Portland City Council PM Session 08/06/26

6:20Good afternoon.

6:21I am calling back to meeting— back to order this recessed meeting of the Portland City Council.

6:27It is Thurs— 2 o'clock on Thursday, August 6th.

6:31Keelan, would you please take the roll?

6:33Good afternoon.

6:34Koyama Lane?

6:35Here.

6:35Morillo?

6:37Novick?

6:38Here.

6:39Clark?

6:42Green?

6:43Here.

6:44Zimmerman?

6:44Here.

6:45Avalos?

6:45Present.

6:48Smith?

6:49Here.

6:50Canal?

6:51Here.

6:51Ardenwald-Guiney?

6:56Ryan Dunphy.

6:57Here.

6:58Hank, can we please read the rules of decorum for the chamber?

7:01Good afternoon.

7:02Welcome to the Portland City Council.

7:03To testify before council in person or virtually, you must sign up in advance on the council agenda at www.portland.gov/council/agenda.

7:14Information on engaging with council can be found on the council clerk's webpage.

7:19Individuals may testify for 3 minutes unless the presiding officer states otherwise.

7:22Your microphone your microphone will be muted when your time is over.

7:27Presiding officer preserves order.

7:29Disruptive conduct such as shouting, refusing to conclude your testimony when your time is up, or interrupting others' testimony or council deliberations will not be allowed.

7:38If you cause a disruption, a warning will be given.

7:40Further disruption will result in an ejection from the meeting.

7:44Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass.

7:47Additionally, council may take a short recess and reconvene virtually.

7:51Your testimony should address the matter being considered.

7:53Thank you, Council Clerk Rebecca Dobert.

7:54When testifying, state your name for the record.

7:56Your address is not necessary.

7:58If you're a lobbyist, identify your organization— the organization you represent.

8:02Virtual testifiers should unmute themselves when council clerk calls your name.

8:06Thank you.

8:07Thank you very much.

8:08Colleagues, we have 4 items on our agenda.

8:11However, the majority of our time today will be spent discussing the Moda Center items.

8:172 Of our items are relatively quick.

8:19We have already extended this meeting to 6 o'clock.

8:21That is a hard out at 6 o'clock.

8:23It is my hope we can at least get through the agenda and get first reading's done on everything here.

8:28Our original agenda placed the return of the Moda Center item at the end of today's agenda, but we were originally anticipating a relatively quick discussion of Councilors Smith and Koyama Lane's traffic safety item.

8:41However, now that amendments have been filed, it looks like we need to do the Moda item before the traffic safety item so that we can be sure to complete that work today.

8:53Therefore, I'd like to reorder the agenda.

8:55Second.

8:56May I have unanimous consent to do so?

9:01I see a no.

9:05Trying to swap items 8 and 9 so we would have the Moda Center item before the right turn on red item.

9:12And we are scheduled to go until 6 today.

9:15I'm seeing—.

9:16Please.

9:17Well, I'm just looking and seeing that we do have someone here to testify and signed up for that.

9:22And I am— Looking at my co-sponsor, Councilor Smith, for how you're feeling about this.

9:28But I know this is something that we were hoping to make sure is not, um, skipped over or bumped today.

9:39Council President, can I—.

9:41Yeah.

9:41So are you going to do a hard stop at 4 o'clock for the Moda Center?

9:47Um, no, my— right now my intention is to have a hard stop at 6 o'clock.

9:51No, I mean for us to have the appropriate amount of time.

9:56How much do you think you need, um, Councilor?

10:00Our time request is 45 minutes.

10:02Okay.

10:04Will you have a hard stop at 5 o'clock with the Moda Center no matter what?

10:08I'm not— it sort of depends on, uh, there are I think 18 amendments filed to the Moda Center item.

10:13We must get through the Moda Center item today in order to make it, uh, for the final vote on the 12th.

10:19So that is my top concern.

10:22Um, but, and I, so I, I cannot, I, I at this moment have no idea how much dialogue our councils want to have.

10:31If it was going to be a time certain and we knew we were going to go an hour, I'm, I'm okay with the move.

10:36But if it's not going to be a time certain at, um, I don't want to do it because I want to make sure that we get this heard today.

10:46Okay, so I have 2 colleagues who are not, who Do not give unanimous consent on reordering the agenda.

10:51Councilor Turtle-Guiney.

10:54Council President, is this something that we could move to a vote?

10:57Absolutely it is.

10:58Yeah, that is my next move.

10:59So I would like to move that we rearrange our— reorder our agenda and hear item 9 before item 8.

11:11And I would welcome a second.

11:12Second.

11:13Thank you, Councilor.

11:14Colleagues, is there any discussion of this motion?

11:19Yes, item 9 is the Moda Center term sheet, and item 8 is the no right on red item.

11:27Seeing no further discussion, can we call the roll on the motion to reorder the agenda?

11:32Moved by Dunphy, seconded by Pirtle-Guiney.

11:35Yes.

11:38No.

11:41No.

11:42Regretfully, aye.

11:44No.

11:48No.

11:51Aye.

11:53No.

11:55No.

11:57Referee, aye.

12:00Pirtle-Guiney.

12:01Aye.

12:04Aye.

12:05Aye.

12:07Uh, the motion fails with a vote of 6 ayes and 6 okay, dope.

12:13We are moving forward with our agenda as is.

12:15I hope folks will help us get through in a timely manner.

12:19Why is it that the point of order—.

12:20Excuse me, Councilor Zimmerman.

12:22Thank you.

12:23Uh, in this case, would the mayor not cast a vote here?

12:27I don't know.

12:32In this case, since it was a 6-6, would the mayor not cast a tie-breaking vote?

12:37Procedural motion, not a final.

12:38Right.

12:39Yeah, it's, it's a procedural motion.

12:42Okay, there we go.

12:43Thank you.

12:44Could we please call item number 6?

12:48Document 2026-242, amend the comprehensive plan map and zoning map for a vacant lot on Northwest 31st Avenue described as Willamette Heights Addition, Block 18, Lot 14, at the request of Portland Parks and Recreation, LU 26-007966.

13:08Colleagues, as you will recall, this item involves a change of a parcel owned by the Parks Bureau from open space to residential use to facilitate its sale and development.

13:17When we last heard this item, we approved a motion to tentatively approve the application for a comprehensive map plan map amendment and zoning map amendment and to uphold the recommendation of the hearings officer.

13:31And we asked staff to return with revised those findings have been filed and are before us today.

13:38As this is a legislative land use decision, council now considers the filing as an ordinance using our regular legislative process, and therefore today is the first reading of that ordinance.

13:49There's no further presentation, but are there any technical or clarifying questions from councilors?

13:57Yes.

13:59And Keelan, has anyone signed up to testify on this item?

14:02No, it wasn't open to testimony.

14:04Okay, thank you.

14:04The record was closed.

14:05Perfect, thank you.

14:07Okay, technical clarifying or council discussion on this item?

14:14Seeing none, this item now moves to second reading.

14:16Can we please call item number 7?

14:20Oh, um, what did I do?

14:24Let me check.

14:25I think Lauren is online.

14:31Oh, hi, Lauren.

14:34Hi, sorry.

14:35Council needs to amend— so if you recall, council voted to adopt the hearings officer recommendation and directed staff to go back to write revised findings.

14:46And so staff has prepared those revised findings.

14:48Those are filed under the item.

14:51And so council needs to amend the ordinance to adopt the Oh, okay.

14:58None of that was in my notes.

15:00Great.

15:01So we need to amend this.

15:03Yeah, we're doing item number 6, correct?

15:05Yes, we are.

15:07Okay.

15:07Yes.

15:07So that is a motion to— I will pull up what— Motion to amend.

15:17A motion to amend the ordinance to adopt the revised findings.

15:21Second.

15:21And then it will roll to after, and then a roll call vote, and then the item rolls to a second reading.

15:26Okay.

15:27So moved.

15:28Thank you, Councilor Knoll.

15:29Is there a second?

15:29Second.

15:30Councilor Green, thank you.

15:32Is there discussion of the amendment or amended item?

15:37Okay, now can we call roll on this?

15:40Yeah, this is a motion to amend the ordinance to include the updated finding, to amend the findings.

15:48Moved by Kanal, seconded by Green.

15:50Koyama Lane?

15:53Aye.

15:54Murillo?

15:55Aye.

15:55Novick?

15:56Aye.

15:57Clark?

15:58Aye.

15:59Green?

16:00Aye.

16:00Zimmerman?

16:01Aye.

16:01Avalos?

16:03Aye.

16:04Smith?

16:05Aye.

16:06Kanal?

16:06Aye.

16:07Pirtle-Guiney?

16:08Aye.

16:09Ryan?

16:10Aye.

16:10Dunphy?

16:11Aye.

16:12The amendment is approved with a vote of 12 ayes.

16:15Okay, Lauren, just verifying, are we good now to move this to second reading?

16:18You do.

16:19Yes, please announce a date and time certain.

16:21Okay, and we need a date and time certain.

16:26Yeah, we've got it for August 12th at 9:45 AM, time certain.

16:29Thank you very much.

16:30Very quick final vote.

16:32Thank you.

16:34August 12th, final vote.

16:36Great, moves to second reading.

16:38Can we please call item 7?

16:40Document 2026-189, amend city code and improve land use regulations through the Regulatory Improvement Code Amendment Package 11, amend code titles 32 and 33.

16:55Colleagues, this is the second reading of a non-emergency ordinance.

16:58We've had a number of conversations about this.

17:00Is there any further council discussion?

17:08Seeing none, can we please call the roll?

17:11Koyama Lane.

17:13Aye.

17:13Aye.

17:15Aye.

17:15Aye.

17:16Aye.

17:17Green.

17:20Aye.

17:21Ryun.

17:26Aye.

17:27Danphy.

17:28Aye.

17:29The ordinance passes with a vote of 12 ayes.

17:32Thank you very much.

17:33Can we please call item number 8?

17:38Document 2026-213, direct the Portland Bureau of Transportation to evaluate and implement no turn on red restrictions at signalized intersections within the high crash network.

17:51Thank you.

17:51This is the first reading of a non-emergency ordinance.

17:53Claire Adamsick from Council Operations is here with a committee staff summary report.

17:57Clerk, take it away.

17:59Thank you, Council President and councilors.

18:01For the record, Claire Downs, Council Policy Analyst and staff of the Public Works Committee.

18:05The ordinance before you is document number 826-213, was heard in the Public Works Committee on June 23rd, where it was referred to full council with the recommendation to pass.

18:15The ordinance directs the Portland Bureau of Transportation, PBOT, to evaluate and implement no turn on red restrictions and install appropriate signage at signalized intersections within the city's high crash network.

18:26The ordinance directs PBOT to develop an initial implementation list of priority intersections within the high-crash network where pedestrians, bicyclists, and other vulnerable road users face elevated safety risks.

18:38Within 90 days of ordinance adoption, PBOT shall deliver to council an implementation plan including intersections identified, anticipated costs and proposed funding sources, installation timeline, education and outreach plan, and an equity analysis describing how implementation will prioritize communities most impacted by traffic violence.

18:57The ordinance directs PBOT to lead a public education and outreach campaign during initial project implementation.

19:03It also describes initial and ongoing enforcement measures led by PBOT and the Portland Police Bureau for traffic violations of posted no-turn-on-red restrictions.

19:12No later than 1 year after the first implementation phase is completed, PBOT will report to council on the number of intersections where restrictions were installed, related costs, available compliance and safety data, The ordinance also clarifies the city administrator will update corresponding procedures and administrative rules to carry out the directives of the ordinance.

19:35The full impact statement on this item includes information on financial and budgetary impacts and community impacts and community involvement.

19:42No one submitted verbal testimony aside from invited testimony at the committee meeting, and one person submitted written testimony prior to committee action.

19:48Councilmember Herbold.

19:49The themes of that testimony included acknowledging that No Turn on Red is one tool within a broader system of intersection safety strategies, encouraging council to give PBOT clear direction while preserving the resources and flexibility needed to continue advancing other urgent Vision Zero priorities, and ensuring that the ordinance implementation considers staff capacity and a full cost assessment that includes all resource needs, including the costs of outreach and education.

20:13And that concludes the committee staff summary.

20:15Thank you.

20:15Thank you, Claire.

20:16Vice President Clark, this came out of your committee.

20:18Any opening remarks?

20:19Sure, just, um, very, very briefly because I know we're short on time, is that we had a great discussion.

20:24It really falls within our, um, long-range goals on Vision Zero, and I think both the co-sponsors may want to add a word.

20:32Thank you.

20:33So Councilors Smith or Koyama Lane, any further?

20:37Thank you.

20:37Um, yeah, we had a, a great conversation about, um, how to keep people safe who are walking Yes.

20:44Rolling and, um, and riding in bikes, uh, particularly in the high crash corridors in, um, in District 1.

20:53We know that, um, if we can slow the speed down, we can eliminate some of the safety issues that we have in our district.

21:01And I like this as a pilot so that we can, um, we can kind of direct what we're going to do and, and if it's working.

21:10But we do know that there are a majority of the, uh, the crashes that we've seen here lately, they've been in the high crash corridor, and we want to use this as, as another tool in conjunction with the, um, cameras that we can also put up.

21:27Thank you.

21:30Thank you, Council President.

21:32I wanted to thank Vice Chair Smith, Vice Chair of our Public Works, uh, Committee, for your care about Vision Zero and for the safety of all of our constituents.

