provide support for or take volunteer hours on.
1:11:52But I think we know that the volunteer hour is valuable.
1:11:55In the state of Oregon, volunteer hour right now is valued at about $35 per hour.
1:12:01So if you get a few folks together on a weekend or a weekday, we're making investments in our community in ways that people may not even realize by engaging that volunteer support.
Olivia Clark 1:12:10 - 1:12:30
1:12:10Terrific.
1:12:11That's great.
1:12:13Just an observation that there's got to be some overlap between what we're doing in maintenance and operations and Vision Zero.
1:12:21It seems like the Vision Zero number seems kind of low, but there is— there's a lot of— seems like there's a lot of projects within the maintenance category that are Vision Zero.
1:12:30If Jody were here, she would tell you maintenance is safety.
1:12:34And it is.
1:12:34That is true.
1:12:36A lot of the work that is being done is It's been identified because of its nexus with the need to create a safer environment for the traveling public.
1:12:45And by traveling public, I mean however anyone is moving about the system.
1:12:49So to suggest that it is not being invested in safety would be a bit of a fallacy.
1:12:58I would share that we would classify— be able to classify much of our maintenance work as safety.
Olivia Clark 1:13:03 - 1:13:13
1:13:03Not to make more work for you, but work for you, but somewhere down the line it might be interesting to try to quantify that or just to show that a lot of this, a lot of the maintenance work really falls into Vision Zero.
1:13:13I'll share that when we started the Vision—.
1:13:15Excuse me, Vision Zero, but the Fixing Our Streets work, we were required to separate the work out by maintenance versus safety.
1:13:27Were those the buckets?
1:13:29Yeah, yeah, it was 4357.
1:13:32So we, we, we have a tool to be able to determine what is, is, um, but, uh, sometimes, um, uh, that is a, a challenging definition to reach.
1:13:44And so we are making sure that we're landing in the same space in terms of what maintenance means and what safety means and how we can, um, uh, separate out those buckets.
1:13:51I'll share that I was in a conversation at the state level, uh, talking about maintenance maintenance, preservation, and safety.
1:13:57And one of the things that I shared in that conversation was one person's preservation is another person's maintenance is another person's capital program.
1:14:07So it's the meeting of the minds on the definitions, making sure we're articulating that clearly both to this body but also to the general public so that there is an understanding about what is happening and what is funding that work.
1:14:21That's excellent.
1:14:22Yeah, so we can certainly work on to do that.
Olivia Clark 1:14:24 - 1:14:40
1:14:24Couple more quick questions.
1:14:26So I know that a lot of this work that you're doing that was in our request requires help from BTS.
1:14:34And I'm just wondering, I know that, you know, with core realignment and they have a long priority list, if you're getting the help that you need.
1:14:41We have, as we were asked to provide insight to BTS on what our priorities would be or needed to be, especially in the coming weeks and months.
1:14:52We shared that the implementation of the TUF was something that we needed to make sure that they continued to focus on.
1:14:58There are a number of other programs that we use on a daily basis that we're anticipating understanding how BTS will be able to provide the levels of support that are necessary to provide continuity of operation.
1:15:11But we've been in direct conversation and in fact, I just heard from Director Rosenberg 2 days ago about connecting on Maximo, which is another system that we use, the work order system.
1:15:24We also use eBuilder, which is a tool that BES also uses.
1:15:28All of those are tools that we need to depend heavily on BTS to help to support.
1:15:34And so we're in those conversations.
1:15:35Okay.
1:15:36And then of course GIS is another one that depending on the flavor of the work, it takes on many different forms, but we're working to make sure that they are well aligned with our needs and expectations.
1:15:50And while we will probably need to come back to report about how the pace of some of the work has needed to adjust based on that centralization effort, know that we have made sure that they're aware of the importance.
Olivia Clark 1:16:06 - 1:16:32
1:16:06And just let us know.
1:16:11I want to go back to the question that Councilor Koyama Lane brought up, and in the context of Burnside, there's been a lot of pushback by some of our constituents on the work that you're planning to do.
1:16:26And I know that on page 11 you talked about the level of complexity, and I just wondered, can you address that?
1:16:33Sure.
Olivia Clark 1:16:33 - 1:16:44
1:16:33A little bit for us what's going on there?
1:16:35I know it was a— it is a high-crash corridor, and there are definitely maintenance needs on Burnside.
1:16:42So just, can you address it?
1:16:44I certainly am happy to address it, and I'm going to not ask Gabe to take the weight of some of the choices, but he is the project manager for yet another— he was the project manager for 4th as well.
1:16:55So he's pretty well adept at addressing really strong needs and opinions of community.
1:17:04I will share that as we were looking at the landscape of the city and the needs citywide, there were a number of streets of significance, and I would not necessarily call it as— this one is a street of citywide significance, but some of the streets that we looked at that were in need of a touch based on where they are, what they carry, how they currently operate that needed some care.
1:17:32The Burnside Bridge project was planned some years ago.
1:17:37The funding for that fell through.
1:17:38That was when we were going to work to do work on Burnside.
1:17:43Oh.
1:17:43Since that did not happen, we were looking at the need to figure out how we could address some of the needs, especially around not just the aesthetic, but the actual use of Burnside and the practicality of the use of Burnside, because it is a gateway to the city.
1:18:04And if you drive it, if you walk along it, we recognize there are places where it's particularly wide, especially at the bridgehead.
1:18:12There are places where the crossings are particularly challenging for pedestrians.
1:18:17We recognize that circulation is a challenge all throughout that corridor.
1:18:22But what is at its foundational element challenging is the general condition.
1:18:29And so the call was, and I will share that I challenged the team to identify a way for us to address Burnside.
1:18:37And when I asked the team to look into that work, I said, we're going to address the maintenance needs, and I recognize that there are probably going to be needs for us to go back and do more, especially because of the need for considerations around safety.
1:18:56The sidewalks are particularly narrow in certain portions of that corridor.
1:19:00All of those things were things that we knew going in that we would need to think about.
1:19:05And so Gabe and the team looked at a phased approach, and he worked with our maintenance folks as well to figure out the best ways to address the areas of greatest need, see where we had already made some investment, which is why the phasing is how it is.
1:19:20There were some investments that were made, and again, Gabe can speak to some of that.
1:19:23But it was buses stuck in ruts, people not being able to cross the street, people's heels getting stuck while they're trying to make crossings.
1:19:36The businesses that are contributing so much to the brand of the city, sitting right in a space where the neglect that has been a symptom of under or lack of investment— Powell's being right there— it was an eyesore for us.
1:20:02And so that was my challenge to the team.
1:20:05Did we think about all of the full universe of ways that we might be able to reimagine the corridor?
1:20:14I will share that in the urgency to move, my request is that— was that we not forego, but that we phase it so that we could look at how we might be able to get to a better place on that corridor.
1:20:29And so the 3 phases would be happening over the course of 3 years.
1:20:32Thank you.
1:20:33Which does provide the opportunity for community input, for feedback, for recommendations.
1:20:39Doing what we would imagine would be something that folks would desire in terms of bringing it to a certain level would require a significant level of investment, which, as we know, we do not have.
1:20:52What we are fortunate in, though, is that there are alternatives on either side of Burnside that we have made investments in.
1:20:59Okay.
1:20:59Investments in for folks to be able to use, um, that aren't just car-centric.
1:21:05Um, and so, uh, we want to be able to highlight that as well as, as we continue to think about how we're going to reimagine, uh, Burnside.
Olivia Clark 1:21:14 - 1:21:52
1:21:14Well, I think I, I wasn't aware of the 3 phases, and I don't know that the public, um, that we've heard from in District 4 was, uh, aware of the phases.
1:21:23So it would be helpful perhaps for Councilor Green and I to receive maybe some more information or an explanation of exactly why we're doing what we're doing now and not doing the full meal deal.
1:21:34That it is— if there's a plan for it phased in.
1:21:37And I think it was germane too that you mentioned the bridge, how that kind of— the loss of funding for the bridge kind of changed, um, our trajectory.
1:21:45So I think that would be helpful for at least us two and possibly for, um, the whole committee to hear I can share that.
1:21:52And there's some more analysis that has been planned based on some of the feedback that we've received.
1:22:00We have received the letters and calls for pauses or other actions.
1:22:06I don't know, Gabe, if there's anything else you'd like to share, if I covered it.
Gabe Graff 1:22:09 - 1:22:43
1:22:09I think that was a pretty good summary.
1:22:10The first phase of work is between 15th and 20th on West Burnside, and that segment we selected because as the Director noted, we've made a number of safety and crossing investments already at 18th and 19th and 15th and 16th.
1:22:27Most of the corners of the corridor in that segment have been upgraded and are fully accessible and certified.
1:22:34So it's the segment of West Burnside where the least additional work is needed in order to—.
Tiffany Koyama Lane 1:22:43 - 1:22:43
1:22:43Thank you.
Unidentified speaker 1:22:48 - 1:23:57
1:22:48Well, just getting some sort of explanation spelled out for us would be really helpful for us to respond to our constituents.
1:22:54So let me move on really quickly and just get heads up, colleagues.
1:22:59I think I want to— when I'm done, I'll turn this over to Councilor Kanal, and then we'll take a break before we go on to the next issue.
1:23:07Just one quick question.
1:23:09Yeah, Quick I just wanted to make sure question, very painful.
1:23:12I know that in the state legislature there's going to be another effort to have a transportation package, and there's been conversation among some legislators, as we saw evidence at the last— the short session, about changing the distribution formula, the 50/30/20, which is truly the Holy Grail.
1:23:29It has always been the Holy Grail.
1:23:31And I just wondered if you have done an estimate.
1:23:33Should that change?
1:23:33I think that's a very good question.
1:23:36What we might lose, the range of the dollars that we would lose if they change the formula.
1:23:42You don't have to answer that now, but I'm concerned about that, and it'll be on our legislative agenda that we don't want to have that change.
1:23:50If anything, it should change in our direction.
1:23:53But that's a real concern for me, and just a heads up.
1:23:57I can just share, I mean, I think, yes, we've heard the conversation about potentially changing.
1:24:02I haven't heard yet.
1:24:04I mean, I hope that there is not a cities don't get anything.
1:24:07I think that there's been some conversation about changing the proportion.
1:24:11So there's sort of too many things to have done specific estimates, but it would be, as you know, very impactful.
1:24:17Certainly any amount that they reduce of our share will be very impactful.
1:24:22That still contributes a large amount towards our general transportation revenue.
