WEBVTT

1
00:07:09.677 --> 00:07:10.610
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Good afternoon.

2
00:07:10.802 --> 00:07:13.951
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>It is 2:02 PM on Tuesday, September 22nd.

3
00:07:14.096 --> 00:07:17.937
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I am calling to order today's City Life Committee.

4
00:07:18.802 --> 00:07:20.274
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Wendy, can you please call the roll?

5
00:07:24.257 --> 00:07:25.319
<v Unidentified speaker>Good afternoon, Maria.

6
00:07:26.963 --> 00:07:27.011
<v Dan Ryan>Here.

7
00:07:27.204 --> 00:07:27.654
<v Unidentified speaker>Zimmerman.

8
00:07:28.973 --> 00:07:29.086
<v Eric Zimmerman>Here.

9
00:07:29.923 --> 00:07:30.309
<v Unidentified speaker>Avalos.

10
00:07:30.470 --> 00:07:30.759
<v Candace Avalos>Present.

11
00:07:31.853 --> 00:07:32.158
<v Unidentified speaker>Ryan.

12
00:07:32.415 --> 00:07:32.673
<v Dan Ryan>Here.

13
00:07:33.060 --> 00:07:33.526
<v Unidentified speaker>Pirtle-Guiney.

14
00:07:34.122 --> 00:07:34.314
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Here.

15
00:07:34.749 --> 00:07:37.593
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And Kevin, could you please read us our statement of conduct?

16
00:07:39.019 --> 00:07:41.199
<v Unidentified speaker>Welcome to the meeting of the City Life Committee.

17
00:07:41.555 --> 00:07:48.324
<v Unidentified speaker>To testify before this committee in person or virtually, you must sign up in advance on the committee agenda at www.portland.gov/council/agenda/citylife.

18
00:07:53.966 --> 00:07:56.658
<v Unidentified speaker>Life Committee, or by calling 311.

19
00:07:57.187 --> 00:08:00.170
<v Unidentified speaker>Information on engaging with the committee can be found at this link.

20
00:08:00.634 --> 00:08:04.274
<v Unidentified speaker>Registration for virtual testimony closes 1 hour prior to the meeting.

21
00:08:04.802 --> 00:08:07.976
<v Unidentified speaker>In-person testifiers must sign up before the agenda item is heard.

22
00:08:08.569 --> 00:08:14.468
<v Unidentified speaker>If public testimony will be taken on an item, individuals may testify for 3 minutes unless the chair states otherwise.

23
00:08:14.901 --> 00:08:17.370
<v Unidentified speaker>Your microphone will be muted when your time is over.

24
00:08:17.947 --> 00:08:18.956
<v Unidentified speaker>The chair preserves order.

25
00:08:19.406 --> 00:08:33.910
<v Unidentified speaker>Disruptive conduct such as shouting, refusing to conclude your testimony when your time is up, or interrupting others' testimony further disruption will result in ejection from the meeting.

26
00:08:34.426 --> 00:08:38.272
<v Unidentified speaker>Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass.

27
00:08:38.788 --> 00:08:42.488
<v Unidentified speaker>Additionally, the committee may take a short recess and reconvene virtually.

28
00:08:42.971 --> 00:08:44.958
<v Unidentified speaker>Your testimony should address the matter being considered.

29
00:08:45.509 --> 00:08:48.135
<v Unidentified speaker>When testifying, one, state your name for the record.

30
00:08:48.442 --> 00:08:50.923
<v Unidentified speaker>If you are a lobbyist, identify the organization you represent.

31
00:08:50.971 --> 00:08:51.083
<v Unidentified speaker>Thank you.

32
00:08:51.355 --> 00:08:55.607
<v Unidentified speaker>And 2, virtual testifiers should unmute themselves when the clerk calls your name.

33
00:08:56.123 --> 00:08:56.428
<v Unidentified speaker>Thank you.

34
00:08:58.120 --> 00:08:59.634
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you very much, colleagues.

35
00:08:59.811 --> 00:09:07.780
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>At our last meeting, we got to dive deep on a big topic that we hope will lead to some legislation down the road.

36
00:09:08.394 --> 00:09:13.479
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Next meeting, we will dive deep on a different topic through our Advance Portland presentation.

37
00:09:13.527 --> 00:09:19.482
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We'll get to look at economic development and then work on a couple of ordinances brought forth by the administration.

38
00:09:19.533 --> 00:09:31.096
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>But today we get to do some work on items brought forward so we have 3 main items on the agenda today that we'll be hearing, uh, 2 brought by Councilor Zimmerman and one from Councilor Novick.