21:43Yeah, we had a good conversation at the committee, and while Oregon state law generally allows drivers to turn right on red lights after stopping, it also gives local jurisdictions the authority to restrict movement where safety conditions dictate.

22:01So I really appreciate that this legislation, which PBOT has been incredibly helpful with— thank you so much, Shoshana and Director Williams.

22:10Thank you to advocates that have been working on this.

22:12Thank you.

22:13Spoken up and, and been part of the discussion, and we're very collaborative with Councilor Smith's office and I.

22:20We have an amendment to change a couple pieces there, um, and I appreciate that the urgency of the ordinance is— it's really underscored by really stark local data and dire frequent accidents.

22:36In some cases, you know, some of the worst still are 122nd Avenue and Halsey.

22:41So I appreciate that it focuses on areas where there's high crash data.

22:49It would prioritize intersections that include pedestrian head starts, bike boxes, heavy— where there's a lot of heavy foot bike traffic.

22:58And I appreciate that it's really clear with a rollout plan of 90 days.

23:03And so council will be hearing back.

23:04There's a piece of education that's part of it.

23:07And just I just really appreciate your partnership, Councilor Smith, and appreciate the entire Public Works Committee for supporting this in committee.

23:18Thank you, Councilor.

23:18And Councilor, I understand— I don't know who's going to introduce it, but I understand there's also an amendment that needs to be moved on this.

23:28Yes.

23:30We have an amendment titled Koyama Lane Smith 1.

23:37And you can see there, it's redlined in there and there are some specifications in there and that explain that this is work as a pilot project.

23:51It explains that it focuses on 30 intersections where there's been high injury, high injuries.

23:57I'm sorry, can you repeat that?

24:01It specifies that the part of the pilot— the pilot will happen and then folks will return from PBOT to council to keep us updated and get some additional guidance.

24:13If you have more questions, feel free to let us know.

24:17There are just some specifications in there.

24:20I believe some of the costs are— is that from the bureau explaining some of the—.

24:25Yes.

24:26Director Williams and I. Yeah, so thank you so much for your partnership to make sure that those numbers are accurate.

24:33And I will— should I move that?

24:36I'll move it now or do you want me to?

24:37Why don't we get to technical clarifying questions from councilors, get testimony, and then I'll turn to you for the amendment.

24:43Sounds great.

24:44Thank you.

24:44Okay, colleagues, so technical or clarifying questions at this point?

24:49Councilor Novick.

24:50Thank you, Mr. President.

24:51One question I had is, how many no right turn on red locations do we have now?

25:02I just want to give the public an understanding of whether adding 30 would be tripling the number or adding 1% to the number.

25:12Peter Kuntz, Signals and Streetlighting Division Manager.

25:15We have approximately 200 locations where we're doing some level of no turn on red currently.

25:22Okay.

25:22Also, I mean, just a little Googling I did suggested that this is not a reason to vote no, but it suggested that there aren't that many fatal crashes at right turn on red because people are going slowly, but there are crashes, but they tend not to be of the fatal variety.

25:41Yes, that's a correct statement.

25:42Okay.

25:44Thank you.

25:45Thank you, Councilor Novick.

25:46Vice President Clark.

25:48Um, I don't have a question.

25:50I was just going to speak to the amendment.

25:53Sure.

25:53Is that okay?

25:54Sure.

25:54Um, I really appreciate the amendment.

25:56I appreciate that you put the words in pilot because I think it is rather, um, an experiment, and we'll get feedback back from PBOT.

26:05So I'm supportive of the amendment.

26:08Thank you, Vice President Clark.

26:09Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

26:11Thank you, Council President.

26:12I have some questions that I'll ask after public testimony, but I'm seeing both a Koyama Lane 1 and a Koyama Lane 2 filed that look like they have some overlap but some difference.

26:25Um, Councilor Koyama Lane referred just to a Koyama Lane 1, and I'm wondering if we can get some clarity on whether our colleagues plan to move one or both of these and what the difference thank you.

26:39I have Alan De La Torre from my staff here also.

26:42We're messaging because we worked with folks at PBOT to make a couple other changes.

26:48And so now I'm understanding that Koyama Lane Smith 2 adds a couple of those.

26:55We will just need to move that one.

26:57So we should not be looking at Koyama Lane Smith 1.

27:00We should accept the amendment to Koyama Lane Smith 2.

27:01I expect that you'll be moving just Koyama Lane Smith 2.

27:04Is that correct?

27:05Yes, that is correct.

27:06Thank you for asking.

27:07And if you look, you can also see, um, I think they, they tried to use colors in a certain way to show that they had added it on, but we will just be moving Koyama Lane Smith 2.

27:18You can just look at that one.

27:19Thank you so much.

27:19Thank you for the clarification.

27:20Thank you, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

27:21Councilor Zimmerman.

27:24Thank you.

27:26I don't know where the staff went, but what constitutes a high-crash corridor?

27:30And during the last pilot, when was the last time PBOT ever reversed anything it did in the roadway related to— based on the public input?

27:39We have staff who can come back on up to the table, please.

27:46Bueller.

27:49Sorry, we were trying to decide who was going to answer the question.

27:53Wendy Cully, PBOT City Traffic Engineer.

27:56The first question was, how do you define a high-crash corridor?

28:00So about 15 years ago now, we did a mapping exercise and looked at data to see where, which corridors in the city had the highest number of crashes.

28:10And since then, we've refined that.

28:11We now have different segments, but the high-crash network is still based on data that talks about the number of crashes and more importantly, the severe severity of crashes.

28:23Thank you.

28:24Number of fatalities and pedestrians and bicyclists involved.

28:28So we have a map on our website that has 30 high-crash corridors identified.

28:34They typically are 4- and 5-lane roadways in East Portland.

28:37So am I then to assume that the other 200 that you cited just a few minutes ago are all high-crash corridor, no turn on rights?

28:44No, they're varied.

28:47We have a lot of reasons for putting in—.

28:48I don't need answers from here.

28:49I'm asking the staff, please.

28:50Thank you.

28:51Yeah, we, we have a lot of reasons for why we would put in a no turn on red.

28:55We put them in where we have bike boxes.

28:57We put them in where there are conflicting movements, different phasing for different signals.

29:01So you can't make a right on red if there's a bike phase signalized there because it would just conflict with another signalized movement.

29:08So we have a variety of reasons why we put them in.

29:12They're not always on the high crash network.

29:14They're at a variety of intersections depending on what's there.

29:17All right.

29:17I appreciate that.

29:18I think the reason I'm asking questions, I think that this amendment may be what gets me there on the overall, right?

29:23With it being moving from originally was all intersections to 30, and within a high crash— or now it says actually, now it says high injury network.

29:36So that's different.

29:36So what's a high injury network?

29:38It's basically the same thing.

29:39We've changed terminology over the years, and now we have just recently in the past couple years, we're looking at tiered injury networks.

29:46So instead of maybe including all of Outer Stark, we're including just segments of Stark where we are seeing the highest number of visual field crashes.

29:55And are any of these 30 in District 4?

29:59Yes, the original 30, yes, there are some in District 4.

30:02There was Tewilliger for bike crashes, Beaverton-Hillsdale Highway, Southwest Barber.

30:09Okay, thank you.

30:11And then the second question I asked earlier was, you mentioned a lot of pilot and public input and yada, yada, yada.

30:17So I'm just curious to when the last time you reversed anything after you did something, then got public input and said that wasn't working when it comes to one of these types of experiments.

30:25The no right turn on red at 3rd and Alder.

30:28Okay.

30:29We did that recently based on community input, folks who are, most prominently placed in this neighborhood and who were experiencing challenges with people accessing their facilities.

30:47And so we made the adjustment.

30:48We worked with our partners at TriMet.

30:51We ensured that we were not disrupting anything else by undoing that restriction and opened up the lane and created a smoother experience for everyone using it.

31:01Okay.

31:02And that was just 6 months ago, maybe.

31:05Thank you for that.

31:05I think those are good examples.

31:07Um, you know, I think that—.

31:09Oh, Millicent Williams, for the record.

31:11Is that you, Millicent?

31:12It is, just in case you weren't clear.

31:14Um, no, I appreciate that.

31:16I think that, um, one of the questions I came in originally with was, since I'm experiencing no right turns all over the district, I don't know what the point of this was.

31:28And so it sounds like this is an emphasis for, particularly for some outer East Portland areas.

31:35But I think the fact that you've moved it to a pilot and just a select 30 is helpful because I've seen a city that's put in 200 no-rights already and not for high-crash reasons.

31:49So this seemed— I wasn't exactly sure what we were doing here originally, but I think your amendment is good.

31:53Thank you.

31:55And I appreciate you bringing it forward, Councilor.

31:58Thank you.

31:58Councilor, another location where we removed something that we implemented was at 4th and Main after completing the 4th Avenue project, again from stakeholders in the community that were concerned about access to their facilities.

32:12Yeah, lots of improvements to make on 4th Avenue.

32:14Well, but we got to start somewhere and we started there.

32:16I'm now experiencing dump trucks playing slalom every single morning and garbage trucks playing slalom with people and bikes and cars because of some of those changes.

32:25So I hope that when we say public input for improvements, we mean it.

32:28We do mean it.

32:29Because yikes.

32:30Yeah, it's, it's a lot of opportunities for folks to continue to learn how to best use the system when we make those types of changes.

32:37And so we'll continue to do our work to ensure that the system works the way that we intend.

32:46These potential changes.

32:47Absolutely.

32:48Thank you.

32:49Thank you, Councilor Zimmerman.

32:50Councilor Smith.

32:52Thank you.

32:53Thank you, Council President.

32:54Thank you for coming up, um, Director Williams.

32:57And this was an attempt for me and Councilor Koyama Lane to meet some of the Vision Zero promises that we made, which was making sure that Portland's commitment to eliminating traffic deaths cannot just be a policy goal.

33:12It requires proactive, uh, engineering changes that physically separate people from the vehicles.

33:19And I want to go back to what, uh, Kathy said earlier.

33:24Um, the national statistics say that, that this no turn on red, it has a 9%, um, decrease in, in traffic accidents.

33:35So I know you said that there was no number to it, but it is, you know, out of every 100, we could possibly save about 10 people's lives.

33:42Now, those may not be the lives that that you want to save, but there are 10 lives that, um, we're, we're attempting to make sure that we save in the city of Portland.

33:53Because it makes, it makes a big difference when we can actually get people to stop and to think.

33:59Because we also know that, uh, speed kills.

34:03And if we could turn down the speed, that also, that, that is another reason for doing the no turn on red.

34:11Um, We have a lot of vulnerable communities out in East Portland— pedestrians, cyclists, and community members in wheelchairs— and they bear the brunt of no-turn-on-red crashes, which result in severe injuries and sometimes tragic deaths.

34:31So I want to make sure that those injuries that we have, that we can eliminate those.

34:39And those fatalities that we have, we can also try to eliminate those as well.

34:45But what we don't track is we don't track those near misses of people who are trying to turn red when bikes are coming down.

34:55We don't track those.

34:56So we don't know how many near misses we're preventing.

34:59And I think this will give us an opportunity to collect some of that data too.

35:05Thank you.

35:06Thank you, Councilor Smith.

35:08Putting myself in the queue, I have a quick question.

35:11You know, I appreciate that this amendment that is before us narrows it down to a pilot.

35:17Sometimes pilots are driven off of not necessarily the highest need, but the one that makes the most sense for measuring and things like that.

35:26And I suspect I know the answer to this.

35:27I just wanna hear it on the record.

35:31Is East Portland going to be well represented in this pilot process?

35:35I suspect it will because we are looking at signalized intersections that have the highest number of crashes, and many of the 4-lane arterials out in East Portland are consistently on that high-crash intersection list.

35:48Absolutely.

35:50It is a— all 3 of my— I assumed since Councilor Smith is one of the chief sponsors of this, I assumed that would be the case.

35:56I just wanted to hear it on the record officially because East Portland, we are unpaved roads that are connecting freeways.

36:05That is truly the infrastructure we have out there, is nothing in between.

36:09So that's a bit of an exaggeration, but I would love to see this—.

36:13Not much of one.

36:14We at least get not, you know, not a quarter.

36:16I'm coming for half.

36:19Thank you.

36:19That is my only technical question.

36:22Councilor Ryan.

36:23Yeah, thank you, Council President.

36:24First, on 4th Avenue, what I experience is the no left turn.

36:30Yeah, because it goes this direction, doesn't it?

36:34Yeah.

36:35And so when I'm trying to take a left on Jefferson, I can't go until the bikes go.

36:40Well, that's because of the infrastructure that we have on 4th.

36:44Yeah, so I just wanted to say, I don't experience right turns much on 4th.

36:47Just thought I'd say that.

36:49Hardware question.

36:50Are these metal signs or plastic signs?

36:52I didn't hear the first part of your question.

36:55They're metal signs.

36:56Okay.

36:57Yeah, those are—.

36:59They're high intensity, so when headlights hit them, they pop extra bright.

37:04Oh, the ones with the lights around them?

37:06They don't have lights on them, but it's just a really high-intensity reflective sheeting that is on those signs.

37:11There are some with the little lights around them, right?

37:14Um, or did someone just do that?

37:16We don't— we don't do those on—.

37:17I have some in my neighborhood.

37:20We don't do those on the no-turn-on-red signs.

37:23There are some stop signs around town that have some lights in the borders.

37:28Got it.

37:29All right.

37:29Since the price seemed to go up a lot from the first time I looked at this to the second time, maybe I thought you were going to tell me it was much more expensive hardware.

37:37The price went up when we had the opportunity to reengage in the conversation about the actual cost of doing the work.