1:24:27So continuing to see the state share, you know, again, we know you guys have done this important work to stay thank you so much.
Olivia Clark 1:24:39 - 1:24:42
1:24:39I'm going to turn this over to Councilor Kanal.
1:24:41He's got more questions.
Sameer Kanal 1:24:43 - 1:25:40
1:24:43Thank you, Chair Clark.
1:24:44It's actually a comment, not a question.
1:24:46So just to kind of indicate where I'm thinking about this as we go forward, I think my vote on this back in April was contingent on credible affordability analysis.
1:24:59I think it's clear that Portland costs are rising.
1:25:02Renters have expressed their inability to keep up, and I want to make sure that our most financially burdened and hurting multifamily residents are not required to foot the bill completely when they don't have access to discount programs.
1:25:14And I want to appreciate— I know that the staff has told us and has told you, Madam Chair, that it's operationally expensive to deliver discounts.
1:25:20I appreciate the challenge in front of them, and I appreciate the work that they're doing on this.
1:25:23Thank you.
1:25:24This.
1:25:24Um, but I want to make sure that I'm, I'm on the record as saying, you know, choosing to deliver this bill in a way that is easy and/or cheap for the city but harmful for our community's most vulnerable was not a policy decision that I thought I was voting on in April.
1:25:38So I just want to put that on the record.
1:25:39Thanks.
Olivia Clark 1:25:40 - 1:26:08
1:25:40Thank you, Councilor Kanal, for that clarification.
1:25:43I appreciate it.
1:25:44Um, I don't think we have any other questions at this point.
1:25:49Um, it's been a great great update, great conversation.
1:25:52Really appreciate the work that you're doing.
1:25:53I know there's a lot more work to come, and we'll be really interested in hearing about it in September.
1:25:58So thank you, thank you all again.
1:26:01And with that, colleagues, let's take a 10-minute break.
1:26:04When we come back at 11:01— I mean, yes, 11:01.
Mitch Green 1:26:08 - 1:26:08
1:26:08Yeah, just a bit.
Olivia Clark 1:38:49 - 1:40:33
1:38:49Well, welcome back everyone.
1:38:51Sorry we're a little late.
1:38:54Um, Diana, can you please read the next item, item number 3, document number 2026-266, Automated Vehicles Rulemaking Update.
1:39:08Thank you, Diana.
1:39:10Um, colleagues, uh, we've been really eager to dig into the whole issue of automated vehicles, and we're going to get an update today on PBOT's rulemaking efforts.
1:39:22And the public input that they've received throughout this process.
1:39:26Additionally, PBOT staff are going to be reviewing the regulatory pathways that we could pursue to ensure that automated vehicles operate safely and contribute their fair share towards our infrastructure.
1:39:41This is a good opportunity for us colleagues to learn about approaches that other jurisdictions have taken to regulate autonomous vehicles and what we can also learn from them.
1:39:53But it's important that we, our council, sets this regulatory framework to ensure the best outcome for the city.
1:40:00My goal, which I've shared with some of you, is to really take a unified approach to this work to the extent that we can and develop in consort with our colleagues at PBOT committee ordinances that we can move to the full council sometime this fall or before the end of the year in anticipation of the 2027 state legislative session, where we know this was an issue in this short session and is due to come back in January.
1:40:29So with that, I'll hand it off to Director Williams.
1:40:32Hello again.
1:40:33Fancy seeing you here.
Olivia Clark 1:40:34 - 1:40:34
1:40:34Welcome back.
1:40:35Thank you.
Olivia Clark 1:40:35 - 1:40:36
1:40:35Thank you and your team.
1:40:37So thank you, Council Vice President Clark.
1:40:41For the record, my name is Millicent Williams, and I am the director of the Portland Bureau of Transportation.
1:40:46We are here today to discuss automated vehicles.
1:40:49This is a quickly evolving new technology that is already having a big impact in multiple cities across the country.
1:40:56The City of Portland began preparing for automated vehicles in 2017, but as you've heard from this team when they presented their draft proposal in February to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, much has changed since then, and the industry is expanding more quickly now.
1:41:11You'll hear today from PBOT staff who've been learning about the impacts of AVs from peer cities and have been working with staff from across our own city to consider a path forward.
1:41:22I want to thank you for your time and consideration this morning, and now I'll turn it over to PBOT Chief of Staff Shoshana Cohen to begin the presentation this morning.
1:41:30Thank you, Director Williams.
1:41:32Good morning, Council Vice President Clark and members of the committee.
1:41:35Again, for the record, my name is Shoshana Cohen and I'm the Chief of Staff for the Portland Bureau of Transportation.
1:41:41Here we have the agenda for our presentation.
1:41:44We'll first provide an overview of the strategy that we've been sort of taking so far around automated vehicles.
1:41:49We'll then move into an update on the administrative rulemaking process, including an overview of feedback received from Portlanders during our public comment period.
1:41:58And finally, we'll discuss a set of policy concepts that we'd like your feedback on, and your input will help us sort of collectively all determine next steps in the regulatory approach.
1:42:08Next slide, please.
1:42:09And continuing.
1:42:12So I want to start by grounding us a little bit more in the goals, our goals at least, in coming to this Public Works session today.
1:42:21First, we're here to share updates again on the process that we've been going through in the strategy since we last Second, we're here to share a small set of policy concepts.
1:42:34We have more, but we're gonna sort of dig in on a few of the key concepts we think.
1:42:39And the outcome of, again, of this discussion will guide our team as we're continuing to work on some administrative rule updates and some code updates that I know is a collaboration with you all.
1:42:50Before we dive into the details, I'd also like to highlight the concurrent work that is still happening.
1:42:55Again, we have sort of a bigger list of administrative rule updates that we're working on.
Gabe Graff 1:42:56 - 1:42:56
1:42:56Thank you.
1:42:58Of rule updates that we're going through and some of the basic code updates that we're continuing to work on.
1:43:03And these code updates live under Portland City Code Title 1640, which we're already working on even sort of outside of automated vehicles.
1:43:13We're working on for some other reasons.
1:43:151640 is the overarching regulatory framework that governs all of the private-for-hire transportation, including taxis, tour buses, limousines, Uber and Lyft, and now automated vehicles.
1:43:28And then finally, as you already alluded to, we're preparing for the 2027 state legislative session, which we expect to again include legislation around state regulation of automated vehicles.
1:43:38And I'll touch on that a little bit more in a couple slides.
1:43:45So the team before you today really sort of frequently deals with emerging technologies but I do want to emphasize that in the topic of automated vehicles, we're really on the leading edge here.
1:43:58There's no city in the country that is currently regulating for hire automated vehicles.
1:44:03And in fact, every city with an active deployment of AVs has been preempted by state legislation.
1:44:09There are a few other cities that have regulations around testing of AVs.
1:44:14We have some, Seattle does, and there are also a couple other cities is similar to us that are discussing local regulations right now, like Minnesota and Washington, DC.
1:44:25But no one has been able to set up a full regulatory framework yet.
1:44:28So this really gives you all an opportunity to lead the way.
1:44:33And in thinking about the approach, if we're gonna be out front, at least the approach that we've been thinking about and as we've discussed with our peer cities, Sorry, I just lost my— I started talking too much and lost my place.
1:44:50In talking to some of the cities that have been preempted and what we've learned from them and what we've heard from the public and what we heard from you all last time is that we really want to take an approach that sets a really high bar with operational standards and set that high bar and then as we move through the process sort of go slow and verify that whatever is happening is meeting our standards along the way.
1:45:10Thank you.
1:45:11And part of the rationale for setting this high bar approach is that automated vehicles companies really are claiming that their drivers are safer than human drivers.
1:45:21And so we believe we should hold them to that standard.
1:45:23If we're gonna let them in, let's sort of make them prove that they're doing what they can say, what they're saying they're doing.
1:45:29So again, this is the approach that has been guiding the staff as we've put together some things for you to think about.
1:45:36Thank you.
1:45:38So as mentioned, we've been spending a lot of time talking to other cities, learning from what's going on in other cities.
1:45:44And again, unfortunately, the other cities that we're learning from don't yet have the ability to develop and enforce their own regulations.
1:45:51There has been this sweeping trend towards statewide preemption.
1:45:55At least 16 other states have passed legislation that preempts cities or counties from setting their own AV regulations.
1:46:02This includes every city with current for-hire deployments, which initially included cities in California, Arizona, and Texas, and has now expanded to Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee.
1:46:15So while speaking to peers in those cities, we've been learning about the significant challenges that they deal with on a daily basis from having for-hire AVs operate commercially without the ability to regulate them.
1:46:27We've heard the challenge of having limited, or in most cases no local ability to hold AV companies accountable for actions such as school buses with the stop arm extended or driving into flooded streets.
1:46:39And finally, these cities that have no regulatory control also are not receiving any data from the AV companies.
1:46:46That means they don't know how many trips are actually happening, they don't know where pickups and drop-offs are happening, and they just don't know how many AVs are on the road.
1:46:54It makes it really difficult then to plan for and sort of help regulate the impacts on the transportation system.
1:47:00Thank you.
1:47:03So again, given what we're seeing in other states, we do remain concerned about the possibility of preemption here.
1:47:09As you already discussed in last year's legislative session, House Bill 4085 would have enabled automated vehicles and put all regulatory authority at the state level, completely preempting localities.
1:47:23And as you know, we had many concerns about this bill.
1:47:26It didn't adequately address the likely impacts on the transportation system.
1:47:30And while we all helped to ensure this bill didn't move forward last year, we do know that AV legislation is likely to resurface again.
1:47:38In fact, Waymo stated in their public feedback to our AV administrative rules that they look forward to seeing a successor bill approved in the 2027 session.
1:47:48So as the staff has been thinking about our local approach, we're definitely keeping that state conversation in mind and trying to figure out how what we do with regulations here can help and with that, I will turn it over to Jacob Sherman to begin with updates on the rulemaking process.
Jacob Sherman 1:48:06 - 1:53:47
1:48:06Great, thanks, thanks so much, Shoshana.
1:48:12For the record, my name is Jacob Sherman and I lead the city's work on emerging technology at the Portland Bureau of Transportation.
1:48:18Our team works on topics including electric vehicle car charging, zero-emission freight, the private-for-hire industry, shared micromobility, as well as next slide.
1:48:29The draft administrative rules that we presented to City Council's Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on February 9th were built on policy direction from the city's Safe Automated Vehicle Initiative.