39
00:09:31.741 --> 00:09:34.724
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Uh, before we dive in though, I think we have to approve some minutes.

40
00:09:34.773 --> 00:09:37.134
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So Wendy, could you please call the first item on the agenda?

41
00:09:39.796 --> 00:09:40.135
<v Unidentified speaker>Certainly.

42
00:09:40.280 --> 00:09:47.619
<v Unidentified speaker>Item number 1, City Life Committee meeting minutes for July 14th, July 28th, and August 11th, 2026.

43
00:09:51.042 --> 00:09:54.024
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And colleagues, is there any opposition to the minutes?

44
00:09:54.121 --> 00:09:56.570
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>If not, I believe we can approve them by unanimous consent.

45
00:09:58.368 --> 00:09:59.625
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Seeing none.

46
00:10:01.619 --> 00:10:02.975
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, minutes approved.

47
00:10:04.950 --> 00:10:09.116
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And that moves us to our public input.

48
00:10:09.182 --> 00:10:11.355
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Wendy, could you please call the next item on the agenda?

49
00:10:13.158 --> 00:10:18.600
<v Unidentified speaker>Item number 2, document number 2026-338, public input on City Life Committee topics.

50
00:10:19.793 --> 00:10:21.885
<v Unidentified speaker>We have one person signed up to testify.

51
00:10:24.149 --> 00:10:26.688
<v Unidentified speaker>Ghalib El, come on up.

52
00:10:28.250 --> 00:10:28.572
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Welcome.

53
00:10:32.548 --> 00:10:41.716
<v Unidentified speaker>And my apologies, just, uh, we're having some trouble with the timer, so you, um, you'll see the timer on the screen, but you will not get that 30-second warning that we normally do.

54
00:10:42.024 --> 00:10:45.548
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Well, I timed this thing, so it should come in around 2:55-ish, hopefully.

55
00:10:47.870 --> 00:10:48.113
<v Unidentified speaker>Perfect.

56
00:10:48.291 --> 00:10:49.813
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Greetings, beloved committee members.

57
00:10:50.009 --> 00:10:59.419
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>I am Ghalib Ben Imhotep L. My district is Domicile 4, and when I last spoke before you, I expressed my dedication to Project Zero.

58
00:11:00.966 --> 00:11:03.480
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>It's more than just a dedication, it is a will.

59
00:11:04.289 --> 00:11:08.956
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>By 2050, Portland will be a zero-carbon emission city.

60
00:11:10.018 --> 00:11:12.493
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>The written testimony that I submitted 2 weeks ago.

61
00:11:13.091 --> 00:11:14.739
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>It had a couple of visual flubs in it.

62
00:11:14.932 --> 00:11:15.029
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>I—.

63
00:11:15.029 --> 00:11:17.759
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>It's the first time I used PowerPoint in a while.

64
00:11:18.229 --> 00:11:18.859
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>I was a little rusty.

65
00:11:19.708 --> 00:11:24.604
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>I resubmitted it recently, and hopefully it's a little bit more comprehensible and able to be comprehended.

66
00:11:26.648 --> 00:11:37.225
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>I am that I am, a solution-oriented being that believes that economy and ecology are not just synonymous, they are one in the same.

67
00:11:38.660 --> 00:11:40.207
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Portland's economy is suffering.

68
00:11:40.981 --> 00:11:41.606
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>That is obvious.

69
00:11:42.919 --> 00:11:44.701
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Data centers ruin ecology.

70
00:11:45.544 --> 00:11:46.599
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>That too is obvious.

71
00:11:49.961 --> 00:11:59.727
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Given the previous statements, it is only logical to state that there is no economical benefit to a data center if it does not support the local ecology.

72
00:12:00.976 --> 00:12:03.538
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>But I am not here to discuss the controversy of the data centers.

73
00:12:03.716 --> 00:12:06.767
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>I am here because Mother Earth beckons me to action.

74
00:12:08.793 --> 00:12:21.594
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>If I do not act, if I sit idly by and let things happen, who knows what sort of ecological travesties will befall this area or, or here.

75
00:12:22.371 --> 00:12:22.937
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Excuse me.

76
00:12:23.909 --> 00:12:24.428
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Excuse me.

77
00:12:26.501 --> 00:12:27.215
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Lost my place there.

78
00:12:29.133 --> 00:12:31.433
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>But that's not a sustainable way of thinking.

79
00:12:32.518 --> 00:12:34.191
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>It's not the right way of being.