37:44There was Um, some, uh, uh, reevaluation of what was necessary and just a leveling— setting— level setting of expectations.

37:52Overarching, it seems like these amendments are the fact that PBOT and the sponsors got together and just cleaned some things up, right?

37:59Okay, thanks.

38:00Thank you, Councilor Ryan.

38:03Keelan, is there anyone signed up to testify on this item?

38:07We have one person signed up.

38:11Thank you all.

38:12Mike Dennis.

38:15Welcome, Mike.

38:16Come on up.

38:17Introduce yourself for the record.

38:19Hello everyone.

38:19Mike Dennis with Oregon Walks.

38:21Thank you, Councilor Dunphy and Vice President Council Clerk and all members here.

38:28I'll be very brief.

38:30With Oregon Walks, we wanna support the no right on red and want to lend our support as well to the amendment.

38:38And that's amendment number 2.

38:39Just had a chance to look at that thank you.

38:43Really pleased to see this going forward.

38:46We'll be back later.

38:48I'm happy to answer questions if any of you have questions, can talk individually.

38:52We can share some of the data we have.

38:54We know that No Red on Red is a proven tool.

38:57Very pleased that this is going to be in a pilot situation like we talked about.

39:03And finally, I just wanna acknowledge and thank Councilors Koyama Lane and Councilor Smith for working together.

39:09The teamwork, the collaboration really makes a difference.

39:16Thank you.

39:20Okay, colleagues, we are now into discussion, and I'm going to recognize Councilor Koyama Lane.

39:28Thank you, Council President.

39:29I would like to move Koyama Lane-Smith Amendment 2.

39:32This amendment updates the original policy to focus on delivering 30 intersections before PBOT comes back to council for additional direction, and the amendment also updates the language to reflect the second.

39:44Councilor Koyama Lane moves Koyama Lane-Smith 2, and Councilor Smith seconds.

39:50Colleagues, discussion of the amendment?

39:54Councilor Novick, is that a legacy?

39:56Yes.

39:56Okay.

39:57And Councilor Pirtle-Guiney?

40:00I noticed that the amendment has significantly increased costs per intersection.

40:04Is that because the original estimates of cost were off and this is just updated and more accurate, or is that because we're now looking at a more extensive infrastructure for these specific intersections?

40:24Welcome back up, staff.

40:26Yeah, there we go.

40:27Director Williams.

40:29Thank you so much for the question, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

40:32The estimate that's been provided the earlier number that was provided was an estimate based on a different set of data, but when we were able to go back and help the councilors understand what was actually required to do the work, the estimate more appropriately reflects what's necessary to do the work at each intersection.

40:55Thank you.

40:56Yes.

40:57Thank you, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

40:58Further discussion of the amendment?

40:59Seeing none, the amendment is adopted.

41:05Seeing no one in the queue, Keelan, can we please call the roll on Koyama Lane-Smith 2?

41:10Moved by Koyama Lane, seconded by Smith.

41:12Koyama Lane?

41:13Aye.

41:14Morillo?

41:14Aye.

41:15Novick?

41:16Aye.

41:16Clark?

41:17Aye.

41:18Green?

41:18Aye.

41:19Zimmerman?

41:19Aye.

41:20Avalos?

41:21Aye.

41:21Smith?

41:22Aye.

41:23Mull?

41:23Aye.

41:24Pirtle-Guiney?

41:24Aye.

41:25Ryan?

41:25Aye.

41:27Aye.

41:27The amendment is approved with a vote of 12 ayes.

41:30Colleagues, to the now amended underlying amendment ordinance, is there any further discussion?

41:34Councilor Green.

41:36I just want to say thanks to the sponsors for identifying this policy as an urgent item.

41:44I think this is a matter of public safety, and I really appreciate your willingness to continue to say let's make forward progress on this issue even Even if we can't solve it all at once, I see it across the sort of policies that y'all are taking in this view.

42:02Councilor Smith, this is related to SIP in my mind.

42:05And so I'm connecting that piece together.

42:07So I just want to say thanks, and I'm really happy to support it.

42:10Thanks.

42:11Thank you, Councilor Green.

42:13Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

42:14Thank you, Council President.

42:15I just have 2 questions to pull out some information that I'm guessing was discussed earlier in the process, and I'm not sure if these are questions for the sponsors or maybe for our experts at the Bureau, but I'd love to hear a little bit about how this policy was chosen and what data we have about crashes at intersections like this and how no turn on red helps to to address some of the data that we.

42:45See around where fatal or, or very dangerous crashes are most likely to happen.

42:54Councilor Pirtle-Guiney, would you like me to answer how I came up with it?

42:59Happy to hear from you, and it looks like we have somebody from the bureau as well.

43:02Yes, both are great.

43:04Well, a lot of, um, the reason why I came up with this was because we— I think District 1 and District 2 had more deaths and had higher crash corridors in our districts.

43:18And I was trying to figure out a way how to use Vision Zero to decrease those numbers.

43:24And then when I saw that 9% through the no turn on red, it could cut it down by 9%.

43:30No, it's not the silver bullet that you would want of a 50 or 60%.

43:35But when you're thinking about that and thinking about—.

43:38Yeah.

43:38And I was doing some stuff with Midway, um, Division Midway out there, and I was walking, doing a, a business tour, and I was frightened out there.

43:49There is a no turn on red on Division and 122nd, but on some of the, some of these streets out there on, on 122nd, uh, out in, um, in East Portland, they don't have them.

44:03And I was like, I need to do something to keep folks Yes.

44:08From being afraid to walking in the neighborhoods.

44:11And we want to also, when we work with PBOT, is to also identify those areas where it can be safe for kids, safe routes for school, to make sure that it's going to coincide with other things that we have going on to make it safe as people who are walking, you know, seniors.

44:29And the conversations that we had, we talked to a lot of organizations and we talked to folks who work with and who provide senior housing out there, they don't want to— they don't want to go outside.

44:43And so when you have people speeding down the street and they have, have no reason to stop, or they're doing those California right turns— and which, for some people who don't know what that is, they don't ever stop, they just kind of slow down a little bit and then they turn— this will make folks stop, hopefully.

44:59Councilor Smith.

45:01You don't like the California roll stop, Councilor?

45:03Well, and, and I've been guilty of it too, so that's how I know.

45:06But it's just, it's, it's, it's not safe.

45:10I mean, it is really not safe.

45:13I'd love to hear some of the data from PBOT as well.

45:15Yeah, so, um, as Councilor Smith mentioned, we do see a 9% reduction in crashes when, uh, no turn on red is installed, and that's based on national studies.

45:28We follow a lot of national studies when we look at our safety treatments.

45:32And so you'll be hearing a little bit more about this next week with the Vision Zero Action Plan, PBOT's Vision Zero Action Plan update, when we dig into different strategies for safety at intersections and how when you, you may have one countermeasure like a no-turn-on-red that's 9%, but when you layer it with other things like reflective backplates for traffic signals and you start doing that systemically across the city, you start to drive down crashes across the city.

45:57Thank you.

45:57So great, thank you.

46:00May I also respond?

46:01Yes.

46:02Another piece of why this is important, the no turn on red, and specifically the way it is in this ordinance, is because it does focus on high injury, high crash areas.

46:15And we know that in Portland, I think it's about 8% of the streets account for the vast— for the majority of traffic deaths.

46:23I think it's about 62%.

46:25So that paired with focusing the intervention on also making sure it's targeted is important.

46:32Thank you all.

46:33I was glad to see something come forward for us that wasn't just focused on speed limits, but that was really looking at what are some of the targeted places where we need to have different interventions.

46:48And this is an interesting one to me because it sounds like the interplay is so different in different districts.

46:53Councilor Smith, you've talked about the, um, the thoroughfare streets, and when I think about the need for this in District 2, I first go to thinking about our industrial corridors where if you're turning on a red, you're trying to jut out, um, amidst a steady flow of traffic, including, um, a lot of trucks and, and other larger vehicles, and there aren't as many pedestrians, but but when there are pedestrians there, I think that risk factor goes up pretty significantly because of the type of traffic you're interacting with.

47:27So I hope that as this is implemented and as pilot locations are chosen, our folks at the bureau are thinking about the way this might be implemented differently in different parts of town and how having our representative council can help us think a little bit more in a little bit more of a nuanced way.

47:45Thank you.

47:48Thank you, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

47:52Councilor Smith.

47:55Thank you, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

47:57I want— is Dana here?

48:00Dana does a great email.

48:03She sends out an email of all the crashes.

48:07Um, do you all look at that email or do you just cross over it?

48:10It's so depressing.

48:12It, it can be.

48:13So I'm looking at this just to give you all an example.

48:16She sent the latest one out on August 3rd, and so she separates the, uh, the traffic deaths by, by, uh, council districts.

48:25So for District 1, um, traffic deaths calendar from year to date is 11.

48:34District 2 is 5.

48:37District District 3 is 6.

48:40District 4 is 6.

48:42So we nearly have twice the number of traffic deaths in District 1 than any other place around the city.

48:50And this is one of the reasons why we wanted to make sure that we could get some resources to, uh, to kind of slow that down a bit.

49:00And so I just want to thank you, Dana, for, um, you, you give this information, and it comes out every week, and I appreciate you, and I appreciate you, um, putting this all together because this gives us a, um, a snapshot of what's happening.

49:16Are there any other things that you, um, you want to tell the council about in terms of the No Turn on Red?

49:22And, um— I, I would just echo a lot of the things that have been said here, being able to focus on areas where we do have those repeated injuries and fatalities where we have a history of crashes is really beneficial.

49:39And also echoing what Wendy Cully said, that being able to layer that with other interventions, I'm excited to see this as a start to be looking at implementing more no turn on red and then seeing where we can go next with it.

49:55And you all saw the All the, um, the TV news on Friday, July 31st, when a person on a motorcycle was killed in a crash on, uh, eastbound Exit 10 of I-84 to Northeast 122nd.

50:13And this crash occurred during the nighttime, and so it was a major crash, and it appears that the motorcycle came from eastbound I-84.

50:23Thank you.

50:24Uh, at a high rate of speed.

50:26And like I said, that high rate of speed, and, um, that person did not slow down enough to, to kind of manage the curve.

50:34So the motorcyclist applied brakes late and crashed into the, uh, the barrier with speed and, and likely died on impact.

50:44Um, there's a lot going on, um, that there are a lot of chances that people are taking in East Portland.

50:51That are not, um, that don't impact some of the places like in District 3, in District 2.

51:00So for me, um, this is, this is really personal, and, and we have to stop all the, the, uh, fatalities that are happening in District 1.

51:12Yeah, thank you.

51:13And I want to use this just as a tool.

51:15It's like I said, it's not the silver bullet, but it is a tool to see if we can curb the speed and, and what happens out there.

51:23And thank you, Dana.

51:26Thank you, Councilor Smith.

51:27Councilor Koyama Lane.

51:31I also want to highlight the folks from the city that have been really helpful.

51:36Dana Dickman, Shoshana, Director Williams, thank you so much.

51:43Thank you to folks from Families for Thank you.

51:45Thank you to the folks from Portland for Safe Streets, especially Sarah Risser, for helping us think about the amendment.

51:53Folks from Oregon Walks, Verde, different folks from neighborhood associations that played a role in looking at this, giving feedback, and engaging in different ways, whether it was kind of more broadly about this or also specifically helping us with the amendment.

52:07And I really appreciate that Mike Dennis thanked our staff, because Elijah, you have been amazing.

52:13You have— I know my team throws a lot at you, and we've Or trying to track you down and also Teamsing you, and you have been great.

52:20And same with Alan.

52:21And thank you for both of you for working together.

52:25Um, and thank you, Councilor Smith, for your leadership on this and your focus.

52:30I know that when you are focused on something, you, uh, you stick with it.

52:33And I'm so glad that you are focused on Vision Zero, and I love your Vision Zero orange today.

52:40Thank you, Councilor Koyama Lane.

52:44Colleagues, seeing no one else in the queue for discussion, this item is now moving to second reading.

52:50Can we please call our last item for the day?

52:55Item 9, document 2026-280, authorize a non-binding term sheet with Rip City Management LLC and Trailblazers Holdings LLC outlining the terms for Moda Center Arena renovation.

53:10Operating and lease agreements that will keep the Portland Trail Blazers playing in Portland for at least 20 more years.

53:17Thank you, colleagues.

53:18Yesterday we heard invited and public testimony on the proposed term sheet resolution.

53:23Today is reserved for council discussion on the underlying and to consider amendments, several of which have been filed yesterday and overnight.

53:31Before we get into that, I'd like to start by bringing up Deputy City Administrator Oliveira, if he's in the room.

53:37Nope.

53:38Okay, I'm bringing up— he's probably still coming back from the counties conversation.

53:41So I'm going to bring up Kristen Dennis to give us a—.

53:44Sorry, I'm not ready to—.

53:46You're not ready either.

53:47Okay, great.

53:49Cool.

53:51Do we have anybody in the room, any staff in the room to help us with some synopsis of the changes that have been made to the term sheet since our last work session and to update us on the legislative action by our friends at the anybody here available yet?

54:04Sorry.

54:06Thank you, Council President.

54:07Um, I'm wondering if people are coming back from the county now, if it might be a smart time to take just a tiny break for the staff to set up.

54:14Looks like they're all filtering in.

54:16I don't have them in front of me.

54:17Do you have them?

54:18Let's see.

54:20Are you guys—.

54:20Okay to give me an update, or do you want to—.