1:48:41As our team developed updates to these rules this past fall, we built them under the framework of City Code 1640, which, as was previously mentioned, regulates all of the private-for-hire transportation industry.
1:48:54As Shoshana mentioned, we talked with many peer cities in one-on-one conversations and through convenings by expert groups like NACDO, and we also coordinated closely with staff from across the city and some of the bureaus and teams that you see here.
1:49:08I actually want to pause for a second just to thank staff from across the city that have contributed to this work— our own policy team, our Vision Zero team, and to colleagues like Hannah, who will speak shortly, for her own leadership in this space.
1:49:23Next slide.
1:49:25So this slide contains a summary of some of the details in the draft regulations that we discussed with you in February.
1:49:33These were the regulations that we put out for public comment.
1:49:37The existing draft included a requirement for companies to provide a testing of statement— a statement of testing and deployment experience that would disclose all reported crashes, injuries, and other incidents that have negatively impacted the transportation system.
1:49:53This will help ensure that we permit safe companies, not possible unsafe companies.
1:49:59Our existing proposal also requires the submission of a passenger safety plan.
1:50:04This would describe the main risks that passengers could face and the steps taken to mitigate those risks.
1:50:10This could include everything from how passengers should safely identify, enter, and exit the vehicle, and what passengers should do in the event of a crash or how they should respond under unsafe We would also require a first responder plan and hands-on training for first responders.
1:50:29The goal of this would be to ensure that first responders know how to respond to all types of scenarios with automated vehicles, from disengaging the automated vehicle driving system if needed to safely move an AV off the roadway or to other items.
1:50:43I think it's worth noting this is not controversial at all.
1:50:46This is something the AV companies are already doing in many cases.
1:50:48Other places.
1:50:50Our existing proposal also included a requirement that all for-hire automated vehicles be electric vehicles in order to submit— support our city's decarbonization goals.
1:51:01And finally, we also want to highlight our requirements to coordinate with us in order to receive data and information on road closures like for Sunday Parkways, the Portland Marathon, street fairs, or other emergency events.
1:51:17This is just a selection of the requirements from our draft rules.
1:51:25We also included key topics like liability, insurance, public outreach, accessible service, and more.
1:51:33And I also wanted to note that our liability requirements that we're thinking of have been developed kind of in partnership with the City Attorney, and we believe would give us fairly strong protections.
1:51:44Thank you.
1:51:44Councilmember Herbold.
1:51:44Next slide.
1:51:47So after we presented to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in February, we moved forward into a public comment period.
1:51:55To ensure that we gave Portlanders enough time to review the rules and provide feedback, we extended our traditional 30-day public comment period to just about 2 months.
1:52:07We sent notice of rulemaking and the public hearing to over 30,000 people on our email lists and posted it on multiple public sites, including in the newspaper as well.
1:52:19And consistent with our rulemaking process, we held a hybrid public hearing with— at the Portland Building, where people also had the option to attend virtually.
1:52:29We hosted a dedicated listening session with the private-for-hire industry, and we also presented at all of PBOT's modal committees and held one-on-one conversations with industry.
1:52:40Next slide.
1:52:42During that process, we received over 220 comments from Portlanders.
1:52:47Our team— and again, many thanks to Hannah Morrison and Clark Goldenrod— then spent the next several weeks reviewing all of these comments and considering feedback and policy suggestions in order to ultimately develop a summary report.
1:53:01Some of the key themes that emerged from the comments helped inform some of these policy concepts that we want to talk with you about.
1:53:09In our summary report, the largest theme that we heard from the public was safety, with over 50% of all comments mentioning safety.
1:53:19Of those comments, 79% were concerned about the possible negative impacts of automated vehicles and suggested accountability measures like fines or safety reporting for transparency.
1:53:34The other 20% were excited about the opportunity of automated vehicles and the possible safety benefits, most often from their own past experiences riding in them in other markets.
Olivia Clark 1:53:48 - 1:53:50
1:53:48Jacob, can you repeat that one more time, how that broke down?
Jacob Sherman 1:53:50 - 1:55:53
1:53:50Yeah, so, so of the 220 comments we received, over half of them, so over 110 comments, mentioned safety.
1:54:00And of those 110 comments, comments, about 80% mentioned concerns on safety.
1:54:07So that'd be what, 85 or 90 comments?
1:54:11And then the remaining comments mentioned excitement about safety, having kind of mostly from their own personal experience with AVs in other markets.
1:54:21Many of the comments that we received, over 35%, mentioned concerns around accountability and enforcement.
1:54:28With questions on how automated vehicles would be ticketed and comments suggesting that AVs should be held to equal, if not higher, standards than human drivers.
1:54:38Another broad theme that emerged from the public feedback was the possible impact on jobs, with 34% of all comments mentioning concerns around labor impacts and suggestions ranging from protecting the remaining human private-for-hire drivers to supporting a just workforce transition.
1:54:58Finally, many comments highlighted concerns about how AVs could impact the transportation system through increased vehicle miles traveled, how it could impact other modes like transit, biking, and pedestrian.
1:55:09And there were suggestions given about how to mitigate this, including ensuring that AVs know how to yield to buses and will not block MAX tracks, to prohibiting pickup and drop-offs in and bicycle lanes, or establishing a per-mile fee to discourage miles driven without passengers.
1:55:26The full report is linked to in our slides and is available on our website and contains a lot of very detailed additional information about this.
1:55:36So moving forward, I'd next like to hand it over to Hannah Morrison, who's going to talk with you about some of our proposed policy concepts so that we can get your direction as we move forward with thinking about rules thank you, Jacob.
Hannah Morrison 1:55:56 - 2:00:42
1:55:59For the record, my name is Hannah Morrison and I'm a planner on the Mobility and Innovation section at PBOT.
1:56:05We have 7 policy concepts that we are hoping to get your feedback on today.
1:56:08I'm proposing to go over all 7 of them and then we will move to discussion.
1:56:14So our first policy proposal is to clearly define automated vehicle thank you, Councilor Smith.
1:56:18Thank you, Mayor.
1:56:18I'm going to be talking about the proposed ordinance that would amend the rules for private-for-hire vehicles in private-for-hire code.
1:56:20ORS 221.495 clearly defines our ability to regulate private-for-hire transportation, and this is something the city has done for over 100 years, beginning with the regulation of jitneys in the early 1900s.
1:56:32So through Title 1640 of Portland City Code, which you've heard a lot about today, PBOT regulates a variety of private-for-hire transportation.
1:56:40This includes horse-drawn carriages, pedicabs, tour buses, shuttles, party buses, limousines, non-emergency medical transportation, taxis, transportation network companies like Uber and Lyft, and now the next evolution in private for hire of automated vehicles.
1:56:55The administrative rules that are regulating AVs that we've discussed today are already linked to Title 1640, and any code updates related to AVs we believe should go in this code as well.
1:57:08Our second policy concept for discussion is to establish the authority to set fleet caps for automated vehicles in city code.
1:57:15We believe that it would be stronger to establish this authority in city code rather than in administrative rules.
1:57:21And to be clear, we are not proposing to establish the actual fleet size and set a number in city code, just establish the authority to cap automated vehicle fleets.
1:57:30Under this proposal, the performance of a company during its testing phase would inform their initial fleet size, and testing itself would also be done with a limited fleet.
1:57:40Once a company graduates from a testing permit to a for-hire permit, an initial fleet cap has been established.
1:57:46The city would conduct an annual analysis on operations and safety of that fleet to inform fleet cap changes.
1:57:53Setting a cap on automated for-hire vehicles will help us safely manage this change to our streets and to the greater for-hire industry.
1:58:02Next, I'd like to discuss defining testing permit metrics.
1:58:06Under our proposed framework, every AV company would be required to begin local operations with a testing permit.
1:58:12This would ensure that they prove their technology can navigate unique aspects of Portland streets before beginning to offer paid rides through a for-hire permit.
1:58:20Under this proposal, all companies would be required to log 50,000 miles across their entire fleet with a testing permit before becoming eligible to apply for that for-hire permit.
1:58:29And I want to highlight that this mileage requirement is just one piece of our permitting structure, so companies would have to complete those 50,000 miles while complying with all of our other safety and operational— excuse me, safety and operational requirements.
1:58:43The 50,000 miles driven with a testing permit aligns with California Public Utility Commission statewide requirements, and we believe could strike the right balance between enough miles driven to prove that they can safely navigate our streets and not too many miles driven that we are encouraging empty vehicle miles traveled.
1:59:00Thank you.
1:59:03Next, I'd like to share our proposal around metrics for permit suspension.
1:59:08These metrics were informed by the claims that you've already heard mentioned today from— that automated vehicle companies are making that they are safer than human drivers.
1:59:16In fact, Waymo's homepage currently states that the Waymo software, or the Waymo driver, is over 10 times safer than the average human driver.
1:59:24Well, we have a standard for permitting human private-for-hire drivers in the city to ensure that we're permitting safe drivers.
1:59:30And here we propose holding the robotaxis to that same standard.
1:59:34One key difference is that since the AV companies treat their software as a singular driver, this proposal would consider violations by any car within one company's fleet as accumulating to the same driver because it's using the same software.
1:59:48For example, under this proposal, if 2 separate vehicles within one company's fleet were to get traffic violations, That would count as 2 traffic violations for that company's singular AV driver and would be grounds for suspending that company's permit.
2:00:02And just to make sure it's clear, these metrics of 2 traffic violations in 1 year or violating the expectation of operating in a safe manner are the same standards to which existing private-for-hire drivers are already held.
2:00:15I'd also like to point out the degree to which this differs from the language from last year's unsuccessful House Bill 4085.
2:00:21In that bill, there were only 2 ways that the state would revoke an AV company's— suspend or revoke an AV company's permit.
2:00:28First, if the automated vehicle was found to not be in safe operational condition, or second, if their operations created substantial risk of death or had already caused death or serious injury.
2:00:39And we believe what was proposed in that bill is too low of a bar.