80
00:12:35.253 --> 00:12:37.246
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>I am the promoter of a progressive Portland.

81
00:12:37.745 --> 00:12:42.235
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>I have a minor background in law, though I have passed no bar exam and I'm no licensed attorney.

82
00:12:42.768 --> 00:12:49.303
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>I do realize that there are barriers to what can and can't be done according to Oregon Revised Statutes and state ordinance and municipal policy.

83
00:12:50.336 --> 00:13:00.528
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>But Mother Earth does not, will not, and is not in, in any sort of manner supposed to have to bend her will to those things.

84
00:13:00.639 --> 00:13:00.736
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Thank you.

85
00:13:01.447 --> 00:13:05.462
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>When things get too hectic, Mother Earth cleanses and then starts all over again.

86
00:13:06.426 --> 00:13:07.695
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Humanity cannot afford this.

87
00:13:08.691 --> 00:13:10.264
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Portland will not experience this.

88
00:13:11.034 --> 00:13:13.202
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>I have submitted another document for the committee's review.

89
00:13:14.167 --> 00:13:21.041
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>If it's agreeable, maybe this document can be presented to Multnomah County for a countywide or even a statewide Project Zero.

90
00:13:22.326 --> 00:13:23.288
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>We sit on a precipice.

91
00:13:24.332 --> 00:13:31.707
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>We are powerful enough to dictate whether we fall off that cliff Or whether we spread our wings and fly like the celestial beings that we are.

92
00:13:33.370 --> 00:13:34.337
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>That choice is yours.

93
00:13:35.241 --> 00:13:36.274
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>That choice is mine.

94
00:13:36.873 --> 00:13:38.034
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>That choice is Portland's.

95
00:13:38.729 --> 00:13:40.020
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>That choice is Oregon's.

96
00:13:40.893 --> 00:13:42.006
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>The power is yours.

97
00:13:43.029 --> 00:13:44.806
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>It resides in your hands.

98
00:13:45.888 --> 00:13:53.230
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Wield it wisely and know without an iota of if that I love you all unconditionally.

99
00:13:53.328 --> 00:13:53.934
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Thank you.

100
00:13:54.066 --> 00:13:54.410
<v Ghalib Ben Imhotep L>Thank you.

101
00:13:56.096 --> 00:13:57.874
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you for being here and for the documents.

102
00:14:00.860 --> 00:14:02.188
<v Keelan McClymont>That concludes public input.

103
00:14:03.470 --> 00:14:03.826
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

104
00:14:04.539 --> 00:14:09.219
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Wendy, could you open the next 2 items, items 2 and 3?

105
00:14:09.395 --> 00:14:11.950
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>No, items 3 and 4, I believe.

106
00:14:12.511 --> 00:14:13.154
<v Unidentified speaker>Yes, thank you.

107
00:14:14.038 --> 00:14:32.505
<v Unidentified speaker>Items 3 and 4, documents number 2026-287, Dynamic Pricing and Surveillance Pricing Regulation Presentation, and 2026-288, add regulation of dynamic pricing and prohibition of surveillance pricing in retail code.

108
00:14:33.003 --> 00:14:35.504
<v Unidentified speaker>Add Code Chapter 7.28.

109
00:14:36.547 --> 00:14:37.509
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

110
00:14:37.653 --> 00:14:43.474
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And I am going to turn it over to Councilor Zimmerman, and I believe you and your staff have a presentation for us.

111
00:14:44.227 --> 00:14:44.725
<v Eric Zimmerman>We do.

112
00:14:44.821 --> 00:14:45.846
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you, Chair.

113
00:14:45.927 --> 00:14:46.985
<v Eric Zimmerman>It's great to be here.

114
00:14:47.066 --> 00:14:52.470
<v Eric Zimmerman>I do have both Luke and Daniel from my team at the dais who will help with the presentation.

115
00:14:52.581 --> 00:14:58.967
<v Eric Zimmerman>But as we go through this, I know there'll be some aspect of, defining certain things.

116
00:14:59.307 --> 00:15:06.327
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so that's what this presentation is going to attempt to do while we also lay out both a problem and a solution.

117
00:15:07.179 --> 00:15:08.807
<v Eric Zimmerman>If we can go to the next slide.

118
00:15:09.164 --> 00:15:19.828
<v Eric Zimmerman>The Consumers Opposed to Surveillance Technology, or the COST Ordinance, is really trying to face a problem that is— we just heard about being on the precipice of something.