54:22Uh, well, Ken McGarry, for the record, from the City Attorney's Office.

54:25I don't have them in front of me.

54:27The changes, but— and Donnie is still in the county meeting.

54:32But essentially, we added some references to strengthen the position of the fire as a sublessee, Portland Fire as a sublessee.

54:44We changed references to the MOU to definitive agreements because we're going to skip that interim step in the event that the term sheet passes and—.

54:55Okay.

54:59We are moving towards something for the end of the year.

55:01We wanted to kind of get into the meat of the negotiation of the actual definitive agreements.

55:08We took out a reference in the exhibit, I believe, or in the term sheet to one of the community partners that was referenced.

55:20And I can't remember the others, but they were essentially ministerial things.

55:24Yeah.

55:30Okay.

55:30One of the ideas that's been raised in some of the pre-filed amendments has to do with the composition and responsibilities of the Joint Authority.

55:38That Joint Authority is going to be incredibly important to all of our future decision-making as it relates to the Moda Center.

55:45Council has clearly expressed some concern about the responsibilities of that body and how the city's legislative branch will be involved moving forward.

55:53Could you speak a little bit about the status of the joint authority's development and to some of the concerns that have been raised in the amendments?

55:59Of course.

56:00Thank you, Councilor.

56:01And that is actually one of the other kind of small changes that was made in the term sheet was to add a reference that the City Council will appoint members to the joint authority.

56:12We are in the process of yet another term sheet.

56:16With the state forming the joint authority, kind of the parameters, just like this term sheet that sets the high-level parameters of how that's going to function.

56:28The current kind of framework, and it changes from day to day, is now adding the county into that joint authority.

56:37Funny.

56:39Speak of the devil.

56:41Adding the county into the joint authority and also kind of the parameters around how the joint authority will function, not just with regards to oversight of the arena renovation project, but oversight of the ongoing operations after the project is complete.

57:02The current kind of thinking would be, and Donnie can chime in here, a 7-member joint authority with 3 members appointed by the state, 3 members appointed by the city and 1 member appointed from the county.

57:21From that group of 7, the 7 would create a chair.

57:25The actual constitution of that authority is TBD for the intergovernmental agreement that will be formalizing what the joint authority is.

57:36And then from that, the joint authority will figure out who's involved in helping to negotiate with the Trailblazers on behalf of the Joint Authority and how that's going to function in terms of relationship with the Joint Authority and the city.

57:54As you guys all know, the city owns the building, owns the property.

57:57So we have a little bit more of a, what I would call, first position.

58:02The state may not, but that's kind of the way we see it.

58:05Thank you.

58:06Thank you.

58:08Hi everyone, uh, Donnie Oliveira for the record.

58:12So councilors, I've been in government for a long time, but this is a first.

58:17I am concurrently in this meeting with you and also still in the, the county commission meeting right now.

58:22Double government.

58:23Yeah, good work.

58:24Doing double duty right now.

58:26Uh, along with what, what Ken just reviewed, and if I say things that duplicate, I'm sorry, one of the other more material changes is in the table in Exhibit D, we reflected the ongoing contributions to be a maximum contribution versus it being just dependent directly on revenues.

58:44So this just clarifies that in those years that the spectator venue fund is making beyond the contribution that was committed, those additional revenues would stay within the city, not just default to the Moda Center.

58:57So there's that piece.

58:57Thank you.

58:58It sounded like you touched a little bit about the WNBA standards.

59:02So that was a material change that we worked with the fire leadership on.

59:06So that's—.

59:06And then we also, as you know, we have a resolution coming next week through CityLife, but we were more clear about Albina Visions Trust's role as a development partner, and that's included in the CBA component.

59:18And it sounded like you touched on the joint authority pieces as well.

59:21Thank you.

59:22All right, colleagues who are jumping into the queue, I just want to check, are we Questions for Donnie or Ken, or is it amendments?

59:30Councilor Smith?

59:31No.

59:32Okay.

59:32Councilor Knoll?

59:33Okay.

59:34Councilor Green?

59:35Amendments.

59:36Thank you.

59:36Councilor Avalos?

59:39Councilor Morillo?

59:41Yes, I have a question for you, Ken.

59:44I think there was an interview yesterday with K2 that Mayor Wilson did that talked about some negotiations that happened in March And maybe some promises that were made to the NBA.

59:56Can we get any clarity on what promises were already made to the NBA in March, and is that in writing anywhere?

1:00:03Um, I, I don't have any knowledge of any promises that were made to the NBA.

1:00:09I wasn't involved in things in March, so I'll defer to Donnie or anybody from the administration.

1:00:15Are you interested in my response, Councilor?

1:00:17Okay.

1:00:17Uh, I think what happened in March, and actually going back a few months before that, is as we were ramping up towards, uh, the short session, there was a conversation about how would the various components of a— at this point, we're in that range of $500, $600 that you've heard about, a renovation— what the different components would be.

1:00:37So I think there was a general consensus that the state would have contribute their amount, and it'd be about $365 million, and the city would have approximately $120 million, and the that would make up the difference of that.

1:00:50Those were general commitments as a framework, but we continued to acknowledge at that time that there were a lot of steps to be made both on the city side and the county side to make those dollars real.

1:01:00That was always communicated to the Blazers.

1:01:02It was clear, I think, in SB 1501.

1:01:05So framework, yes, but commitment's hard.

1:01:07We're clearly in the middle of trying to solve that right now.

1:01:10Gotcha.

1:01:11Thanks for that.

1:01:13I do want to sort of level set for my colleagues as we enter this conversation today that there is the negotiating team, which is the administration and your team that is working on that, but we are the budget authority of this government and nothing goes through this council without our authority, especially when it comes to commitment of dollars.

1:01:32So as far as I'm aware, the other side has not even made any updates on what they think about our term sheet.

1:01:42So I am living in a world where I get to make a term sheet that I think is good for the public, and then they can negotiate that down later if they want.

1:01:49But we are the stewards of the public dollars, and we need to act like that today in what we're choosing to bring forward.

1:01:56Thank you.

1:01:57Thank you, Councilor Morillo.

1:01:59Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

1:02:00Thank you, Council President.

1:02:02The overview of the changes was a little disjointed there, so I just want to make sure I've captured the categories correctly.

1:02:09And I think this is important because we were in work session before.

1:02:14We don't have an annotated copy posted for the public to see.

1:02:18So there were provisions added to make sure that the term sheet includes the necessary WNBA standards and the work that our Portland Fire needs.

1:02:30There were some changes made around the MOU step because given the lack of formal response from Rip City Management, it doesn't make sense to have that interim step right now.

1:02:42There was the removal of one of the parties that was explicitly named in the community benefits agreement section.

1:02:49I believe that was 1803 Fund.

1:02:52There was some clarification in Exhibit D that that is a maximum amount, which I think originally was stated but not as clearly as it is now.

1:03:01So not a content change there, but a specification.

1:03:06And then there are the changes to the joint authority given the feedback that we've heard from the county.

1:03:12Are there any other changes that people should be looking for in this term sheet compared to what we were basing our discussion on last week?

1:03:21I think those are the material changes.

1:03:22There were some smaller nuance, like added context, but context that existed in the public.

1:03:27For example, things like that the new ownership group accepted the terms of the current non-relocation agreement in March of '26 when they assumed ownership.

1:03:36Details that just clarify—.

1:03:38Things that build the case for why we have the term sheet that we do, not things that change the terms within the term sheet.

1:03:45Correct.

1:03:45Okay, thank you for that clarification.

1:03:48Thank you, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

1:03:49So colleagues, uh, as we're going to move into some conversations around amendments, I just want to note I, I really believe that this council has done a commendable job under highly unusual circumstances to consider and contribute to a term sheet that will be a clear demonstration of our seriousness at the negotiating table.

1:04:06As you know, we're— this is a fragile time in this work.

1:04:10My office had asked councilors to craft amendments in conversation with the professional negotiating team, not as a veto point on council, but because every word and comma matters in this document.

1:04:22And the people who will execute this delicate work need to have a hand in creating the tools that they're being told to use.

1:04:28My, my priority remains putting forward a term sheet that sets us up for success and centers the priorities of the people of Portland.

1:04:36This term sheet is not a blank check.

1:04:39I believe that it empowers our negotiators to represent our most urgent priorities as they work towards a deal in December that must thank you.

1:04:46Councilmember Herbold.

1:04:46Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

1:04:46I would like to thank the city attorney for the work that she has done on this lease and the work that she will do in the future to ensure that the lease must also—.

1:04:47That will also pass muster with our body before a lease is signed.

1:04:52There are some ideas in these amendments that I really like and some that I want to know more about and some that I disagree with.

1:04:58However, I am not going to be able to support any of them today.

1:05:02I have asked Kristen Dennis, who has been working with council and my team on this process, to work with the negotiating team on reviewing the ideas that are raised today and to potentially come back next Councilor Smith.

1:05:12Thank you, Mayor.

1:05:12I would like to thank the city staff for their work on this resolution.

1:05:12I'm hopeful that we'll be back next week with an amendment that considers any final adjustments reflecting council priorities to the resolution language or the term sheet.

1:05:19But that being said, today is our time to introduce these amendments.

1:05:23I am planning on recognizing councilors to introduce their amendments in the order that they were filed, with one exception for 2 amendments that are very similar, so I'll ask that those be brought up together.

1:05:33And so to start, I would like to recognize Councilors Green and Avalos for Green-Avalos thank you, Mr.

1:05:43President.

1:05:45Colleagues, I've filed Green-Avalos 1, which does 2 substantive things, and then it does some adjustments in the impact statements of the underlying resolution that, while I don't think lack substance, they're just— I'm focusing right now on the Exhibit A.

1:06:06So I'll speak to the first 2 adjustments in Exhibit A.

1:06:12The first of these is just adding some clarity in the footnotes on page 1.

1:06:20There's a second footnote that— and I think Kristen and others have already described that some of these adjustments have been made to reflect some of my priorities, which I appreciate— which is just really clarifying the authority of the City Council to appoint members to the Joint Authority.

1:06:36And what the— what first part of the amendment does is also add the language and remove members from the Joint Authority.

1:06:43I think previously I'd raised concerns about us moving forward on a funding package with exactly zero information about what our public dollars are buying.

1:06:55Just trust us.

1:06:56I think that's a good point.

1:06:57And where we're at in this stage is all of the buck will stop with the joint authority.

1:07:02And so it's very important that we have language that clarifies that the joint authority has both the duty and, and the power to exercise discretion in the public interest.

1:07:13And the accountability is by allowing council to both appoint and remove members.

1:07:18So that— you'll see that first adjustment in the second footnote on page 1.

1:07:22Thank you.

1:07:23Just minor.

1:07:24On page 2, in the body of the clause on the role of Joint Authority, it adds the sentence, as a custodian of public funds, the Joint Authority will condition approval of funds for use in the renovation based upon open and transparent review of plans, specification, budget, and scope to ensure that funds are deployed in the public interest.

1:07:42That's still quite broad.

1:07:43It's probably broader than I would prefer in there, but I think it's fair in this moment.

1:07:48So those are the joint authority-related aspects of the amendment.

1:07:51I think the big meatier part of this amendment you'll find on page 5, which is the clause titled Funding for Post-Renovation Operations.

1:08:01The amendment strikes that clause entirely.

1:08:04And the reason why is, colleagues, we have been talking about this project being in the neighborhood of $600 million.

1:08:12That has been what we have talked to the public about.

1:08:15In, in basically every venue that we have officially.

1:08:19More precisely, the number is $573 million now, and it is constituted based upon $365 million from the state of Oregon authorized in SB 1501, the city's commitment verbally of $120 million locally, and then $88 million from the county.

1:08:39Okay, that gets you to the $573 million.

1:08:40Thank you.

1:08:41So we have been talking to the public that this is a $573 million project.

1:08:45But what this clause does is says this deal is actually an $848 million project because we are committing basically the entirety of the Moda Center contribution and the spectator facility fund, which is the— are those numbers in Exhibit D. In the work session on January or June 22nd, I had asked about more detail on the spectator facilities fund and whether or not— if I could get a sense of a pro forma of that.

1:09:16And so DCA Oliveira and his team did send that to all of our offices, and I looked at that spreadsheet.

1:09:22And what that spreadsheet shows you is that the current bridge lease agreement and what has been rolled forward into this term sheet is a commitment that all of the average revenue received from the Moda Center yes.

1:09:35Related ticket fees in the parking garage accumulates to this thing called MOTA contribution, and that sums up to $267 million over the course of 20 years.

1:09:46Now, Attachment D, Exhibit D, is $275 million, which includes the Veterans Facility IGA.

1:09:52And so just to be conservative, I calculated, well, what if we didn't pre-commit that and kept it in the spectator facility and I'm going to share my screen, and here are the results.

1:10:09All right, making me do math here.

1:10:13Councilor Smith, I know that that's something you don't like to do at the dais, but I did it off dais.

1:10:17But on the screen you see a spreadsheet, and I'm going to zoom in to the right.

1:10:22Okay.

1:10:27For each fiscal year '27 through '28, you get the sum of Blazer— Moda Center user fees, Blazers parking, and VMC NOP.

1:10:36And that is what we currently allocate to the Moda Center contribution.

1:10:40And it starts at $8.8 million in FY '27, and it escalates at 3% cumulatively through 2046 over 20 years.

1:10:49And if we were to issue a bond for the $120 million that I have had a heartache around, Okay.

1:10:55I don't want to spend PCF money on that.

1:10:57I don't want to spend general funding on that.