2:00:43Anna, can I interrupt you just for a second, if you don't mind?
2:00:46That's really good to know how we stack up against that preemption measure.
2:00:50But can you go back and tell us, on each of these concepts, are these things that the other states or other cities around the country that you spoke to regarded— they regarded these as high priorities?
2:01:03Or what, what were their major complaints?
2:01:05Maybe you could elucidate either during or after your presentation.
2:01:09Yeah, yeah, I'd be happy to.
2:01:11Um, I can answer this a little bit right now because we're in very early conversations.
2:01:15Most other cities are in very early stages.
2:01:17I was on a call with 5 major US cities just last week, and we were trying to identify actually everyone's priorities.
2:01:24So that is kind of the stage we're at.
2:01:26The number one priority for most people is preemption and the ability to simply regulate, issue and suspend permits, and set fleet caps.
2:01:34But beyond that, there's still a lot of work to be done.
2:01:38Thank you for that.
2:01:39Of course.
2:01:41So just to kind of conclude this slide, under this proposal, the remedy to the suspension of the AV driver and therefore the entire fleet would be for the company to show that they have addressed the issue or issues for which they received tickets, which would likely be through a software update.
2:01:58The next policy concept is also safety-focused.
2:02:01While we can see that automated vehicles stopping in bicycle lanes to wait to pick up passengers or drop them off could become a safety hazard, We actually are already preempted by state law in our ability to prevent these actions.
2:02:13State law allows, as you can see on the slide, the momentary stopping or parking in bicycle lanes while actually engaged in loading or unloading property or passengers.
2:02:23So our proposal here, and we'd like to hear your— what we'd like to hear your thoughts on, is to explore defining loading and unloading in private-for-hire code to limit AV stopping in bicycle lanes.
2:02:33One way to do this would be to put a time limit on those loading and unloading activities.
2:02:37I'd also like to point out, if this definition was added to private-for-hire code, then it would apply to all types of private-for-hire trips, from AVs to taxis and TNCs.
2:02:50The next policy concept focuses on exploring limitations on the sale, sharing, or transferring of data collected by AVs.
2:02:57AVs collect data both inside and outside of their vehicles.
2:03:01They use LiDAR, radar, 360-degree video and audio data use of this robust sensor array is crucial for their safe operations.
2:03:11For example, using radar allows the AV to cut through heavy rain, snow, or fog in order to track pedestrians, vehicles, or other hazards at far distances.
2:03:20And so while we understand the need for this data for safe operations, we also believe it's important to have a conversation about what else this data is used for and where it goes.
2:03:30We have begun to work with the City Data and Privacy Office to develop a framework for how this data is used.
2:03:32To ensure that any regulations here would be consistent with related city policies on surveillance and policy, such as City Code Title 34 that prohibits the use of facial recognition by private entities in places of public accommodation.
2:03:46On this topic, we would like to discuss limitations around selling, sharing, or transferring data from our streets that we can add to our administrative rule.
2:03:55And this is the final policy concept before we move to discussion.
2:03:59Under our current proposal, AVs are subject to the same fees as TNCs, including all permit and per-trip fees.
2:04:06Another area where we think a fee may be appropriate is around workforce transition.
2:04:11A third of the comments that we received during the public comment period for this administrative rule were related to labor, as you heard from Jacob, and it is undeniable that there will be workforce impact with the introduction of AVs.
2:04:22A workforce transition fee could provide funds for things like job training, job placement, or other we know this council just passed the Driver's Resource Center ordinance, and there may be a way to connect workforce transition activities to that new center.
2:04:36And finally, we think that there should be some further consideration of other impact fees due to the continued growth and impacts of the entire private-for-hire industry on our streets.
2:04:45Thank you, and I'd now like to hand it back to Shoshana Cohen to share next steps.
2:04:50Thank you, Hannah.
2:04:53So again, before diving into discussion, just sort of reiterating next steps for this process.
2:04:58As mentioned, we've already been working on the next stage of AV administrative rules and some potential proposed code updates, which we really want to hear more about, sort of feedback.
2:05:08And I think that's back and forth with you all.
2:05:11And we expect, based on the feedback from this conversation, to be back sometime in the fall.
2:05:17And then— and I believe Derek Bradley is in the room from the Office of Government Relations.
2:05:20Again, we're also already preparing for the state conversation.
2:05:24We know it's coming and are just, you know, really trying to make sure we're not preempted as our top priority.
2:05:32So that concludes our presentation, and we're looking forward to hearing your feedback.
2:05:37Thank you all very much for the work that you've done to date and for outlining some policy options for us.
2:05:44I know we have a lot of questions and a lot of concerns about so let's start with Councilor Green.
Mitch Green 2:05:53 - 2:07:53
2:05:56Thank you, team, for the work on this.
2:06:00It's been much anticipated.
2:06:02My office has had a lot of conversations with your folks about ways that we might want to sort of respond to the Waymo question or the AV question.
2:06:10And so kind of knowing that the fact that there's just this robust rulemaking process that's, I think, maybe envisioning more than just rulemaking, but kind of thinking, how do we lead on codification here, has been a very good thing.
2:06:26So I just want to acknowledge that.
2:06:27So I want to respond, I think, just right up front to the— because you're testing some ideas with us.
2:06:35And I think that's— I think the 7 items are great.
2:06:38I think it's a really great framework.
2:06:40There's not much there that I think— well, there's nothing there I disagree with.
2:06:45I think I want to flesh out some areas a little bit more, but one of the things that I do want to make sure that we acknowledge here is— I appreciate understanding that if we go down this road to permit Waymos to operate in our city, there will be a labor displacement problem.
2:07:03Like, that's real.
2:07:04And I think if we're going If we're going to say let's deal with that through a just transition style impact fee, the fees are going to be large.
2:07:12Mm-hmm.
2:07:12Because those are not just little, you know, couple hundred bucks per, you know, like this is, these are real livelihoods.
2:07:19And so if we're going to go down to that level, we need to be pretty serious about what those impact fees might be.
2:07:25So I'm just kind of noting that now, that if we're going to send that signal to the workers that you have to be honest that you actually want it to be a supportive tool.
2:07:39There's obviously more conversation we need to have around this piece of it.
2:07:41But I want to touch on a couple areas.
2:07:44I support the approach that you kind of framed up of saying we do need to take a codification approach through the city in partnership with PBOT.
2:07:54I would—.
Mitch Green 2:07:54 - 2:07:56
2:07:54I'm grateful to be part of that.
2:07:56I support thank you.
2:07:56Councilor Smith, I appreciate you bringing this up.
2:07:56I think it's important that we support that through this committee.
Mitch Green 2:07:58 - 2:11:24
2:07:58I— Councilor Koyama Lane and I have been kind of working on sort of a little bit of a one small element of a theme that's in here, which is really the Vision Zero compliance piece.
2:08:08We were worried about missing the moment and not having any regulatory authority to say, I don't want to start issuing permits for these things before we have a handle on this.
2:08:17I don't really buy their claims to safety.
2:08:20They're not really grounded in evidence.
2:08:22And So it's good to see that in here.
2:08:24And so we were wanting to kind of move kind of quickly on a very sort of tight code change in this TNC code, understanding that that's not nearly sufficient enough.
2:08:35And it was about really making sure you have a Vision Zero compliance piece.
2:08:39But I'm seeing that language kind of already on the slide, which tells me that you're incorporating some of the things that we've already been talking to you guys about behind the scenes.
2:08:48I think for my part, I think that if you cannot meet the basic bar of respecting our Vision Zero framework and not abusing the kind of preemption, which by the way is deeply troubling to me, maybe we want to take that up with the state legislation that like we need to tighten up what that language means because people camping in the bike lane with the hazards on for 15 minutes is unacceptable.
2:09:15It happens to me all the time.
2:09:17I ride my bike to and from work all the time, and I see, um, you know, I see folks just waiting there and waiting with hazards on.
2:09:26Uh, if, if we expect that to be a Waymo outcome, that, that's going to doubly enrage me because at least someone's not getting paid for that work, right?
2:09:35So, um, anyway, I'm rambling.
2:09:38The point I'm trying to make thank you.
2:09:40So all of this Vision Zero work rests on a scaffolding of commitment to make sure every opportunity we're kind of tweaking or turning our dials to kind of go towards enabling the outcomes that we want.
2:09:54And so I support this broad framework.
2:09:57I think this— the claims to safety are grounded in this idea that you completely replace your fleet with autonomous vehicles, and then at that Councilor Smith.
2:10:05And then at that point, you get scale benefits of safety, but that's not ever going to happen because people are never going to just give their cars up and just take robo-taxi rides all the time.
2:10:14So measurement matters, metrics matter.
2:10:16It sounds like that's what PBOT wants to commit to here.
2:10:21I like the idea of a conditional test permit because that allows us to say— it's easier, I think, to regulate up front than it is on the Mm-hmm.
2:10:31That's kind of what I'm saying.
2:10:36Data sharing and privacy limitations are core.
2:10:39Like, we cannot be in the business of allowing companies to drive around our city and surveil us and then sell that to whoever.
2:10:46And yeah, I probably have more to say, but I just think, you know, the reason why I was comfortable backing off, and I think Councilor Koyama Lane was comfortable backing off on approach is 'cause we recognize it's important to do this right and with maybe a broader buy-in here.
2:11:02And you can't have 3 conversations with committee members, otherwise you violate quorum.
2:11:06And so this is one of those moments where I think there's enough alignment on this committee to say, let's do this all together and let's kind of work in partnership with PBOT.
2:11:14And I think fall timeline makes a lot of sense.
2:11:18So I probably have more to say later, but I'll—.
2:11:21Okay.
2:11:22Thank you, Councilor Green.
Olivia Clark 2:11:24 - 2:11:27
2:11:24I really appreciate those comments.
2:11:26Councilor Kanal.
Sameer Kanal 2:11:27 - 2:11:45
2:11:29I'm a little confused by something I heard early on.
2:11:34Shoshana, I think you said what we heard from you all last time, and I think someone else mentioned February in the context of hearing we want to take an approach that sets a really high bar with operational standards.
2:11:44When was this?
2:11:45So, yeah, thank you for the question.
2:11:47I realize this was the previous iteration of this committee when it was the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
2:11:53So we would be happy to give you some more background if that would be helpful.
Sameer Kanal 2:11:58 - 2:13:04
2:11:58Yeah, our committee started April 14th, and at that, you know, previous time to that, a quarter of the city was not represented here.