119
00:15:19.957 --> 00:15:36.621
<v Eric Zimmerman>We're on the precipice of technology moving fast enough and faster than, frankly, I think consumers can, to the point where we can see that technology is headed toward a surveillance-based or an AI-enhanced price-setting model within the retail market.

120
00:15:37.423 --> 00:15:45.534
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so from the perspective of our office and others, it's that if we can get in front of this issue, we have a chance here.

121
00:15:46.111 --> 00:15:50.375
<v Eric Zimmerman>So going to the next slide, I want to just define a few terms.

122
00:15:50.423 --> 00:15:58.961
<v Eric Zimmerman>Dynamic pricing of altering the price of an item for all customers in real time based on external factors such as weather, demand, time of day, and availability of supply.

123
00:15:59.715 --> 00:16:08.852
<v Eric Zimmerman>Surveillance is based— setting the price of an item for a specific customer based on information acquired through their personal data, some history, income, and demographic profiles.

124
00:16:09.432 --> 00:16:13.157
<v Eric Zimmerman>Retail vendor— any business that sells goods to customers within the City of Portland.

125
00:16:13.221 --> 00:16:18.504
<v Eric Zimmerman>And third-party service providers— any business that delivers goods to customers of a retail vendor.

126
00:16:19.548 --> 00:16:21.331
<v Eric Zimmerman>Uh, just noting that neither dynamic yeah.

127
00:16:21.412 --> 00:16:31.370
<v Eric Zimmerman>Not that dynamic pricing nor surveillance pricing are all about the cost of goods so much as— and the cost of labor, but that dynamic and surveillance pricing usually comes after we've seen original prices set.

128
00:16:31.595 --> 00:16:32.623
<v Eric Zimmerman>So just keep that in mind.

129
00:16:33.136 --> 00:16:39.513
<v Eric Zimmerman>We're already on to the next slide, and I just— in terms of the public reaction, the public is already familiar with dynamic pricing.

130
00:16:39.561 --> 00:16:48.315
<v Eric Zimmerman>This is a common practice that we see in rideshare, airlines, hotels, those types of services that a person buys.

131
00:16:50.643 --> 00:16:57.024
<v Eric Zimmerman>Applying that to retail goods, and retail goods is what today is really about.

132
00:16:57.763 --> 00:17:13.462
<v Eric Zimmerman>I say that because I want to make sure I underline for you that today's ordinance is not, is not taking any action against the service industry, and there's more to come on that, but I wanted to be very clear we're talking about retail goods.

133
00:17:14.217 --> 00:17:15.804
<v Eric Zimmerman>Moving to the next slide, thank you.

134
00:17:16.782 --> 00:17:22.659
<v Eric Zimmerman>You've seen some stuff across the country that cities and states around the nation have started to act.

135
00:17:22.787 --> 00:17:36.690
<v Eric Zimmerman>Even our own Senator Merkley and Representative Hoyle, both from Oregon, have been trying to work federal legislation to halt this type of what could be potential price manipulation in the retail goods, but certainly what we're seeing in the services area.

136
00:17:37.573 --> 00:17:42.999
<v Eric Zimmerman>We've listed here some states who've already tried to take some action or successfully taken some action.

137
00:17:43.897 --> 00:17:53.403
<v Eric Zimmerman>And we'll just say that as technology moves rapidly in this moment, when all things related to technology advances, I think everybody's trying to keep up here.

138
00:17:53.805 --> 00:18:08.704
<v Eric Zimmerman>So moving to the next, the reason that we're bringing this forward to you is really in terms of ensuring that Portland doesn't slide any further away from making sure that everybody's treated fairly when they're in the retail market.

139
00:18:08.801 --> 00:18:21.855
<v Eric Zimmerman>That we're talking about affordability, we're talking about a consumer protection issue, and ultimately this comes down to a fairness issue for all shoppers and ensuring that your private information is not used to set prices for you.

140
00:18:23.630 --> 00:18:29.007
<v Eric Zimmerman>So what does the cost ordinance do and how does it regulate?

141
00:18:29.169 --> 00:18:42.557
<v Eric Zimmerman>So in terms of how does it regulate dynamic pricing, prices cannot be increased more than once In a calendar day and applies to all retail vendors and third-party delivery service providers.

142
00:18:44.691 --> 00:19:00.678
<v Eric Zimmerman>In our discussions about what is a norm within the market, we've found that a once-a-day price change is quite reasonable and that we're all familiar with the need to move— I'm going to use grocery as an instance— but the need to move a product.

143
00:19:00.726 --> 00:19:00.790
<v Eric Zimmerman>Yes.