1:10:59And I've been asking, how else can we finance this?

1:11:01And I've been told there's nothing in the Spectators Facility Fund.

1:11:04And the reason why there's nothing in the Spectators Utilities Fund is because we're pre-committing it to some future $275 million expense.

1:11:10But if we didn't and we said, let's issue a bond against our revenue there, not only could we fund the $120 million, which would get me over the line and get me to yes on the term sheet, We would also have money accruing and collecting to do other future upgrades as well over the course of this thing.

1:11:27And then, but that would be based upon a needs-based assessment.

1:11:31That would be based upon someone coming with an actual use case to say, hey, we want to do this upgrade.

1:11:36We think it'll be good for the WNBA, or we think it'll be great for this concert, or we think this would be a really timely value add.

1:11:42That's an ask that can be made to the council.

1:11:46And that's before interest.

1:11:57And that is— that's not a market deal.

1:12:00That's— in fact, the next market deal will be worse for every other city if we go down this road.

1:12:05And so what I'm telling you is if we were to adopt this amendment, then I could get yes on the term sheet.

1:12:11I'm not saying no.

1:12:12And this is my pathway to getting a yes on the term sheet, which would fund the jobs, it'd fund the project, it'd unlock the state money that I have been such a hard case about.

1:12:21So that's my proposal to you.

1:12:23Elsewhere in the amendment, I'm striking parts of the financial impact— the impact analysis which are unsubstantiated, or claims that are just made by impact analyses that every time I've asked for the underlying data, it's been hard to come by.

1:12:38Councilor I'm told, sorry, that's under an NDA.

1:12:40You'll just have to trust me.

1:12:41That doesn't belong in a financial and impact analysis.

1:12:46So that's my case.

1:12:48I welcome your questions.

1:12:50And are you formally moving?

1:12:51I'm formally moving Green-Avalos 1.

1:12:53Great.

1:12:53Second.

1:12:54Thank you.

1:12:55And Councilor Avalos, as this is a co-sponsored item, would you like to speak to this as well?

1:12:59I think Councilor Green laid it out.

1:13:01Thank you so much.

1:13:02I will just add, it's really important that the public understand what the city's true commitment is.

1:13:07Because again, we keep saying $120 million.

1:13:10We heard a lot of testimony say, oh, it's $120 million divided by 20 years, yada yada yada.

1:13:14No, it's really $400 million.

1:13:18Uh, and I think this, uh, it makes sense for us to not pre-commit, especially given that we're operating blind here with no information.

1:13:25I don't think we should pre-commit another almost $300 million.

1:13:29Um, and that also takes away from other things that we could be paying for not only Moda but other venues.

1:13:35Um, and so yeah, I, I urge support.

1:13:38Thanks.

1:13:39Thank you, Councilor Avalos.

1:13:41Colleagues, to the, uh, Green-Avalos 1 amendment, Councilor Kanal.

1:13:46I'm just going through the queue.

1:13:50Yeah, let's hop out of the queue if you don't want to talk to the amendment, and I will—.

1:13:54Yeah, so really big picture thank you, Mr.

1:13:58Mayor.

1:13:58Before getting into this specific amendment, I, I think I agree with everything Councilor Murillo said earlier about what this conversation is.

1:14:07The way I would describe it is, um, if we're in the video game, we're not at the big boss yet, right?

1:14:12Because we haven't gotten to a point where we're negotiating with the Blazers.

1:14:15We are looking at what we're even able to ask for, even able to put on the table.

1:14:19And this conversation is what we've been putting on the table, and it reflects what we've been asking the administration not everything we've asked for has been put into the term sheet, even if there may have been majority support.

1:14:31We haven't actually had a chance to express majority support because this is that time.

1:14:36So that's, that's been kind of frustrating, and I am surprised and dismayed by the idea that we wouldn't even evaluate amendments now on their merit unless the mayor's team agrees with them.

1:14:49I think that's a fair point.

1:14:50So I have to just express that, and I would ask everyone here to reconsider that position and look at each of these on their merits, because it's not going to— this is what we want to even be discussed, not even what we want the outcome to be, just what we want to be discussed.

1:15:07So I had to express that first because it's context for this amendment.

1:15:12First, I really appreciate, Councilor Green, the way you articulated why we need to change the impact statement.

1:15:19Because it's a lot of vibes, it's a lot of trust me, bro, and we need to move past that and get to where there's data.

1:15:25We've talked about this in so many other contexts, including in the items we talked in this morning's Committee of the Whole meeting about, that we need data before we base decisions off of it.

1:15:34I also very strongly support the increase— or sorry, the additional text added in the custodian of funds the joint authority definition on page 2 and the footnotes.

1:15:48I have a little heartache about the idea of removing the post-renovation operations, but what I appreciate is that there is still money left that can be allocated to it.

1:16:00It's just that it's not a pre-commitment.

1:16:02I appreciate that.

1:16:03Furthermore, I don't know how $75 million of the $120 million can be funded right now.

1:16:11Okay.

1:16:12We've received absolutely no information showing us another funding source besides the possibility of $40-$45 million in BLT and $5 million in— from up to $5 million from Prosper, with the rest being theoretically PSEF, but absolutely no information to show eligibility for PSEF funding.

1:16:31And so without creating a possible funding source to bond against, we might be in the position of being asked to commit $120 million.

1:16:40That's correct.

1:16:41That we cannot possibly get from any source other than the general fund.

1:16:46And if we take it from the general fund, there's 4 big buckets there: police, fire, parks, homelessness services.

1:16:52Can't see us cutting from police or fire for this, and you can bet that there's going to be issues about cutting parks in the context of the levy.

1:16:59And obviously the person proposing it would be someone who's a champion for the homelessness services.

1:17:03So where does it come from?

1:17:05And so the reason I'll be supporting this amendment and as time has passed, there's nothing given to us.

1:17:13There's just no information given as to where this money can possibly come from.

1:17:17So it's on us.

1:17:18The same way that the city is in the position of finding solutions at some places for the Blazers because of a lack of communication, now the City Council is in the position of having to come up with solutions because the administration has not proposed a credible funding source yet for anything other than those first $45 million.

1:17:34Councilmember Herbold.

1:17:35So this doesn't commit us to doing it this way.

1:17:38It commits us to putting it on the table, and I'll be supporting it for that reason.

1:17:41Thank you, Councilors Green and Avalos.

1:17:43Thank you, Councilor Kanal.

1:17:44Councilor Murillo.

1:17:46Thank you.

1:17:47I am generally supportive of this amendment, so I will be a yes on it.

1:17:51I think it puts us in a better place.

1:17:53I don't think any of this term sheet is my dream whatsoever, but I think that some of these items can put us in a better place.

1:18:00Before we begin that discussion, though, I do have questions for my colleagues with regards to what we're actually here for today.

1:18:09Since the other side has not evaluated our term sheet or given us any feedback, I checked to make sure that it didn't come in 10 minutes before this meeting.

1:18:20Under what pretenses are people choosing to not vote on this?

1:18:24I think that's a fair question.

1:18:25Approve any amendment on its merits?

1:18:28And that's a question for you, Council President, and I will have follow-up questions for Mayor Wilson as well.

1:18:33Point of order, Mr. President.

1:18:36Are we talking about the Green-Avalos amendment right now?

1:18:42We are.

1:18:43So I think the conversation that we're having now is not about this.

1:18:48It's about a general function of what we're going to do.

1:18:52So can you—.

1:18:53The reason I believe—.

1:18:54Give us back on—.

1:18:55The reason I believe that this is a relevant question to ask is because any discussion of any amendment necessitates that this question be answered.

1:19:06Because if we have not received any feedback from the other side as to the term sheet, then anything and everything is on the table.

1:19:16So we need to be very clear right now with ourselves and with the public As to why some of us are going to be a hard no on all amendments.

1:19:24I want to know what information was received that made that the condition of your negotiation, because it's very different from the condition of mine.

1:19:33Is that a question specifically for me?

1:19:36You were the one that stated you will be not voting for anything, so yes.

1:19:39But I presume some of our other colleagues may have the same analysis.

1:19:42Yeah, uh, I, I stated my, my position on I want to make sure we are in the strongest negotiating position, and I don't think that amending the term sheet in this regard when we haven't had any conversation with our— with the Blazers is the right decision for us.

1:19:57That's just how I believe.

1:20:00Based on what evidence?

1:20:02Honestly, it is what I am believing at this moment.

1:20:08I will vote how I see fit ultimately.

1:20:11Yeah, you are allowed to do that.

1:20:12I know.

1:20:13Mayor Wilson, has the NBA at any point told you that this negotiation is a no-go if we ask for some of these amendments or if we ask for private contribution of funds, which is commonplace in every other city that has had this type of deal?

1:20:34There's nothing written down, but we used our discussions with the NBA to frame what a market rate deal is currently across the nation.

1:20:44And then we used a third-party consultant to verify that we had a market-rate deal that was acceptable through the NBA and the team at the time.

1:20:57Well, the decision of what is a market-rate deal is not really based on the personal opinions of those who would benefit from such a deal.

1:21:05It's based on the evidence of what has happened across and based on the analysis that we got last night from not one but two renowned economists nationwide on this, we are nowhere near a market deal on this.

1:21:21So again, I just want to ask, have they said that they are a no on this if we— I'm not even talking about Dundon, I'm talking about the NBA— if we ask for private contribution or if any of these amendments move forward today?

1:21:32I can't speak to that.

1:21:33I can't speak on behalf of the NBA, and I can't speak on behalf of the Trail Blazers.

1:21:38This is just a starting point of our negotiation that was framed through consultation and market research and our experts.

1:21:51Okay, Councilor Green, I will definitely be supporting your amendment.

1:21:55I think this is a valiant effort in a time when we are clearly We're clearly having a lot of information withheld from us as councilors about how to make this financial decision that is going to impact the city for generations to come.

1:22:07And we owe it to the people of Portland to try because we just cut $160 million from our budget.

1:22:15We laid off a bunch of employees.

1:22:17We cut core services, and we are still not getting the full details of this.

1:22:21So we owe it to try.

1:22:23Councilor Smith.

1:22:24So thank you for bringing this forward, Councilors Green and Avalos.

1:22:28I will definitely be supporting this, but I will say right now it does feel like there are some of us up here who might be getting extorted by the NBA on this.

1:22:37And, uh, at the end of the day, you're gonna have to look at yourself in the mirror every single day when you wake up and decide if you are okay with doing this to Portland without the appropriate thank you, Councilor Morillo.

1:22:53Council President, I have a point of order.

1:22:56When Councilor Smith raised a point of order, you didn't rule on it.

1:23:01She asserted that Councilor Morillo was breaking the rules.

1:23:03Oh, right.

1:23:05I found Councilor Morillo's line of questioning to be appropriate.

1:23:09Yeah.

1:23:09Thank you.

1:23:09Thank you.

1:23:11Councilor Green.

1:23:13Yeah, I understand that you would like to move us forward, and I'm going to— this is my last statement.

1:23:17I'm going to move to approve Last the ordinance.

1:23:18Comment here, and then I'll— we'll see where the votes go.

1:23:21I just want to reiterate that when Adam Silver did a press conference and acknowledged that things had, I think, quote, gone off the rails or sideways or something like that, he said he was interested in the framework that was spoken about in March, and that was a $600 million framework.

1:23:39That's what he said.

1:23:41Now, I don't agree with that dollar amount because I don't think it was ever based on anything except for a We'd like to have this, please, which is the playbook in stadium deals.

1:23:49But the framework is $600 million.

1:23:53If we don't adopt this amendment, the framework is now $848 million.

1:23:57And I just need everyone to understand that crystal clear.

1:24:01So there's no violating— there's no departing from the framework.

1:24:04There's no inconsistency with the league.

1:24:05There's no departure from good faith negotiations if we say, you know what, this is way too rich.

1:24:10Thank you.

1:24:11We're going to back off this piece and we're going to use that headroom we have to responsibly fund the other side of it.

1:24:18This should be a slam dunk.

1:24:20So I'll just leave it at that.

1:24:24I, I just want to provide a point of clarity in this.

1:24:30There's 2 parts of the equation.

1:24:32You have the capital expense for the renovation.

1:24:35We still have to operationally and through capital maintain the facility.

1:24:40And I look to you, Councilor Knoll, because we've spoke to the same mayor around the nation.

1:24:45I've spoke to Oklahoma City Mayor Holt as well as San Antonio Mayor Ortiz Johnson.

1:24:52And those deals require the city to maintain those facilities even after renovation, where the parking fees, ticket fees are all going to the NBA owners or the teams.

1:25:05In our case, Those funds are going to maintain and make sure capital maintenance on the facility is done for 20 years.

1:25:13Somebody still has to pay for the maintenance of that facility.

1:25:17So I want to make sure that we're talking about a holistic agreement.

1:25:21Those funds are not just fungible, but they do need to be negotiated with Rip City Management on the amount and the use of which keeps the flexibility as we go through the negotiating process and allow the negotiators the creativity to determine what they're going to be spent for.

1:25:41And that is essentially what you're looking at in the contract.

1:25:44That still has to be maintained.

1:25:45And many NBA arenas don't even have the expenses or capital covered, and the cities are on the hook to pay on an ad hoc fashion on a year-to-year.

1:25:55This agreement—.

1:25:57Thank you.

1:25:58The City of Portland isn't going to be required to maintain operationally or through CapEx, but we still need the negotiators to negotiate what those funds are going to be used for.

1:26:07And that's what you're applying this agreement for right now.