2:12:06And so, and I just wanna, since it's my first time, I guess, to be able to express it, that is not my opinion.
2:12:13The approach I wanna take is a categorical ban and a full-press OGR effort at the state against preemption.
2:12:19I'd like to have code that simply says all vehicles require a human driver.
2:12:24It would take 6 words.
2:12:26Um, I'm also concerned that the— appears there's a thumb on the scale here.
2:12:31I, I mean, there's marketing materials and city presentations, uh, which is concerning to me.
2:12:35On slide 14, we've got their slogans and stuff here.
2:12:38Um, I, I'm thank you.
2:12:39I'm concerned about that.
2:12:40And you can go to slide 14 if you'd like.
2:12:50Waymo coming would require more training for PPB and emergency responders broadly on how to interact with driverless vehicles.
2:12:57As of right now, Waymo permitting costs, or any autonomous vehicles, I think the current plan is $500.
Mitch Green 2:13:04 - 2:13:05
2:13:04Thank you.
Sameer Kanal 2:13:05 - 2:13:30
2:13:05I have a question for Deputy City Attorney Nancy Thorington.
2:13:05The proposed funding for this program is $1 million, which is way too low, by the way.
2:13:07It's not supplanting general fund dollars for public safety trainings.
2:13:11Overtime and training pay is expensive, and the need for the training is being caused by a technology that's not— the companies that are pushing are not paying for.
2:13:20Additionally, I believe Jacoby said requiring training for first responders.
2:13:26I appreciate that.
2:13:26Has any discussion occurred related to bargaining about required training?
Jacob Sherman 2:13:32 - 2:13:35
2:13:32Sorry, Councilor Kanal, I didn't quite hear the last part of your question.
Sameer Kanal 2:13:36 - 2:13:44
2:13:36Has any conversation happened in the bargaining context as it relates to represented workers and required trainings?
Jacob Sherman 2:13:45 - 2:13:56
2:13:45No, not that I'm aware of.
2:13:47We have started conversations with Portland Police Bureau about like what these kinds of— this kind of training could look like, but we haven't gotten into a conversation on bargaining.
Sameer Kanal 2:13:56 - 2:15:24
2:13:56Okay.
2:13:58I'm switching gears to the data side.
2:14:01I agree with everything Councilor Green said, and, you know, we don't know broadly what these companies do with the data they collect.
2:14:07And so another reason we shouldn't have them here is that they're not being required to share all their data as a stipulation of operating in Portland.
2:14:14I'm also concerned about the use of the word limitation on selling.
2:14:17What limits do that bans do not is allow some, right?
2:14:21Ban means none.
2:14:22Limitation means some.
2:14:23I agree.
2:14:23Could mean we're restricting it by 1% and 99% of it's okay.
2:14:28So what I'm curious is what's the sum that's being proposed to be allowed?
2:14:33And I have significant concerns about that.
2:14:36I think our existing rules, compliance with them is vital, and they are itself not enough, which is why we started the conversation about data privacy and governance at council in previous legislation.
2:14:48Waymo does not currently receive We capture the cost to society in terms of environmental impacts of data center usage of both electricity and water.
2:14:56I don't believe that we can account for that.
2:15:00So instead of— I guess broadly speaking here, I'm concerned about the approach of trying to either regulate something that just should not be allowed or use regulations to sort of backdoor a ban when we could just ban it with 6 words.
2:15:13It might need more than 6, I understand that.
2:15:14Thank you.
2:15:14I'm, I'm being rhetorically 6 words.
2:15:17Uh, Jacob, you mentioned that we've heard from 220 people so far.
2:15:22Was any outreach done in District 2?
Jacob Sherman 2:15:26 - 2:15:40
2:15:26Our, um, outreach was, uh, we didn't do any physical outreach in District 2.
2:15:31Um, you know, again, we kind of marketed this very broadly, went to all of our committees— bicycle, pedestrian, freight, um, advisory committee.
2:15:40I'm sure some of those stakeholders well, and it was sent out to 30,000 people throughout.
2:15:48We did sort of the standard administrative rulemaking outreach, plus I think knowing this was something that people were really interested in, we did send, I think, more emails.
2:15:59We extended the time, I think, twice as long as typical.
Sameer Kanal 2:16:04 - 2:16:48
2:16:04So we didn't go out to a lot of places, but we did, I think, what we would consider robust outreach for So I recognize that, that the primary responsibility for engagement is no longer going to be with the bureaus, so I'm not putting this on you, but I do want to ask, what is the takeaway from the idea that time was extended, more emails were sent— 30,000 emails, you said— and that 220 people responded in the context where this may be a high-profile high engagement, high interest item.
2:16:39What, what, what, uh, was a conclusion drawn by the level of participation, if any, by PBOT?
2:16:48Thank you for the question, Councilor.
2:16:50I don't know that a conclusion was drawn other than, um, uh, perhaps people, um, aren't seeing the urgency and don't know the potential imminence of, uh, This type of tool being employed in the city potentially.
2:17:07I would imagine that if we were to go back again, perhaps even changing the way that we introduced the survey, if we did some personal district-by-district outreach, perhaps we would have a different outcome.
2:17:23But I don't know that we can draw definitive conclusions on what that's saying other than that 29,800 people chose not to comment.
Gabe Graff 2:17:38 - 2:17:38
2:17:38Yeah.
Sameer Kanal 2:17:38 - 2:17:48
2:17:38And to be clear, I, again, I think this is probably something that we need to reach out to the citywide engagement team on to provide support and not count on PBOT doing it.
2:17:48Thank you.
2:17:49That's great.
Sameer Kanal 2:17:49 - 2:18:39
2:17:49But I want, and I also want to offer to assist in that.
2:17:52I know they have capacity.
2:17:54I think there's capacity concerns too, but we— I don't think we can make a wholesale change to a very significant— the place where I think Portlanders interact the most with the city, that they know they're interacting with the city, is in transportation.
2:18:07I would put water and sewer on there too, but it's not always known which is private, which is not.
2:18:13And so if we're changing that front end of people's interaction with the city significantly, I think it does require more there.
2:18:21Thank you.
2:18:222 final questions.
2:18:23One, the bike lane thing that you cited, a state law, do we know if that establishes a floor or if it is itself preemption?
2:18:31Like, just because they exempted it, does that mean that we can't provide legislation that— and I don't know if you asked the lawyers already on that.
2:18:39I believe that we can double-check, but that is our understanding, is that that does prevent us.
2:18:45But we can follow up again and double-check.
Sameer Kanal 2:18:48 - 2:21:20
2:18:48Thanks.
2:18:48Yeah, that's another concern.
2:18:50I agree with everything there.
2:18:52We currently have Amazon, UPS, all sorts of delivery vehicles blocking driver lanes, bike lanes all over the place, and we've shown an inability to deal with that.
2:19:02The idea of having a fleet of additional vehicles doing it is pretty concerning to me.
2:19:08I routinely get stopped between driving around here in downtown while one lane is going and I can't get over because I'm stuck behind a vehicle that's just stopped illegally, I should note.
2:19:21Last thing I wanted to mention is in the context of labor, you know, this is a new generation of tech bro companies here, but previous ones have developed a model that they call disrupting to the taxi industry.
2:19:33And the taxi industry has its limitations, of course, but they did it by creating TNCs.
2:19:38Yeah.
2:19:39And in parallel, I lived in New York.
2:19:41They developed an app that let you hail a licensed medallion taxi there.
2:19:48What TNCs did that was different is they also added the second thing of making drivers, instead of being employees, independent contractors.
2:19:56And that took away labor protections.
2:20:00It took away benefits from a workforce that is largely Black and brown men, and now we're talking about that wasn't good enough.
2:20:10The only way to extract further profit is by putting that workforce, which remains primarily Black and brown men, out of business entirely, out of a job entirely.
2:20:22That alone, to me, would be enough for a ban.
2:20:24We do not have the capacity.
2:20:26We don't have the money.
2:20:28We don't have $500 for a.
2:20:30Permit or whatever is not going to cover the cost of a just transition for one driver, let alone, you know, the hundreds and thousands that we have.
2:20:40And so I am concerned that we are accepting the premise that this is going to happen instead of fighting as hard as we possibly can against it.
2:20:51Um, and we might lose, but it won't be because we didn't stand up for people in our city, and it won't be because we didn't stand up for our environment or our data privacy or our budget in the context of ensuring payments for, uh, that, that supplant general fund dollars on trainings.
2:21:12And it won't be because we didn't care about safety.
2:21:15It'll be because we tried and we failed.
2:21:18And I am okay with that as long as we try.
Gabe Graff 2:21:20 - 2:21:20
2:21:20Thanks.
Olivia Clark 2:21:21 - 2:22:13
2:21:21Thank you, Councilor Kanal.
2:21:23I appreciate your comments.
2:21:24Thank you, Councilor Smith, for those comments.
2:21:25I'm going to ask a few questions before I turn it back over to Councilor Green, and I don't see Councilor Koyama Lane's hand up yet.
2:21:33Just a couple quick questions related— when there are closures or special events, I've noticed that my GIS or whatever it is on my phone doesn't catch up either.
2:21:48That's a problem.
2:21:49Just, I don't know if you guys have noticed that when you're going places, that doesn't work either.
2:21:57Let's see, on the fee concept, I think I really appreciate your adding that.
2:22:02I think that was at my request in a meeting that we charge for something.
2:22:07And you're right, the workforce impact fee is really not great enough, but I think we should also consider a transit impact fee.
Jacob Sherman 2:22:14 - 2:22:14
2:22:14Yeah.
2:22:15Just throw that out there.
2:22:18Um, and I know you, you are already speaking with the public safety community.
2:22:23Um, sounds like already working with them.
2:22:26I just bumped into a firefighter here earlier today and said we were talking about this issue today, and he expressed grave concern.
2:22:33So I'm, um, appreciate that.
2:22:36Um, I'd like to call up Derek from OGR and ask him a couple of questions, and I knew you may wish to as well.
2:22:54Thanks for being here today, and thank you for your work last session in trying to impact the preemption bill that was floated during the 30-day session.
2:23:07You know, I spent a part of my career trying to stop preemptions, working with a governor who was willing to do that, who was willing to not preempt cities, at least on revenue-raising issues and on mandates with no money.
2:23:21We had an agreement to do that.
2:23:23That kind of went away with the next governor.
2:23:26And I guess I just wanted to hear you, Derek, talk about what you're— what you think might happen next session in January, this bill, whatever it was, I don't remember who the sponsors were, maybe you can share that as well, is going to be reintroduced in, I would imagine, the same format.
2:23:43Can you just talk a little bit about that experience with us and what you foresee in the future?
Derek Bradley 2:23:51 - 2:24:59
2:23:51Certainly.
2:23:52Chair Clark, members of the committee, for the record, my name's Derek Bradley, he/him, state legislative— State regional coordinator for the City of Portland.
2:24:01Relations coordinator, sorry.
2:24:05It's a little bit of a cloudy crystal ball at the moment.
2:24:11There is certainly some amount of, I would say, passion in the legislature about creating a statewide AV system that would have certainly some amount of preemption.
2:24:28The amount or where that lands on the gauge is an active conversation.