144
00:19:02.106 --> 00:19:17.564
<v Eric Zimmerman>None of this gets in the way of that, but making sure that if you went to the store, you know, at 10 AM versus 1 PM, that there's a reasonable expectation that prices remain the same unless it's part of a program set of changes.

145
00:19:18.157 --> 00:19:19.808
<v Eric Zimmerman>So what does it do for surveillance pricing?

146
00:19:20.337 --> 00:19:33.988
<v Eric Zimmerman>It really means that personal data, including any of your protected class data, cannot be used to establish a retail price specifically to you, is an important and it applies to all retail vendors and third-party delivery service providers.

147
00:19:34.977 --> 00:19:36.096
<v Eric Zimmerman>We can go to the next slide.

148
00:19:39.029 --> 00:19:49.265
<v Eric Zimmerman>Actually, excuse me, before I talk about this a little bit, I do want to just say in terms of what does the ordinance do, we also have the ordinance not taking place until July 1st, 2027.

149
00:19:50.359 --> 00:20:01.137
<v Eric Zimmerman>So really, given the timeline of this council and how it comes out of— if it comes out, if you all decide to send it to council, I see that as basically coming up to be yeah.

150
00:20:01.201 --> 00:20:04.510
<v Eric Zimmerman>So we're talking between 6 to 9 months before going live.

151
00:20:04.977 --> 00:20:11.209
<v Eric Zimmerman>But the good thing here is that generally we don't believe and have not heard from retailers that this is already a technology in place.

152
00:20:11.481 --> 00:20:18.243
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so what we'd be sending is a signal to folks who do business in Portland of, we know you're getting pitched on this technology.

153
00:20:19.174 --> 00:20:23.528
<v Eric Zimmerman>We're telling you, don't invest in that kind of capital expansion because we're not going to allow it here.

154
00:20:23.930 --> 00:20:27.992
<v Eric Zimmerman>But this is what you see in terms of our day here, or of our implementation.

155
00:20:28.909 --> 00:20:46.932
<v Eric Zimmerman>The provisions this will cover matters that are not preempted by state or federal law, and we're not trying to create a complicated patchwork, which is why you see some pretty broad terms in order to avoid loopholes and what-ifs and just be very straightforward with Portlanders, with consumers, and with businesses.

156
00:20:48.859 --> 00:21:02.336
<v Eric Zimmerman>I also want to be really clear, just given the nature of this conversation across the country, that this ordinance is not prohibiting the use of electronic shelf labels, as you saw in the picture in the opening of this.

157
00:21:03.170 --> 00:21:06.847
<v Eric Zimmerman>The label themselves is not the concerning aspect.

158
00:21:06.912 --> 00:21:12.042
<v Eric Zimmerman>It is the technology that is enabled to exploit based on the use of labels.

159
00:21:12.236 --> 00:21:17.587
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so we're going to go after the technology and the exploitative stuff instead of just the change in label technology.

160
00:21:18.915 --> 00:21:25.623
<v Eric Zimmerman>So, uh, in this discussion, it is inherent, you're going to get to the point where you talk about loyalty programs.

161
00:21:25.686 --> 00:21:39.843
<v Eric Zimmerman>And loyalty programs mean things like Safeway Rewards, Fred Meyer Rewards, Costco memberships, Amazon Prime memberships— those types of things that we all are aware, well aware of, and many people are members of.

162
00:21:40.435 --> 00:21:45.053
<v Eric Zimmerman>That this does not attack any of those typical programs and those that are set up for their consumers.

163
00:21:45.164 --> 00:21:50.743
<v Eric Zimmerman>The cost ordinance doesn't limit or regulate discounts and sales and loyalty programs.

164
00:21:51.161 --> 00:21:56.676
<v Eric Zimmerman>Retailers can still continue to offer those discounts to attract customers, to build that customer base.

165
00:21:57.510 --> 00:22:02.368
<v Eric Zimmerman>Membership and loyalty and rewards subscription are all untouched in this.

166
00:22:03.202 --> 00:22:11.925
<v Eric Zimmerman>Signing up for a mailing list or agreeing to share your personal data, registering for promotions, communications, those are all, I think, things we're used to.

167
00:22:12.423 --> 00:22:36.548
<v Eric Zimmerman>Another area that we're not trying to attack here and making sure is protected is If a person is part of a professional group, so we see veterans discounts, we see teachers discounts, sometimes we see student discounts, sometimes residents of a certain area, maybe a neighborhood has said we're going to have a promotion for members of this neighborhood, youth and senior citizens.