1:26:10But all due respect, Mr. Mayor, the term sheet itself describes these funds being for capital expenses, and it's $275 million over 20 years after we've done a $600 million renovation.

1:26:22So how can it possibly be the case like, if we pass this amendment, it doesn't mean we can't spend it on the stadium.

1:26:29It accrues the Spectators Facility Fund, which is an enterprise fund.

1:26:32And this body, under your leadership or a future mayor's leadership, will have to bring forward reasonable proposals to maintain that.

1:26:40So it's, it's, it's not fair to say that if we pass this amendment, then we will have left ourselves short and unfunded on those future liabilities.

1:26:48That's plainly false.

1:26:49I think it's fair to say that if we pass this amendment, Councilor, I wanted to provide you the context of the reason why that item is in the term sheet.

1:26:57Thank you, Councilor Green.

1:26:59Thank you, Mayor.

1:27:00Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

1:27:02Council President, I would like to speak to amendments generally at some point.

1:27:07Would you like to keep the conversation right now germane to this amendment and I'll get in the queue at another point?

1:27:11You know, I'm fine.

1:27:12Go ahead and have that conversation now.

1:27:15I want to start by thanking my colleagues who brought amendments forward, truly, because I think it is critical that we're discussing these ideas today.

1:27:25And there are ideas in these amendments that reflect real concerns that we've heard and that in many cases are trying to push us toward a much better deal for our city.

1:27:36And I, I take the amendments seriously, and I appreciate the thoughtfulness that went into there are some amendments that may veer us in other courses, but I want to focus right now on the ones that I think could improve this deal's bottom line for Portland.

1:27:54Point of order.

1:27:58Uh, we keep jumping.

1:28:00I, I recognize— I recognize she specifically asked if it was acceptable to talk about the broader conversation.

1:28:06I'm not acceptable to it.

1:28:07I'm, um, I—.

1:28:09You have to go look at— see if some other folks are accepting.

1:28:11I'm finding her comments to be germane.

1:28:14Thank you.

1:28:14Point of order, Mr. President.

1:28:15Could you please tell me why we are talking about the Avalos Green and we're getting confused by other people's grand ideas of how this should go, and we're not talking about that right now?

1:28:28And I think it's, it's confusing and it's messing up the process.

1:28:31Thank you, Councilor.

1:28:32I find the conversation germane.

1:28:35Continue, please.

1:28:36To the amendment and to amendments broadly, I can't support these amendments today, and I, I wanted to just take an opportunity at some point early in the process before we get too far in to explain why.

1:28:50Um, it connects directly to how I'm approaching where we are in our decision-making process broadly.

1:28:58This term sheet is not the final deal.

1:29:01It's a framework for negotiation, and I know that some of my colleagues, to the point that, that one made just a few minutes ago, see this as the maximum amount that we can ask for.

1:29:13And in many negotiations, that's the case.

1:29:15And that is why I have asked many times through this process if this would be our only bite at the apple, if this would be the most we could put on the table, if there was only down from here.

1:29:28And each time I've been told no, that's not the case.

1:29:32That this is the type of negotiation that ebbs and flows as different parties put different things on the table.

1:29:38And that's a critical point right now.

1:29:41I'll speak more to that in a minute.

1:29:44That leads me to think that everything in this document is about what signal we send and whether we send the signal that that Portland is serious about getting to a deal that serves our city, because we're at a really fragile moment in this process.

1:29:59So for me, the question before us today is not, do any one of the things my colleagues are putting on the table seem like a good idea?

1:30:11Not, do any one of those items seem like something that I would like to see in our term sheet?

1:30:17Councilwoman Loretta Smith.

1:30:18But the question is whether adopting amendments today strengthens or weakens our ability to get to a final deal that is the best possible deal for Portland.

1:30:30And I believe that making piecemeal changes on the dais today could risk or undermine the work that we've done up to this point.

1:30:40So I trust that what we have in front of us is a reasonable, not the best, but a reasonable draft that demonstrates that the city wants to keep the Blazers in Portland while also demonstrating that we want to find a way to maximize benefits for Portlanders and make sure that this is a fair deal, not just for folks negotiating on behalf of the team, but for our negotiating team negotiating on behalf of the city and on behalf of Portlanders as a whole.

1:31:14I want to be clear that that doesn't mean I think this term sheet is perfect or that it has everything in it that I would want to see, and it certainly doesn't mean that I want the amendments presented today to go away.

1:31:26Again, more on that in a minute.

1:31:28From my perspective, this is not the last opportunity to shape the deal.

1:31:35So I want to thank the council president for asking our negotiating team not the mayor or the administration, but our folks at the table, to review the concepts raised today and come back with any refinements that could strengthen our position at the table.

1:31:50I think it's really critical to get their perspective on what could strengthen our negotiating position, because what we want is to be in the best position possible for the city and for Portlanders as a whole.

1:32:05And I think it's exactly the feedback that we're hearing today in these amendments that they can look at and figure out how to add to our draft in a strategic way that makes our position stronger.

1:32:21And I want to be clear that my priority is setting them up for success, but that what is not included shouldn't go away.

1:32:33And so I want to say to the folks who sit across the table from our negotiating team that I hope you know that what you're hearing today, if it doesn't end up in this draft sheet, shouldn't be new to you if you see it hit the table as you make big asks that require significant counters.

1:32:55Because I want to be really clear that if we don't end up If the counter across the table doesn't show real commitments, real partnership, and real accountability, I'm more than ready to revisit any ideas put on the table today that don't make it into the term sheet we pass, and potentially more than that.

1:33:19Because ultimately we need a final deal, not the draft today, but a final deal.

1:33:23Thank you.

1:33:23Councilor that reflects our values, that holds our bottom lines, and that keeps us in a position to actually get a deal done.

1:33:31And I think that this conversation, these ideas put on the table, are a part of that.

1:33:36But I don't think that adopting them piecemeal at the dais today puts us in the strongest negotiating position.

1:33:43For that reason, I'll be a no on this amendment and the further amendments.

1:33:47And Council President, thank you for allowing me to address them collectively.

1:33:51I think that makes more sense given where I'm at than trying to address them one by one.

1:33:55Thank you, Councilor Pirtle-Guiney.

1:33:57Councilor Smith.

1:33:59Thank you, Council President.

1:34:00I'd like to have Jonas or someone from the negotiating team come up because as I'm looking at the Green-Avalos amendment, And the $270 million that they're talking about, that's basically $13 million, $13.5 million a year that would be used for maintenance.

1:34:26Is that what the idea is?

1:34:30Yeah, Councilor, the ongoing contribution would be towards things related to the, over the 20 years, the upkeep, the investments in the facility to keep it, you know, up to that, you know, first-class standard or state-of-the-art, sorry.

1:34:42Not first-class standard, but the comparable standard level.

1:34:46And if you have a— right now, how much do we spend in that maintenance right now?

1:34:52Is that about $10, $13 million?

1:34:55No, Councilor.

1:34:56The current agreement stipulates that the Spectator Venue Fund contributes 50% of eligible upgrades that we approve.

1:35:05So for example, the most recent contribution was for the new scoreboard that y'all have seen.

1:35:10We paid for half of that.

1:35:11That's how the bridge agreement's currently structured.

1:35:14In the new term sheet, all the contributions that are generated from the revenue would go back into the arena.

1:35:22So this is a better deal for us because we can kind of say what it is upfront and we don't have any extra expenses other than the $270,000 in regards to maintenance and keeping it a first-class building.

1:35:36I wouldn't describe it as a better deal, Councilor.

1:35:39What I would describe it as is that we're taking money, revenues generated from the operations of the Rose Quarter, and putting it back into the—.

1:35:47To the Rose Quarter, the Moda Center.

1:35:49Yeah, to the Rose Quarter, because it's not just—.

1:35:51Right.

1:35:52Okay, so that's what I wanted.

1:35:53So the numbers that Councilor Green put up, Jonas, I don't know if they're correct.

1:35:59I'm not saying that they're not.

1:36:01I'm sure you did it correctly, but I would like to see if those numbers, if they make sense, what he's talking about.

1:36:11Um, I don't have a problem with the upfront money, but I just want to make sure that what he's putting up there is correct.

1:36:23Uh, Councilor, thank you.

1:36:24For the record, Jonas Biery, Chief Financial Officer.

1:36:26And with respect to the Councilor, I wasn't able to see the details of those numbers on the screen, and I'm— and I haven't seen them prior to a few minutes ago, so I can't— I just can't comment on that.

1:36:35So it's going to be hard for me because I don't do numbers like that real quick, and that's a lot of zeros.

1:36:41And it's going to be hard for me to vote for something like this because I haven't verified it.

1:36:46I don't know where these numbers came from.

1:36:49And, uh, no disrespect, Councilor Green, I know you're really good at this, but I would need some more time to study this a little bit longer than we have right now.

1:37:01So that's, that's what I wanted to know, if you all had looked at this and, and verified if these numbers are correct, because the way I'm looking at it, it's, it's averaging about $13 million a year for—.

1:37:20So, Councilor, in real time, I'm just looking at this and just— it looks like the table on the left was the original submitted from from Carlisle, correct?

1:37:29Okay.

1:37:29We're talking about the right table, or is that—.

1:37:33Yeah, the right table.

1:37:34Here, I'll walk you through the formulas.

1:37:36Okay, there you are.

1:37:36Okay, so the right—.

1:37:37I was wondering, you're actually live in the document.

1:37:39Okay, got it.

1:37:39Yeah, it's a sum of the first 3 columns.

1:37:43So I actually took conservative estimate.

1:37:45I didn't take the VFIGA, so it's not even the full $275,000.

1:37:49And then the next formula says subtract the constant payment from a $120 million bond issuance at 20 years and at that interest rate.

1:38:00So I did 3 different interest rates.

1:38:01So that's the formula, that's the math.

1:38:03Okay.

1:38:03Okay.

1:38:04And, and the last question, there was some conversation about, um, we don't know where we can get the money from, but we can bond.

1:38:13We have limited revenue bonds.

1:38:15We do have, uh, debt service dropping off.

1:38:18There, there are several different pots of money other than PCF that we can get these dollars from.

1:38:27Yeah, Councilor Arrell, I think much of the dialogue about the sources is accurate that's been spoken today.

1:38:34I would also just reflect that, as is included in the record, there was a memo prepared by myself to the city administrator that's also attached to the A document that's posted for discussion today that discusses some of those financing options.

1:38:49That document's dated July 10th.

1:38:51So we have had some thinking around that.

1:38:54One of the sources that's contemplated in the document is in fact the Spectator Fund.

1:38:58So there's a complicated mix of if we use revenues for that, we can't use 'em for this.

1:39:04But you're correct contextually that there are pathways, particularly if we issue debt that's paid off over a long period of time.

1:39:12Thank you.

1:39:16Okay, thank you.

1:39:17I appreciate it.

1:39:18Thank you so much.

1:39:22Thank you, Councilor Smith.

1:39:25Councilor Murillo.

1:39:27Yeah, thank you so much, Council President.

1:39:30And I want to— I can literally see Councilor Green's heart and brain breaking as he's listening to Councilor Smith.

1:39:39In front of me genuinely because of how astounding it is that people are genuinely not looking into these amendments right now.

1:39:48The idea that this term sheet, uh, if we're having a chicken or egg discussion, that later on down the line it's going to get better when we have barely been able to get our points as a council who represent the districts across in the original term sheet is just I don't think accurate in any actual reality.

1:40:08The term sheet that we put out today is the final signal for what we are allowed to do.

1:40:14It doesn't get easier to do analysis, and to say that we are going to go to our negotiating partners and ask them what they want so that we can better position ourselves in a negotiation doesn't make any sense, genuinely.

1:40:31There is absolutely economic consensus about stadium deals.

1:40:36We talked with 2 economists who are renowned about this last night in a webinar.

1:40:40It's recorded, it's posted on YouTube.

1:40:41We're posting clips on Instagram as we speak so that people can watch that.

1:40:45Well over 100 peer-reviewed studies since the late 1980s across employment, GDP, taxable receipts, subsidies seem to have little or no impact on all the types of economic variables.

1:40:56And according to J.C. Bradbury, if we're looking at scale comparison, the Jacksonville Jaguars are basically rebuilding their entire stadium for $725 million.

1:41:07That's a football stadium that is considerably larger and more complicated than this building.

1:41:12So what are we spending this money on?

1:41:15Council has not got any clarity on that.

1:41:18And the median comparable arena renovation is around $340 million.

1:41:22So I say all of that because I am literally begging you to take these amendments seriously moving forward.

1:41:31This is a last opportunity for us to adjust this term sheet, and people can say, "Oh, later we'll get to it." Why?

1:41:39Why would we not do it right now while we have the opportunity?

1:41:42I genuinely do not understand.

1:41:44And when we're talking about who it's going to be a risk.

1:41:48A risk for the negotiation, then that means that we are not in a negotiation because that means council's perspective cannot be added based on the feedback of our constituents, based on the research of national experts.

1:42:01That means that we are not in a negotiation, we are in a hostage situation.

1:42:09How does adding amendments to this term sheet make it worse?

1:42:14This is part of the process that we have all agreed to.

1:42:18Council is the final decision maker on the budget.

1:42:23We have the power of the purse.

1:42:24Nothing goes through this body without us.

1:42:27So why this body is continuously refusing to do our duty, I will not be able to wrap my head around.

1:42:36I, Councilor Green, could you please walk us through the amendment in a less professor-like fashion, if you could do it in simple terms for us non-economists up here, because I really need people to understand what you are bringing forward, because I am genuinely terrified that if we don't do something, we are going to be putting something forward that is going to put Portlanders in harm's way for generations to come.