2:24:33There is, however, a lot going on and building up to come forward next legislative session, not just about transportation, which will have another attempt at a package, but serious questions about managing the impacts of HR 1 at the state, and there's, I think, some uncertainty about capacity for some of these.
Olivia Clark 2:24:59 - 2:25:00
2:24:59And what was HR 1?
2:25:01Is that right?
2:25:02HR 1?
Derek Bradley 2:25:02 - 2:25:03
2:25:02The federal—.
Olivia Clark 2:25:03 - 2:25:04
2:25:03Oh, that.
Derek Bradley 2:25:04 - 2:29:19
2:25:04Yes, yes.
2:25:06Um, sorry, the federal transfer of public wealth to not the public.
2:25:14Um, And so I think there's a very real opportunity, chance that something returns.
2:25:24I believe there was enough communication with legislators that we're not gonna see an exact replica of the previous bill.
2:25:36But again, how far along they, what position they start from, how willing they are to consider Um, local impacts is very— it's difficult to tell at this moment in time.
2:25:47One thing that I do think I should emphasize for consideration is we have jurisdictional partners that are interested in the outcome of a statewide preemptive system, but I do believe they largely view this as a— this will impact the city of Portland first and maybe thank you.
2:26:10I think that's a good point.
2:26:10I think that this is probably only for a while, and we have a very serious and large agenda and transportation agenda already bubbling.
2:26:22So when there are moments— and again, I hesitate to even put this because I don't want to speak for my colleagues that are lobbying for other jurisdictions.
2:26:29I don't want to speak for legislators that haven't decided what they're going to pursue next year or how.
2:26:33But I think there's risks involved with wherever the city lands.
2:26:38Bans, wherever this— however far on the dial, as you move further and further or all the way to a ban or tighter or tighter regulations, there will be a reaction from not just the company but from people that are believers in Salem that this is a technology that should be embraced.
2:26:57And that will create risks of preemptive language being introduced and garnering support.
2:27:04And So I think you have— I will offer a worst-case scenario and a best-case scenario and put, you know, for your consideration as how you want to pursue in your deliberations.
2:27:18I think worst-case scenario is that the city implements a ban or a highly restrictive framework.
2:27:27It creates a large upswell of interest and passion in Salem to make a statewide framework.
2:27:35There is a lot of interest among the pro-AV community while other jurisdictional partners have a very substantial amount of workload and can't participate as much as they might on a thing that directly impacts them immediately.
2:27:49And it's a very difficult, if not impossible, uphill struggle to stop a package from moving forward that is not exactly— that is not what the city is particularly interested in.
2:28:00All the way on the other end, best case scenario, Uh, council considers, deliberates, and passes the AV either ban or framework that works best for them.
2:28:09Um, there is some upsetness from for-profit corporations that stand to make money off of this, but it falls upon deaf ears as legislators have other things going on and other jurisdictions and partners come in and say this would be terrible and we think we should give Portland a shot to see how this pans out.
2:28:32It is a large— I acknowledge it is a very large, like, point A to point B is very far apart from one another, and how the reactions might play out, it's difficult to say.
2:28:45And so I do apologize I don't have a better sense to offer.
2:28:50Uh, I do think there was some very good, like, education and discussion with legislators in this year's legislative session.
2:28:59I think there was an initial belief that we had to hurry up and go down in Salem on this, and I think there was, there was clearly some success in slowing it down.
2:29:12How well that translates into action next year is unfortunately beyond my current ability to predict.
Olivia Clark 2:29:20 - 2:29:44
2:29:20Well, thanks for that anyway.
2:29:22I appreciate your thoughts.
2:29:26I never found the Portland delegation, even maybe the regional delegation, very interested in transportation, frankly.
2:29:35I mean, maybe they're more interested now, but I thought that the sponsors of the preemption legislation were from the metropolitan area.
2:29:43Is that right?
Derek Bradley 2:29:45 - 2:31:04
2:29:45The and I think too, I want to— yes, but it is someone that opened the conversation saying, you know, I want to engage with the City of Portland and make sure we get this right, but I want to— I want a statewide framework, and I want a statewide framework that works for local jurisdictions and for the AVs to come in and operate.
2:30:12And that was from a representative in the metropolitan area.
2:30:15Who I think considering their level of interest in pursuing an updated version next year, I think she's— last I spoke to her last month, she's still working through her options and her considerations.
2:30:32But she was a great— she very proactively engaged with the city, with PBOT, myself, and realized that the initial effort was not best suited to get done in the short session.
2:30:46And so she has shown herself to be interested in these discourses and dialogues.
2:30:50But I don't think we've gotten much further past the bill in the short session was moving quickly and had a lot of unanswered questions, and there were concerns raised by local jurisdictions.
2:31:01So we needed more time.
2:31:02I don't think we've gotten beyond that.
2:31:05Well, thank you, Derek.
2:31:06I think I'm glad you're here today.
2:31:08I think you will benefit from the presentation that PBOT made today that has piqued our interests.
2:31:16And my own desire is to come up with an ordinance that puts much of this on the books for us.
2:31:25And I would like to think that that strengthens our position going into the session.
2:31:29I don't know.
2:31:30There's a lot of unknowns.
2:31:33But we'll have that conversation here I'm also going to ask PBOT for your help in drafting that for— with us, for us, given all of your— what you've heard to some extent and some of those policy issues, and particularly what you're learning, what you will learn, continue to learn from the other cities and their experience across the board.
2:31:59I think we can really benefit from that.
2:32:01And we can share that with our delegation, our Salem delegation as well, is this is what's happened in other cities.
2:32:06We don't want that to happen here, et cetera, et cetera.
2:32:09When we start thinking about January, I'm sorry, I'm already, I'm in January.
2:32:14But thank you for your comments.
2:32:16I'm going to stop there.
2:32:18And Councilor Koyama Lane hasn't had a chance to ask a question.
2:32:23Would you like to speak now?
2:32:26Sure.
2:32:26Thank you so much.
2:32:27Thank you so much for the presentation.
2:32:29Thank you, Chair.
2:32:31I love this idea of us being a united front as much as possible and working on this with as many committee members as we can.
2:32:40Yeah, this is something that I have been working on and talking about for months.
2:32:46Thank you, Councilor Green, for recognizing that work.
2:32:50No, there are a lot of issues around privacy, safety, permitting, Um, happy to see, see some stuff move forward.
2:32:58I have a couple questions for PBOT.
2:33:00I'm wondering if you know if AV companies that are operating in other cities have dedicated human staffers on call to address safety issues and other real-time troubleshooting.
2:33:15What have you found when looking into that, if you have?
2:33:21Yeah, I can answer that one.
2:33:22So there are— what we've seen is that for first responders, there is a dedicated person that is there to respond to those incidents, especially for first responders.
2:33:33For city staff, they typically have a point of contact, but it is less of a safety issue, more of a kind of issues that arise every day.
2:33:40So there's those 2 separate contact flows.
2:33:47And have you looked into much how some AV companies are outsourcing those, the human support staffers, to other countries?
2:33:57We have tried to.
2:33:58There honestly is not a lot of information on that.
2:34:00That is something that has proven very difficult to get more information on beyond some of the news articles that I'm sure you've also seen.
2:34:07Okay, thank you.
2:34:08And some other— my colleagues have touched on this, but are there any other thoughts that you all have around what we can be doing to protect local jobs, in particular drivers of taxis, TNCs, who continue to see consistent disruptions in the private-for-hire transportation?
2:34:28Is there anything else that you can add on to that?
Jacob Sherman 2:34:33 - 2:35:39
2:34:33Councilor Koyama Lane, I think in many ways kind of the, the the package of concepts that we're thinking about kind of working in concert with one another is where I think we see probably the most synergistic benefit.
2:34:48So if you were employing something like a just transition fee in concert with a fleet cap that kept things relatively small for an extended period of time while we saw this start to roll out on the streets alongside high standards that hold the AV companies to their claim that they're safer than human drivers.
2:35:16I think it's kind of the combination of all of those things that we think would probably be the most protective.
2:35:21There's probably some additional strategies we could consider.
2:35:25We'd be happy to talk with you or your staff on that or with any other members of this committee.
2:35:31But I think in general, Yeah.
2:35:32It's the combination of these moves where we think we get the most benefit.
2:35:37I don't know if there's anything you'd add.
2:35:39Well, just sort of building on that, I think both of those things, a just transition fee or workforce transition fee, of course, is a big idea.
2:35:48There's lots of other industries where automation is taking over.
2:35:52But is there a way that even a relatively small— maybe it's huge or maybe it's relatively small, Thank you.
2:36:02And the fleet cap idea, you know, in San Francisco we think there's 800.
2:36:08You know, we could start really small here.
2:36:10We could start at 50 or something and just, you know, to allow for some folks who are interested in seeing what potential benefits could come.
2:36:23You know, we could not only start We could start it small, but we could keep it small.
2:36:27We could have a small fleet that exists on our street just to offer this alternative for people who really think that it's another good alternative and really keep it there for a while depending.
2:36:38I mean, I think there's just a variety of ways that we could address the concerns if that seems like the thing to do rather than sort of letting what seems likely at some point for the state to take over.
2:36:51We might be able to push that off for a while.
2:36:53Thank you.
2:36:54Um, but, you know, at some point it is likely that, um, the, the state conversation will continue.
Olivia Clark 2:37:01 - 2:37:13
2:37:01This is really the, the favorite, favorite pastime of lobbyists— speculation.
2:37:08Um, uh, thank you for that.
2:37:10Thank you, Councilor Koyama Lane.
2:37:12Councilor Green?
Mitch Green 2:37:14 - 2:40:35
2:37:14Yeah, thank you, Chair Clark.
2:37:16Um, you know, I— what's challenging about this specific one, and it's not even about the topic, it's about the committee itself, is I think there's a shared interest that we all— everyone on the committee probably wants to do something about this, but we can't talk more than 2 at a time on a specific thing.
2:37:34And so if this is going to be a shared committee ordinance approach, like, we have to kind of engage with our differences and approaches very publicly.
2:37:44And so to To the extent that I'm— I mean, I do want to have a committee approach that says, here's what the committee is going to do, but we have to be kind of vulnerable about that.
2:37:56And so it's good that we're talking with our OGR publicly, with our strategic approach publicly, but— and so we might have maybe some differences of opinion on what the risks are of preemption, what the stakes are.