168
00:22:36.644 --> 00:22:41.347
<v Eric Zimmerman>These are all things that I think are fairly common within the American consumer market and we're all quite used to.

169
00:22:41.798 --> 00:22:43.002
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I want to be clear that this yes.

170
00:22:43.084 --> 00:22:45.712
<v Eric Zimmerman>Is not changing anything for them.

171
00:22:46.394 --> 00:22:49.866
<v Eric Zimmerman>And of course, your coupons, promotions, things of that nature.

172
00:22:51.309 --> 00:23:05.464
<v Eric Zimmerman>What we're really trying to say is that retailers can set different service-based fees on objective costs for delivering prices and goods, but that's between them and their consumer and how they're going to be competitive in the market, and that those loyalty programs are part of that.

173
00:23:06.662 --> 00:23:11.144
<v Eric Zimmerman>So in terms of if this were to go forward, how would a cost ordinance be enforced?

174
00:23:11.531 --> 00:23:16.634
<v Eric Zimmerman>The law has a penalty structure with opportunities to cure any violations.

175
00:23:17.325 --> 00:23:26.904
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so we see that basically go through the typical city administrator's office/hearings officer program that we see in other parts of the city.

176
00:23:27.803 --> 00:23:32.215
<v Eric Zimmerman>If a violation is determined, a penalty can be assessed on a retailer or a delivery provider.

177
00:23:32.376 --> 00:23:38.666
<v Eric Zimmerman>If it's a violation for— it is a violation for each consumer for whom a price has been set in a non-compliant manner.

178
00:23:39.211 --> 00:23:47.961
<v Eric Zimmerman>And penalties can be waived if the violation is cured within 45 days after the notice is received by the business for the first violation in a 24-month period.

179
00:23:48.490 --> 00:23:59.097
<v Eric Zimmerman>I want to just note here a little bit of our approach in working to come up with an enforcement and a violation structure, which was we are getting ahead of a technology.

180
00:23:59.403 --> 00:24:03.376
<v Eric Zimmerman>We're asking, we're asking the market not to adopt a certain type of technology.

181
00:24:04.434 --> 00:24:11.770
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I think that that's important because we're laying out a set of expectations for what it would be like to be a consumer in Portland.

182
00:24:12.317 --> 00:24:24.777
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so while we have some flexibility in here, I also expect that if we set a standard early and now, we can avoid a significant number of issues because we won't be unraveling a current practice.

183
00:24:24.840 --> 00:24:26.575
<v Eric Zimmerman>We're actually preventing a future practice.

184
00:24:27.153 --> 00:24:44.319
<v Eric Zimmerman>So just to kind of get you an idea for what a penalty amount might look like if If we pass such a thing, is that it's noted in the ordinance as $1,000 for the first violation in a calendar year, $5,000 for a second violation in that same calendar year, and $7,500 for any subsequent violation in the same calendar year.

185
00:24:44.390 --> 00:24:51.569
<v Eric Zimmerman>And that's how that's laid out going through our typical human— excuse me, hearings officer.

186
00:24:51.569 --> 00:24:58.049
<v Eric Zimmerman>I do want to invite up some members of the community who've helped us draft some of this legislation.

187
00:24:58.130 --> 00:25:00.670
<v Eric Zimmerman>Mike Salvaggio from United Food and Commercial Workers Local 555.

188
00:25:00.670 --> 00:25:00.690
<v Michael Salvaggio>Hi.

189
00:25:02.586 --> 00:25:07.738
<v Eric Zimmerman>If you wouldn't mind joining us at the dais, and Amanda Dalton from the Northwest Grocery Retail Association.

190
00:25:07.818 --> 00:25:11.810
<v Eric Zimmerman>I'd invite you both up as invited testimony, and I thank you guys for your time.

191
00:25:11.859 --> 00:25:14.652
<v Eric Zimmerman>I know you were here about a month ago, so thank you for coming back.

192
00:25:21.872 --> 00:25:24.615
<v Eric Zimmerman>Mike, do you want to start since you're on the top of the list?

193
00:25:26.104 --> 00:25:29.844
<v Michael Salvaggio>Thank you, Madam Chair, Mr. Councilor, members of the committee.

194
00:25:30.718 --> 00:25:32.435
<v Michael Salvaggio>For the record, my name is Michael Salvaggio.

195
00:25:32.724 --> 00:25:37.653
<v Michael Salvaggio>I am here representing United Food and Commercial Workers Local 555.

196
00:25:38.586 --> 00:25:45.425
<v Michael Salvaggio>We have tens of thousands of members in Oregon and bits of Washington and Idaho.