1:42:58I just, I can't watch this happen.

1:43:00And I'd just like to note we have been on this item for about 40 minutes at this point.

1:43:04We have 12— no, I'm sorry, 16 additional amendments to get through, and we have 2 and a half Council President, I can do it in 20 seconds.

1:43:11Go on, do it.

1:43:14If we don't do this amendment, then we don't have enough free cash flow in the spectator facility fund based upon what I received from Donnie's team to bond for $120 million to pay for this.

1:43:27We don't have it if we're pre-committing it.

1:43:29And so unless we do that, then we don't have another source to pay for this without robbing PCF funds or robbing some BLT funds or making some cuts or floating an unsecured bond against the general fund.

1:43:45And I don't think we've got capacity left on that.

1:43:47So that's, that's what this does.

1:43:49All this does is says we are going to not pre-commit those BLT— that spectator facility funds at that level so we can actually count on them to bond against them to pay for the $120 million to get the deal done.

1:44:00Thank you.

1:44:01Which is what a lot of people who have been asking us to do.

1:44:04And I didn't even want to do that much, but I'm willing to move on that.

1:44:07So that's what this does.

1:44:08Thanks.

1:44:15Thank you for that explanation, Councilor Green.

1:44:17Um, I understand.

1:44:19I, I am sorry that we're taking so long on these amendments.

1:44:24Economics is hard, okay?

1:44:25And this is one of the biggest So have some coffee.

1:44:34I don't know.

1:44:34We have a job to do.

1:44:38Thank you, Councilor Morillo.

1:44:39Councilor Avalos.

1:44:48My—.

1:44:50I'm confused.

1:44:51I'm genuinely confused.

1:44:53About what this is, because if we're going to talk about sending signals, what signal does it send to the public that the councilors they elected don't have an opportunity to voice genuine concerns through amendments?

1:45:07Or at least people are not interested in that because they think that it weakens our position.

1:45:11I, I do not understand that.

1:45:14I've heard you all explain it.

1:45:15It don't make sense.

1:45:16And this whole— the work we've done up until this point—.

1:45:20Who is we?

1:45:22Who exactly is we?

1:45:24Because the work up until this point has been given to us without our input.

1:45:29They put out a draft term sheet without any kind of signal that that's what we wanted.

1:45:34So it just continues to be this position where it's like, well, you're going to have a chance later, you're going to have a chance later.

1:45:39This is the chance.

1:45:41This is literally our only chance.

1:45:43I do not agree.

1:45:45I asked the same question too.

1:45:46What happens after we pass ask this, what is, what is the box that the negotiating team is working within?

1:45:53And it does feel like it's restricted.

1:45:56And so if we don't have an opportunity to do this, I, you know, it's just like I keep hearing now's not the time, now's not the time.

1:46:03The time is now.

1:46:05And then it's like, well, now is the time, but it's very narrow.

1:46:08And actually, no, it's not the time.

1:46:09Which time is it?

1:46:10When is the time that I'm going to be able to represent East Portlanders and fight for something back for the city, because the way that it is currently written, absolutely not.

1:46:20I do not support.

1:46:22My amendments are about, can we talk about rent?

1:46:25Can we talk about private capital?

1:46:27Can we talk about lots of other ways to secure that this investment actually pays back to the people paying it, which is Portlanders?

1:46:35Reminder, 3 times they're paying it.

1:46:37They're paying it with their county taxes, with their state taxes, and with their city So I, I truly am confused because I was told this whole time— I've been— I literally had wrote out sheets of paper with here's what I want.

1:46:51I brought it to an exec session.

1:46:53It was like, no, no, that's not the time.

1:46:54Okay, the next session, exec session.

1:46:56No, no, that's the time.

1:46:58This is what I was told is the time, and now I'm being told it's not the time.

1:47:02When is the time?

1:47:04Genuine question.

1:47:05I don't understand.

1:47:06Councilor Loretta Smith.

1:47:06I don't understand how we're going to go from this to next week with no amendments and what, we're going to get some package back?

1:47:14We all know how precedent packages have worked around here.

1:47:16People don't like them.

1:47:18I don't like them.

1:47:19So I really do not understand, and I'm frustrated because I don't even know what the point is of this discussion if people are not even going to be willing to engage.

1:47:30And honestly, it's shameful.

1:47:32I hope your constituents are watching that you are not interested in making any changes at the time that we were told a million times thank you, Councilor Avalos.

1:47:44Councilor Knoll.

1:47:45Thank you.

1:47:46Um, are DC Oliveira or Kristen Dennis able to come up?

1:47:53Both.

1:47:55Just, I got a couple questions about process related to this.

1:48:02Um, you know, my understanding from, um, the previous— sorry, I know, uh, the previous I think in this conversation, the comments that were made were that from Ken is that there's no interim step anymore.

1:48:15So there's this and then there's definitive agreements.

1:48:17Is that—.

1:48:18Yeah, generally speaking.

1:48:19So just for context for the public's understanding, we had contemplated doing the term sheet and then there's, you know, all deals are different, but then there would've been an interim MOU phase, which would've been more substantive but still not complete.

1:48:34And then definitive documents in the spring.

1:48:36After talking with our partners at the state, just the need to get real high-fidelity, high-detailed information, the definitive documents made just the most sense.

1:48:45And we're just going to push towards that, which is a much bigger lift in a shorter amount of time.

1:48:50But essentially, yeah, that's where we're going is definitive documents in December.

1:48:55If I can jump in too, there are though— Donnie's correct in terms of when council is going to be voting, and the actual vote is again next week.

1:49:04And I think that Council President Dunphy discussed having opportunity to have some changes at that point as well.

1:49:12And then one of the things that council's been really clear about is making sure that council has an ongoing role.

1:49:18It might be an informal role, it might not be— it won't be votes from the dais, but particularly in executive sessions and small group and other meetings, making sure that council's apprised of—.

1:49:31Yes.

1:49:32The negotiations from the negotiating team to make sure that you all are actually kept apprised.

1:49:39So yeah, that makes sense in terms of the idea being we have a term sheet, which is a framework, and as that framework becomes closer to a proposal for the real final thing, that we would have updates along the way in settings that we are legally not allowed to make votes at, you know, executive sessions, right?

1:50:00Right.

1:50:02Um, when those final documents come back, at that time, because there'll be an— I assume an ordinance to accept them.

1:50:09Yeah.

1:50:10That's a legislative item.

1:50:11We are legally allowed to put up amendments at that point, legally.

1:50:15But my guess, and please correct me if I'm wrong, is that that's a really bad idea at that point because the, um, negotiation will have been done and any changes at that point would require going back and renegotiating a portion.

1:50:29And maybe the reason that they were okay with this is because we did this thing on this other thing, and so it could open up other items.

1:50:35Is that accurate?

1:50:36Yeah.

1:50:36And Councilor, I'll also just acknowledge and remind everyone that along the way, the joint authority will be established, and they'll play an outsized role in sort of the renovation details and the approval and oversight of some of those things.

1:50:50So we have this other entity that the city's party to that will have both membership and staffing of.

1:50:55But we don't know— when you say the city, you mean the mayor?

1:50:59No, whoever the council appoints, whoever the process of appointing, there'll be membership on the joint authority made up of state-appointed folks, city-appointed folks, and a county-appointed person at this point.

1:51:11And they will have, you know, an oversight component of this as well.

1:51:15Right, but just so I want to just recap what I've heard here.

1:51:18There are going to be 2 points along this.

1:51:20There's a term sheet and then definitive documents.

1:51:23Yep.

1:51:24Those will be legislative items where we can't make amendments, or legally we can, but they're a bad idea to do, right?

1:51:31Um, and everything in between is updates without any possibility of having decisions because executive sessions under state law do not allow for decision-making.

1:51:42Which means— and I just want to recap— that means that this resolution, this current legislative item we're discussing Is the only place other than up or down votes next week on the resolution and eventually on the definitive documents where council is taking a vote and the only place where amendments could be made without creating those other problems we just talked about.

1:52:05I'm seeing nods.

1:52:07That's correct, Councilor.

1:52:08Councilor, I would note that you're in a very challenging position because even with what you all decide to pass next week, the negotiating team still has to figure out if they can even deliver what's there, and they need to have flexibility in order to get as close to what's in that term sheet and potentially have some trade-offs in there to get to some of the other things that I think they know that council would like to see.

1:52:32Yeah.

1:52:32Because we have seen there will obviously need to be some trade-offs that I think there's things that we've heard and have been brought up as amendments that I think the negotiating team knows about and that will hopefully be discussed next— today and next week.

1:52:48Okay.

1:52:49Where the negotiating team might need to make a decision about those trade-offs, they're going to have to get some input from you informally.

1:52:57That will happen in executive session.

1:52:58Those aren't actual votes because you're not passing any legislation, but we're working within the structure of the City of Portland where you have a— the council cannot be at the table negotiating, and it's incumbent on the negotiating team to make sure that whatever they bring It's actually their responsibility to make sure that they will ultimately be able to have the votes, because if they bring something that this council can't support, they haven't fulfilled their duty either.

1:53:29And so it's not just on the council.

1:53:30I think this is why this partnership and you all working together is so critical.

1:53:34I mean, at this point, it appears to me that the, the angle is to bring something that can't get the votes because nobody's listening to us and then be able to blame it on us.

1:53:42Us at the end.

1:53:44That's how I— I didn't think that an hour ago.

1:53:46I'm astounded by what has happened up here, to be honest.

1:53:50But let me just ask about the negotiating team, and I know you're not on it, Kristen.

1:53:54So basically everybody that we're hearing from on this side of the table other than yourself, who do they ultimately report to?

1:54:01None of them report to City Council, is that correct?

1:54:03Yourself, Donnie?

1:54:04That's correct.

1:54:05Yeah, okay.

1:54:06So thank you, that was the clarification there.

1:54:08Thank you, Mayor.

1:54:09I want to ask a clarification question of the 2 colleagues who've expressed that they're not interested in amending the term sheet.

1:54:15Are you— does that apply to the resolution as well or just to the term sheet?

1:54:20Because there are at least 3 amendments that affect the text of the resolution as well as a portion, I'll note, of Councilor Green and Avalos's amendment, which is the relevant place here that affects the impact statement.

1:54:34So my curiosity is if that is an open conversation, because I took great pains in taking the time at the council president's request from yesterday to develop amendments, um, that 2 of them only touched the resolution.

1:54:50So I'd be curious as to if they have thoughts on that.

1:54:53You know, Councilor, I had a number of very specific requests to all councilors about how amendments should go.

1:55:02I have been— I've sent that email at least 3 times to council, to everybody in council and all of our staff.

1:55:09Nobody, to my understanding, reached out to the negotiating team to understand whether or not these were vetted in any capacity, and that was a clear request of mine in those.

1:55:17Nobody is entitled to my vote in any capacity forever, and not one colleague either followed what I asked in terms of process in order of get to me to a position where I would feel comfortable in having any conversation about these amendments.

1:55:31And nobody has talked to me about them other than filing them or sending them via email.

1:55:35So as of that, that's enough for me to simply say I'm not— I'm unwilling to engage in any of the amendments as proposed.

1:55:44Okay.

1:55:45Councilor Pirtle-Guiney, I'd love to hear your thoughts too.

1:55:48Council President, is it okay if I respond?

1:55:50Please.

1:55:52Councilor, you know, I, I hadn't parsed them this way.

1:55:55I had looked at all of it as, um, whether I was comfortable at the end of the day having a piecemeal who can gain the votes as opposed to the holistic conversations that we had, for example, through our work sessions around the directions we might, um, we might move this and ultimately landed I think that that holds for the resolution language as well, because I think this comes as a package.

1:56:38But I appreciate you bringing it forward in that different way.

1:56:43That's—.

1:56:44Councilor Smith, I think that's And a great point.

1:56:45That kind of bifurcated way that's different from how I had been looking at it.

1:56:48Okay, so I still have the confusion broadly, not to either colleague here, about how on earth we're going to be expected to incorporate these ideas in when they're all going to fail.

1:57:00So because that'll be just used later as why we didn't put it in.

1:57:03So, and if those watching are seeing that that's based on an assumption, I think the lack of trust that you have felt in your city is not limited to people who don't work on the second floor of this building.

1:57:17Many of us have that too.

1:57:20With that said, I don't have anything else to say on this amendment.

1:57:23I'm going to put up my amendments and, you know, make you vote no on them if you don't agree with them.

1:57:28I'd ask for solely, I think, what is not an entitlement but the common courtesy of engaging with the content.

1:57:34And I'll do the same with Green Avalos 1.

1:57:36Thank you, Councilor Kanal.

1:57:38Councilor Morillo.

1:57:40Yeah, thank you.

1:57:41I just want to be clear about what Kristen Dennis had said when she was up here, because what she is basically saying is that the Blazers can't do their job in negotiating if they don't understand our position as a council.

1:57:52I can't think of a better way to indicate our position as a council and the things that we need in a term sheet in order to get to a yes than to approve amendments.

1:58:03This is not a discussion that can be had vaguely behind closed doors where we get to vaguely signal, and then hopefully someone takes back our feedback in a room where we're not in and we can't verify.

1:58:16And they cannot incorporate our ideas if they are not discussed on the merits.

1:58:22And right now we're not discussing ideas based on the merits because people are discussing them based on the impression that if we have any adjustments to this whatsoever, Councilor Loretta Smith.