2:38:10I'm grateful for the Councilor Kanal kind of laid out a different position because that's, that's frankly much closer to my position.
2:38:18But I wasn't really prepared to say, you know, we must kill all the robots today, you know, which is not exactly what you said, but that's a meme.
2:38:27Next in the queue.
2:38:30So I guess what I'm just trying to telegraph here is we either need to sort of flesh this all out up here over the course of the next few committee meetings, or be prepared to have multiple proposals come forward.
2:38:43Mm-hmm.
2:38:43And then just debate 'em up and down and amend 'em as we normally do.
2:38:47But I wanna respect that you wanted to pull us together and have this unified approach.
2:38:53I don't know if you're gonna be comfortable with Councilor Kanal's approach or not, but I will note this.
2:39:00I think the transportation piece of the legislative agenda is going to be very big.
2:39:05And I think that there might be some appetite from some incoming representatives and senators to go a little bit harder than some of the ones that are currently in there now.
2:39:17And so I don't know what that does to the balance of power in Salem, but I think if you think about where Oregonians are at when it comes to— you use the word tech bros.
2:39:30They think about large data centers killing the bees in their neighborhood, and they, and they think about AI, and they're probably associating that with Waymo.
2:39:38And so I— all I'm saying is that there's probably going to be a political situation that provides cover for legislators who maybe want to take a position that's not the same as the lobbyists in this situation.
2:39:52I think House bill 4085 was written by Waymo.
2:39:57I mean, with almost no exceptions.
2:39:59And so, and it's like you can get that done by— with a $1,000 campaign donation.
2:40:04And so like that's what happens down there.
2:40:06And I think going into the next legislative session, it is riskier to kind of play this sort of game, but it might be more principled.
2:40:14And so I'm just sort of expressing my openness to seeing how this conversation unfolds.
2:40:18We have to do it publicly.
2:40:19Or else we're going to violate single meetings law.
2:40:21So I'm really trying not to do that.
2:40:23So that's why I'm talking in kind of weird generalities here and being kind of open about all this, because I— because this is the only place to do it by the letter of the law.
2:40:34So we'll see how this goes.
Olivia Clark 2:40:36 - 2:41:29
2:40:36Thank you so much for that comment, really.
2:40:39I'm— and I'm always trying to thread the needle.
2:40:42And having been in Salem and spent most I understand the threat to us.
2:40:48And by— I was going to say something nasty, but I'm trying to figure out what the best strategy really is for us as a city.
2:40:59And whether something is inevitable or not, I don't know.
2:41:04But I want us to be in the best position that we can possibly be, and the more that we're united and we did that on the TUF.
2:41:13We did that on the street restoration fee.
2:41:15We were pretty much a united front, and I really appreciate that.
2:41:18I think we can replicate that with some different degrees.
2:41:22So we'll talk more about that one-on-one.
2:41:27We'll be careful.
2:41:28Councilor Kanal.
Sameer Kanal 2:41:30 - 2:43:44
2:41:322 things.
2:41:32First, just housekeeping.
2:41:33I want to make sure I got my exact wording right.
2:41:36Right.
2:41:36Previously, I think I used the word primarily, and I want to make sure that we know it's disproportionate in terms of the workforce percentages.
2:41:45Primarily is in some states.
2:41:46I'm not sure about nationwide.
2:41:48So I just want to make sure I amend that to disproportionately.
2:41:52Getting back to what we were talking about here, and thank you so much, Derek, for being here.
2:41:55Appreciate it so much.
2:41:57And I don't know that we're going to be able to having a small number, these things don't tend to get reversed.
2:42:07All that tends to do is slow it down.
2:42:10And so I— slowing it down is better than doing, you know, open season.
2:42:17But I would be— I don't love the idea, to get to the original ask, of having only the right to make a number in code.
2:42:26I would want to have the hard I just— it's been— the mayor is clearly supportive of this, and so I don't want that to be just whatever the mayor decides is an appropriate number to pursue.
2:42:42I would like to have that require a public conversation.
2:42:46But again, I think the challenge I have and the difficulty with answering those questions, which are very good questions, is that I don't have the answer.
2:42:52Councilor Smith.
2:42:53And I appreciate the work that's been done, is I don't want to talk about how to do the thing that I don't want to do.
2:42:58Mm-hmm.
2:42:58I'm just going to be that blunt about it.
2:43:02Because, you know, we could, you know, it's like asking how many people do we want to die?
2:43:09Mm-hmm.
2:43:11And I, that's why I always talk about, you know, Vision Zero is a numerical goal for me.
2:43:14It's the same idea here.
2:43:16It's, you know, you want to reduce, but you also want to get to zero.
2:43:19It's kind of the idea here.
2:43:20I don't want to open the door to it at all.
2:43:26The other point I wanted to raise with relation to— I'm scrolling up here through my notes.
2:43:33I apologize.
2:43:34I appreciate Councilor Green bringing up the serial meetings law.
2:43:39That would be something that the state legislature should spend its time on instead of this.
Derek Bradley 2:43:44 - 2:43:45
2:43:44Yes.
Sameer Kanal 2:43:46 - 2:44:54
2:43:46Funding TriMet should be something that the state legislature spends its time on instead of this.
2:43:50I think for all the criticism that individual councilors and the council as a whole have gotten for our choices of where to spend time on other pieces of legislation, I think you've all seen that if you work in Salem.
2:44:02And I don't think you want to have to defend why you stopped us from saving lives and also didn't fund transit and also didn't fund public schools and also didn't do all the things that, that Portlanders and frankly Oregonians are counting on legislators to do.
2:44:17Um, not to mention enabling us to do our jobs better and every county school board and everything else by, by, um, fixing the, um, the public meetings law in a way that, that maintains transparency and, and sunshine provisions but also allows us to do our, our thing.
2:44:33Um, the other piece that I was, uh, bringing up is with relation to human support, I think the answer we got was about city— you mentioned first responders and city staff, but I don't know that we had anything about staff of Waymo and Zoox and things like that.
2:44:53Was there anything there?
Jacob Sherman 2:44:54 - 2:45:06
2:44:54I mean, we know that the companies have like in-field operations staff.
2:45:00I don't think we can provide a specific number of how many staff are in different cities, but they typically do have staff.
Sameer Kanal 2:45:10 - 2:45:15
2:45:10And when you say operations, are you distinguishing between operations and customer service in that?
2:45:15Correct.
Jacob Sherman 2:45:16 - 2:45:34
2:45:16Yeah, yeah, yeah.
2:45:17So operations that could actually help respond to an incident or something like that, retrieve vehicles or those kinds of things, differing from customer service.
2:45:26If you, you know, got overcharged on your ride or needed to talk to someone about kind of app-based issues, Based issues.
Sameer Kanal 2:45:36 - 2:47:22
2:45:36In the last— since I've taken office, I'm going to say it that broadly to not name the specific one, uh, I attended a conference.
2:45:43Um, I know, uh, that there's often, um, negativity associated with attending conferences.
2:45:49I think they're very valuable, but this particular one was very valuable on the whole, and it was sponsored by one of the ridesharing companies— that's, uh, sorry, one of the autonomous vehicle companies, one of the ones you we've discussed today.
2:46:00And the company, um, they, they were like one of the lead sponsors, and so they spoke early on in the conference.
2:46:08And they, um, in the hallway before you entered the room, they had a, a vehicle of theirs, um, kind of in the corner.
2:46:14So you'd walk and you'd go into the room, or you'd keep going straight and over towards like the restrooms and stuff.
2:46:19There's this vehicle, and they, they, uh, their— one of their brags was, uh, in their, in their intro—.
2:46:24Introductory thank you.
2:46:42I'm not comfortable necessarily saying kill all the robots yet, but I am comfortable saying that it's not at a place where we can just blindly trust that it works because it's better theoretically than a human driver.
2:46:59We all know terrible human drivers, don't get me wrong.
2:47:03But the idea that this is something we should put tons of, I mean, literal tons, right?
2:47:11Weight driving around without any sort of verification piece on it.
2:47:15Liability wasn't brought up today either.
2:47:17That's been a concern.
2:47:17Yeah.
2:47:18That's where I'm coming from on this.
2:47:21So thanks.
Olivia Clark 2:47:23 - 2:47:33
2:47:23Thank you so much for those comments, Councilor Kanal.
2:47:27I don't know, did we talk about liability in any of the proposals?
2:47:33Oh, okay.
Jacob Sherman 2:47:34 - 2:48:05
2:47:34I think I briefly mentioned it, but it was part kind of included in our base set of rules.
2:47:41So we weren't really spending time talking about it because I think we're planning on advancing some of those liability protections that we've already worked on with the City Attorney's Office.
2:47:50So didn't spend a lot of time on that because we're kind of already taking that as a kind of a starting position, if you will, um, and wanted to talk about some of these other policy concepts.
2:47:59But I apologize for, um, glossing over that.
2:48:02We probably could have spent a little bit more time knowing it was a topic of some interest.
2:48:06No apology necessary.
2:48:08Um, well, colleagues, I don't see any other hands up.
2:48:11Um, I think we'll conclude this part of our meeting.
2:48:15Thank you so much.
2:48:16I, I do, um, I'm going to ask you, at least from my office, to begin to craft that ordinance while you're also working on your administrative rules, and we'll schedule a time, uh, for you to bring that back.
2:48:30I think we need to incorporate everything that you've presented today in terms of the policy areas.
2:48:35Um, I'm, uh, I was a little surprised to hear the start small with 50.
2:48:41Um, but that's a— that's an interesting concept as well.
2:48:45Um, and we will— um, I guess it's a, uh, it's incumbent on all of us to talk individually with our colleagues about this as well, those that are not on this committee that will have a real interest.
2:48:59I know others who used to be on this committee have a real interest.
2:49:04Um, So that's incumbent on all of us.
2:49:07But I do— I would really appreciate you— I know you're busy— but put together a draft for us, um, an ordinance that we might be able to implement, uh, if we get the votes on this council, um, before the legislature begins.
2:49:22That would be my, my hope, um, in some way, shape, or form.
2:49:27So thank you so much for the great work that you do.
2:49:31Thank you.
2:49:31Really appreciate it.
2:49:32Great presentation.
2:49:33And thanks also again, Derek, for being here.
2:49:36Um, okay, with that, um, just a little announcement from my colleagues.
2:49:45Um, our next meeting is Tuesday, August the 11th.
2:49:50We're still working on that agenda, but I'm— um, I suspect that we're going to bring back the bus advertising If, um, you've gotten the information that you wanted, uh, input from the City Attorney's Office, I believe, uh, we'll see if we can bring that back.
2:50:07And then I'm hoping that in our role on oversight that we are going to bring back the Bull Run Filtration Project and specifically learn about, um, their owner's rep and the independent filtration oversight panel.
2:50:23Oversight over oversight.
2:50:25So I think that will be beneficial.
2:50:27I'm not sure what else we're going to add or how much time we'll have, but that's what I'm thinking at this point.
2:50:35So with that, I will adjourn the meeting of the Public Works Committee.
2:50:40Thank you all.
2:50:42Thank you.