197
00:25:46.211 --> 00:25:48.846
<v Michael Salvaggio>We are Oregon's largest private sector union.

198
00:25:49.199 --> 00:25:59.644
<v Michael Salvaggio>And if you are shopping at a Safeway, Fred Meyer, Albertsons, or a number of other stores in the area, you're probably interacting with our members.

199
00:26:01.965 --> 00:26:20.122
<v Michael Salvaggio>The reason that we've brought this up is that like many Portlanders, our members are struggling with not only high but unpredictable prices that are the effect of a number of different factors that are going on in our country and in the world right now.

200
00:26:22.432 --> 00:26:29.807
<v Michael Salvaggio>Compounding that though, as Councilor Zimmerman mentioned, what we see on the horizon with regard to these emerging technologies.

201
00:26:31.920 --> 00:26:58.663
<v Michael Salvaggio>The advent of electronic shelving labels is, again, as Councilor Zimmerman noted, not in and of itself nefarious, but the ability of some of these third-party technology providers to then go ahead and pitch certain products that are attached to those is what really has kind of got our backup.

202
00:27:00.951 --> 00:27:07.267
<v Michael Salvaggio>And I want to say for the record, we're not talking about the Kroger Company or Safeway Albertsons.

203
00:27:07.378 --> 00:27:15.337
<v Michael Salvaggio>We're talking about companies that the average Portlander probably has never heard of, such as Nationwide Group or UiPath or Tenging.

204
00:27:15.516 --> 00:27:15.984
<v Michael Salvaggio>Tenging.

205
00:27:17.452 --> 00:27:21.868
<v Michael Salvaggio>These are companies that are not really hiding their hands in terms of what they're pitching.

206
00:27:23.028 --> 00:27:43.679
<v Michael Salvaggio>They're actively suggesting to retailers to use this technology for things like, and I'll just kind of quote, this is from Nationwide Group, by using digital price tags, product pricing is automatically updated, resulting in a reduction of missed margin opportunities.

207
00:27:44.291 --> 00:27:50.491
<v Michael Salvaggio>Or to put that another way, if there's an opportunity to charge the customer a higher price, we're not gonna miss that.

208
00:27:51.519 --> 00:28:17.256
<v Michael Salvaggio>We see elements such as agentic AI at work, which means an AI system that is acting on its own without a human intermediary in order to, as one other provider puts it, quote, interpret customer context from live data and every pricing decision is predicated, optimized, and executed automatically.

209
00:28:18.250 --> 00:28:24.086
<v Michael Salvaggio>These are the types of invasive pricing models that we're concerned about in the future.

210
00:28:24.744 --> 00:28:36.097
<v Michael Salvaggio>And so again, as Councilor Zimmerman, and I'm gonna refer to Councilor Zimmerman a lot given that he made a good presentation, as the Councilor said, this is—.

211
00:28:36.130 --> 00:28:36.290
<v Michael Salvaggio>Yeah.

212
00:28:37.013 --> 00:28:45.163
<v Michael Salvaggio>Not something where we're gonna pass a measure and then people are gonna go to the grocery store and see something drastically different than they did before.

213
00:28:45.373 --> 00:28:46.519
<v Michael Salvaggio>This is preventative.

214
00:28:48.278 --> 00:28:52.851
<v Michael Salvaggio>And so we have a draft that we see here.

215
00:28:53.853 --> 00:28:56.675
<v Michael Salvaggio>We're, just for the record, in favor of the draft.

216
00:28:57.207 --> 00:29:04.452
<v Michael Salvaggio>We're probably going to be doing some additional work at the state level on this for things that the city's not able to tackle.

217
00:29:04.534 --> 00:29:04.886
<v Michael Salvaggio>Thank you.

218
00:29:06.644 --> 00:29:21.954
<v Michael Salvaggio>But the— I did want to put a few things on the record as well, and that is our organization's desire to make sure that those loyalty programs are protected.

219
00:29:23.089 --> 00:29:38.741
<v Michael Salvaggio>When we talk about loyalty programs, you know, we were thinking of that Fred Meyer card, that Safeway card, things that are keeping customers coming back to that union store, we want to keep those in place because we do want those customers to keep on coming back to those union stores.

220
00:29:39.479 --> 00:29:55.936
<v Michael Salvaggio>And so whatever measure or adjustments or amendments are being considered or come down the pike, or if they stay as is, we just want to make sure that we're conveying our desire to hold those programs harmless.