1:58:32Then something terrible is going to happen.

1:58:39That's not a negotiating position.

1:58:41That's not negotiating on amendments.

1:58:43I think at this point, the way I'm approaching this meeting, just having heard what everyone is saying, I'm going to go through the amendments.

1:58:50I'm going to go through the merits of it, support each amendment based on the merits, knowing that it's probably going to not pass, just to show Portlanders what actually was was possible for your negotiations in a term sheet, because you do deserve to see what could have been.

1:59:06Because we are setting a precedent with an ask financially from a team that is more than any other stadium deal in the country has been thus far.

1:59:16That should shake you to your core about the precedent that we are setting nationally.

1:59:23This, to me, this is basic good governance, actually, to go through our amendments and to do our work and to update things based on the information that we have.

1:59:32So that's how I'm approaching this now, and hopefully we'll get more clarity as to why some people are refusing to engage with the material later on down the line.

1:59:45Thank you, Councilor.

1:59:47Seeing no one else in the queue, can we please call the roll on Green-Avalos 1?

1:59:53Moved by Green, seconded by Avalos.

1:59:55Koyama Lane?

1:59:56Aye.

1:59:57Morillo?

1:59:59This is the only responsible approach.

2:00:01Aye.

2:00:02Novick?

2:00:02Nay.

2:00:03Clark?

2:00:04No.

2:00:05Green?

2:00:06Aye.

2:00:07Pirtle-Guiney?

2:00:12No.

2:00:13Ryan?

2:00:16No.

2:00:17Dunphy?

2:00:18No.

2:00:19The amendment fails with a vote of 5 ayes and 7 nos.

2:00:22Thank you.

2:00:22Councilor Kanal to Kanal 1.

2:00:26Thank you, Council President.

2:00:27I will explain Kanal 1 at this time.

2:00:30It makes changes only to the resolution, not to the term sheet.

2:00:35It adds to the— it adds to what has been the 3rd and 2nd to last be it further resolved, a clause, and then it adds a new thank you.

2:00:59The text that it adds to existing clauses, there's one that says that the mayor is authorized to sign the Moda Center Arena renovation and post-renovation operations term sheet in a form substantially similar to the one that is the attachment.

2:01:09And the other authorizes the city administration to develop formal definitive documents.

2:01:14And in both cases, it adds that they are not authorized by council to commit to any specific funding source.

2:01:22And then the new clause says that the city and the city council specifically will evaluate the use of restricted funds for potential financial obligations only following receiving sufficient information to go through our standard processes.

2:01:36And that that is a list, an itemized list of proposed improvements with their estimated cost.

2:01:40It is a 2-column table adding up to $573 or frankly even $75 million if that's the ask.

2:01:47In order to allow us to not have a rushed process, because as is, I think, pretty clear here, I'm concerned about the idea that we're going to leave every other option unexplored and end up where we have $40 or $45 million figured out with BLT and PSAP.

2:02:01I think that's a fair point.

2:02:02The remaining $75 million, there's no other option identified besides PSEF.

2:02:07We don't get information because we never asked for it, or because we asked and didn't receive.

2:02:13And then it's go time.

2:02:15It's December.

2:02:16It's vote for this or the Blazers leave.

2:02:18And you have to do it with PSEF money even though we don't know if it's eligible or not, let alone whether it's a good idea or not.

2:02:27And so this clause does not seek to change the funding source in any way, but simply to say that we'll evaluate based off of the information necessary to evaluate it, received with sufficient time to do so.

2:02:38I've said before, if I'm— if my arm is being twisted and I'm being told to fund— to use PCF outside of a proven scope, proven eligibility for the PCF scope as approved by voters, I will tell them to keep going and to not count on me to break that rule because I will not break the rules that the voters gave us on PCF.

2:03:00Thank you.

2:03:01I do think it's appropriate to look at the information and determine if BCIF is eligible.

2:03:06I think that's a fair request and we're just asking for that information.

2:03:10So that's the amendment, Canal 1, and I will move it formally and ask for a second.

2:03:17Second.

2:03:18Councilor Kanal moves Canal 1.

2:03:20Councilor Avalos, I believe it was, seconds.

2:03:23Colleagues to the amendment, Canal 1.

2:03:31Councilor Green.

2:03:33Thank you for bringing it forward.

2:03:34I think it's substantive to the resolution.

2:03:36I think it's good.

2:03:37It's important for good governance, and I plan to support it.

2:03:39Thanks.

2:03:39Thank you, Councilor Green.

2:03:47Seeing no one else in the queue, Keelan, can we please call the roll on Kanal 1?

2:03:51Moved by Kanal, seconded by Avalos.

2:03:55Aye.

2:03:55Murillo?

2:03:57Aye.

2:03:58Novick?

2:03:59Nay.

2:04:00Clark?

2:04:01No.

2:04:02Green?

2:04:03Aye.

2:04:04Zimmerman?

2:04:05No.

2:04:05Avalos?

2:04:06Aye.

2:04:07Smith?

2:04:08No.

2:04:09Kanal?

2:04:10Aye.

2:04:10Pirtle-Guiney?

2:04:12No.

2:04:13Ryan?

2:04:13No.

2:04:14Dunphy?

2:04:15No.

2:04:16The amendment fails with a vote of 7— or 5 ayes and 7 nays.

2:04:21Councilor Morillo to Morillo 1.

2:04:27Thank you, everyone.

2:04:28You'll like this one.

2:04:29It's super simple and should not be controversial in any way at all if we're actually doing our due diligence.

2:04:35So Morillo 1 requires the city administrator and the chief financial officer to give us at least 30 days before any vote on definitive agreements or city debt to provide the council with a report that identifies, one, every proposed funding source and repayment method, the opportunity costs for every funding source, the potential impacts to the Portland Clean Energy Fund, our general fund services, parks, police, fire, and public safety, to affect the effects on debt capacity and future borrowing costs, and a backup plan if assumed one-time revenues do not it also requires a comparison of the public benefit of funding Moda versus current proposed uses of those dollars.

2:05:20So for example, if we end up using the Portland Clean Energy Fund dollars to renovate Moda, we would need to see what programs and things are going to be defunded from the Portland Clean Energy Fund in order to fund this renovation instead.

2:05:34And that is what we are going to be looking at right now.

2:05:38Councilor Smith.

2:05:38I think this is very simple.

2:05:40I think this, this amendment, of all the amendments that are being brought forward, is the absolute bare minimum boring amendment that a responsible council would pass.

2:05:51Because this amendment is literally just saying, hey, 30 days before your city council makes a decision on a multimillion-dollar deal, we would like to see the cost-benefit analysis of our funding source.

2:06:03Councilmember Herbold.

2:06:04That's it.

2:06:06So if you guys vote this down, I will be very confused.

2:06:09I would love to hear some rationale as to why not for something as simple as this.

2:06:13It's just a report.

2:06:17Councilor, are you moving the amendment?

2:06:19Yes, I am moving Morillo 1.

2:06:21Second.

2:06:22Councilor Morillo moves Morillo 1.

2:06:25Councilor Avalos seconds.

2:06:26Colleagues to the amendment?

2:06:28Councilor Green.

2:06:30Thank you for bringing this forward.

2:06:34Because we have— because the negotiators, the stewards of this, both at the state and the city level, have failed to make sure that this happened before we have gotten here, and I have to emphasize, they have failed us.

2:06:48The state of Oregon, Senator Lieber, I'm actually talking about you.

2:06:52You have failed us.

2:06:54Thank you.

2:06:54This was a condition that went into your bill to make sure that we have independent analysis.

2:06:59You have put us in a position where we must adopt this kind of an amendment or else we are being irresponsible with the public's funds.

2:07:05And so this is like— this doesn't even get into dollar amounts.

2:07:08This doesn't even get into whether or not you can get a hot dog for $1.50.

2:07:12This is just about like, what are we going to spend your money on before we're presenting City Council with a vote?

2:07:19By the way, can't change it.

2:07:22Councilor because we have no time, better pass it.

2:07:26You amend it, it's dead.

2:07:27Like, this, this is, this is so responsible, and thank you for, for writing this.

2:07:32I expect to see 12 votes on this.

2:07:34Thank you, Councilor Green.

2:07:39Councilor Novick.

2:07:41Um, is Jonas Biery here?

2:07:44I wanted to ask if he— I know he has some thoughts about this amendment.

2:07:48I just wanted to give him a chance to express them.

2:07:55Thanks, Councilor.

2:07:56For the record, Jonas Biery, is there a question specifically?

2:07:59Yeah, I just wanted to know your thoughts on the feasibility of the 30 days thingamabob.

2:08:05Okay.

2:08:06Yeah, thank you.

2:08:08Thank you for that.

2:08:09And I'll just say, appreciate Councilor's office did reach out for some feedback on this amendment.

2:08:16So I appreciate that greatly.

2:08:17And I would just say also, I agree with the intent and aspiration.

2:08:22Just say, as I would intend to do for any major decision that's coming to council, as I've said for over 2 years in this position, I'm always striving to bring those appropriate facts and details to support decision-making.

2:08:36So I support that.

2:08:39I did communicate and will communicate again that I think the there are some challenges in complying.

2:08:45I think that the variability in the outcomes will lead to a report that's likely very unsatisfactory.

2:08:52The 30-day timeline is a little bit challenging.

2:08:54I think we can provide something, but often in my experience, these negotiations will go right up to the last minute.

2:09:00And so some of the— there may be some open-endedness in a report that's coming 30 days prior to that timeline.

2:09:08Maybe more challenging.

2:09:10Thank you.

2:09:10Is that the trade-offs that might exist will be extremely variable and subjective.

2:09:18For example, if there was a pathway that had a debt issuance that had multiple payments over a 20-year period, the options around that will be potentially vast or subjective.

2:09:31And I don't think, I mean, it's something that can be prepared.

2:09:35And so I think that's a fair request.

2:09:37Thank you.

2:09:38I'm just a little concerned about the ability to meet council's expectations given that variability.

2:09:44I do appreciate that it includes the phrase if feasible, and I think that's really important.

2:09:49So I would just highlight that if this proposal does pass, set expectations appropriately because I think that if feasible is going to be a really important qualifier of what's able to be delivered within that 30-day window.

2:10:01Thank you.

2:10:04Thank you.

2:10:05Thank you, Councilor Novick.

2:10:06Councilor Murillo.

2:10:08Thank you.

2:10:08Um, thank you, Jonas.

2:10:09I appreciate that.

2:10:10I think that's helpful.

2:10:11And I would say that, uh, you can qualify the information as needed when you bring it forward.

2:10:17That doesn't mean that that's not information that council should request or have.

2:10:22Um, and I think that there are a lot of ways that we can actually look at this information.

2:10:28Uh, PCF is currently obligated to So getting information on how any funding that is used now would require the deobligation of certain plans, I would like to know which ones.

2:10:37From there, you can tell which Portlanders are going to be served less and in which ways.

2:10:42The general fund, which is another pot that it could come from, has a 5-year forecast.

2:10:47So can you utilize the projections in the appropriate year and compare that to what CSL would be, quantify the cut, and then have the mayor speculate on how that would affect Portlanders?

2:10:54Councilor Thank you.

2:10:59We could also analyze the BLT as a one-time reserve.

2:11:03We could analyze our debt capacity.

2:11:05So there are a lot of ways that we can actually assess how and why these different pots of money, should they end up being used for the MOTA, are going to impact our budget overall and what that is going to mean for Portlanders who receive our services.

2:11:19So that is all that I am asking.

2:11:21Thank you.

2:11:23It's not going to be perfect.

2:11:25I understand these are quick timelines, and I think sometimes fabricated timelines, but it is our responsibility to at least try and ask.

2:11:36Thank you, Councilor Maria.

2:11:37Councilor Koyama Lane.

2:11:39Thank you.

2:11:41I appreciate this amendment.

2:11:43I plan to support it.

2:11:45I will also just say that I think it's important I would just say more generally, I hope and expect that negotiations are not happening up until right before we take that vote on December— I think it's the 17th.

2:12:03I, in order to consider voting yes on anything in December, I think that the public needs to see the whole package.

2:12:12Councilor Smith.

2:12:13Councilor Smith.

2:12:13Thank you, Mayor.

2:12:13I would like to thank the council for the opportunity to speak to this proposal, which at least 30 days in advance.

2:12:16There are parts of the term sheet proposal where I see voices from up here and community voices reflected, and I've also been very clear that in order to consider voting for it, I need to see the owners have a financial contribution to the capital stack.

2:12:32If something changes between now and when we have the vote in December, I'd be interested in I'm reconsidering my support, but I really do hope over the next few months of negotiations that there is a timeline set and there is some clarity for Portlanders and for us about how we can get information and stay engaged and follow this, that this doesn't just go completely behind closed doors for a few months and then all of a sudden we're, we're asked and communities asked to support this last minute.

2:13:10So I think this amendment is really clear and reasonable.

2:13:17And in order to, to vote on something, it makes sense that we need to be able to know what are the funding sources, um, and, and get a report like this just to get some basic information.

2:13:29So thank you, Councilor.

2:13:30Thank you.

2:13:31Thank you, Councilor Koyamalane.

2:13:34Colleagues, seeing no one else in the queue, Keelan, can we please call the roll on Marie 01?

2:13:40Moved by Marie, seconded by Avalos.

2:13:43Koyamalane?

2:13:44Aye.

2:13:45Marie?

2:13:46Aye.

2:13:46Novick?

2:13:47No.

2:13:48Clark?

2:13:48No.

2:13:49Green?