Transportation fee rollout and a discount fight

Driverless-car rules and a call for an outright ban

What’s next

Transcript

Olivia Clark 6:30 - 6:42

Gabe Graff 6:43 - 6:44

Unidentified speaker 6:44 - 6:45

Tiffany Koyama Lane 6:46 - 6:47

Mitch Green 6:48 - 6:48

Unidentified speaker 6:49 - 6:49

Loretta Smith 6:50 - 6:51

Shoshana Cohen 6:51 - 6:52

Sameer Kanal 6:52 - 6:52

Unidentified speaker 6:54 - 6:54

Olivia Clark 6:54 - 6:55

Unidentified speaker 6:55 - 10:25

Millicent Williams 10:31 - 12:36

Unidentified speaker 12:36 - 12:37

Millicent Williams 12:38 - 15:42

Shoshana Cohen 15:43 - 17:51

Gabe Graff 17:52 - 25:43

Shoshana Cohen 25:44 - 34:27

Olivia Clark 34:27 - 34:35

Gabe Graff 34:36 - 34:37

Olivia Clark 34:37 - 34:55

Sameer Kanal 34:56 - 35:52

Shoshana Cohen 35:52 - 36:20

Sameer Kanal 36:21 - 37:59

Shoshana Cohen 38:01 - 38:02

Olivia Clark 38:02 - 38:55

Sameer Kanal 38:56 - 39:39

Shoshana Cohen 39:39 - 41:39

Sameer Kanal 41:40 - 42:48

Olivia Clark 42:48 - 43:03

Sameer Kanal 43:04 - 43:09

Olivia Clark 43:10 - 43:13

Tiffany Koyama Lane 43:16 - 44:40

Gabe Graff 44:42 - 45:18

Shoshana Cohen 45:19 - 45:36

Tiffany Koyama Lane 45:38 - 46:15

Millicent Williams 46:18 - 47:54

Tiffany Koyama Lane 47:56 - 48:14

Millicent Williams 48:14 - 49:17

Tiffany Koyama Lane 49:19 - 50:40

Gabe Graff 50:41 - 51:22

Tiffany Koyama Lane 51:24 - 51:27

Olivia Clark 51:29 - 51:36

Mitch Green 51:37 - 52:57

Shoshana Cohen 52:57 - 53:49

Olivia Clark 53:49 - 53:49

Mitch Green 53:50 - 56:10

Millicent Williams 56:11 - 57:35

Gabe Graff 57:35 - 57:35

Olivia Clark 57:36 - 57:46

Mitch Green 57:46 - 57:47

Olivia Clark 57:47 - 57:49

Millicent Williams 57:49 - 57:50

Mitch Green 57:50 - 58:06

Millicent Williams 58:06 - 58:08

Mitch Green 58:09 - 59:01

Shoshana Cohen 59:03 - 59:30

Mitch Green 59:31 - 1:00:01

Shoshana Cohen 1:00:01 - 1:00:23

Millicent Williams 1:00:24 - 1:02:09

Mitch Green 1:02:10 - 1:03:49

Olivia Clark 1:03:49 - 1:03:51

Mitch Green 1:03:51 - 1:03:52

Millicent Williams 1:03:52 - 1:04:55

Olivia Clark 1:04:55 - 1:05:38

Millicent Williams 1:05:38 - 1:05:45

Olivia Clark 1:05:45 - 1:05:47

Millicent Williams 1:05:47 - 1:05:51

Mitch Green 1:05:51 - 1:06:19

Millicent Williams 1:06:19 - 1:07:02

Mitch Green 1:07:02 - 1:08:24

Millicent Williams 1:08:25 - 1:08:38

Mitch Green 1:08:38 - 1:08:39

Olivia Clark 1:08:39 - 1:08:53

Millicent Williams 1:08:53 - 1:10:06

Olivia Clark 1:10:06 - 1:10:09