221
00:29:55.984 --> 00:29:56.144
<v Michael Salvaggio>Thank you.

222
00:29:58.173 --> 00:30:07.306
<v Michael Salvaggio>And I'm sure there's plenty more I could say, but I will save some for questions in case anyone wants to dig in a little deeper on that.

223
00:30:08.930 --> 00:30:10.314
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you, Mr. Salvaggio.

224
00:30:10.394 --> 00:30:16.207
<v Eric Zimmerman>Appreciate you spending so much time with us both last month and now and helping us understand this topic even better.

225
00:30:16.545 --> 00:30:17.173
<v Michael Salvaggio>Always a pleasure.

226
00:30:17.414 --> 00:30:17.624
<v Eric Zimmerman>Yeah.

227
00:30:17.913 --> 00:30:18.736
<v Eric Zimmerman>Amanda, do you want to go ahead?

228
00:30:19.107 --> 00:30:19.446
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Absolutely.

229
00:30:19.980 --> 00:30:22.404
<v Unidentified speaker>Chair Pirtle-Guiney, members of the committee, Amanda Dalton.

230
00:30:22.518 --> 00:30:25.121
<v Unidentified speaker>I'm the president of the Northwest Grocery Retail Association.

231
00:30:25.266 --> 00:30:35.483
<v Unidentified speaker>Our members include large and small grocery retailers, delivery partners, and companies that stock your store shelves across the city, including in Oregon and Washington and Idaho.

232
00:30:35.579 --> 00:30:47.894
<v Unidentified speaker>I do also want to echo the thanks and appreciation to Councilor Zimmerman and his team— nice to see you— who has really put a ton of work into the amended ordinance that's before you.

233
00:30:49.050 --> 00:30:54.076
<v Unidentified speaker>As you've heard, this is an issue that's being debated across the country, and right now elsewhere who are in our region.

234
00:30:54.829 --> 00:30:58.952
<v Unidentified speaker>It won't surprise you that we believe an issue like this is better addressed at the state level.

235
00:30:59.176 --> 00:31:07.326
<v Unidentified speaker>Shoppers, retailers, delivery networks don't stop at city boundaries, and a patchwork of different local requirements does create real challenges.

236
00:31:07.920 --> 00:31:15.395
<v Unidentified speaker>That being said, if Portland is going to act locally, we appreciate the thoughtful and straightforward approach presented in the amended ordinance before you.

237
00:31:16.326 --> 00:31:34.104
<v Unidentified speaker>I will note that it stands in stark contrast to a vote that's taking place right now in the city of Seattle, where we expect a policy to advance which will significantly restrict legitimate discounts and promotions and ultimately create unintended cost increases for our shoppers.

238
00:31:34.922 --> 00:31:42.598
<v Unidentified speaker>Our members support protections that are clear, that prevent consumers from being charged higher prices based on their personal information.

239
00:31:43.271 --> 00:31:48.128
<v Unidentified speaker>I want to be very clear about this point: grocery stores in Portland are not doing this today.

240
00:31:48.176 --> 00:31:48.368
<v Unidentified speaker>Thank you.

241
00:31:49.106 --> 00:31:55.912
<v Unidentified speaker>Grocery is a highly competitive, low-margin business where prices and promotions change for many legitimate reasons.

242
00:31:56.506 --> 00:32:06.744
<v Unidentified speaker>So getting the distinction between individualized price increases and ordinary competitive pricing right matters to both retailers and to consumers.

243
00:32:08.125 --> 00:32:14.737
<v Unidentified speaker>At the same time, grocery shoppers increasingly rely on discounts, promotions, and loyalty programs to stretch household budgets.

244
00:32:15.586 --> 00:32:31.844
<v Unidentified speaker>So throughout this process, our goal, and one that we very much appreciate has been echoed by UFCW and Councilor Zimmerman, has been to make sure the ordinance presented is aimed at preventing unfair pricing practices while not inadvertently eliminating the savings that your shoppers depend on.

245
00:32:32.758 --> 00:32:38.288
<v Unidentified speaker>I will say this is not an ordinance that our industry would have drafted, and there are amendments that we would have preferred to see included.

246
00:32:38.994 --> 00:32:47.490
<v Unidentified speaker>However, we also recognize that policymaking done right requires compromise, and we appreciate that many of our concerns have been addressed and are included in the proposal before you.

247
00:32:48.307 --> 00:32:56.238
<v Unidentified speaker>This includes loyalty protect— protecting programs like loyalty programs, member pricing, manufacturer coupons, promotions, rewards, and rebates.

248
00:32:57.182 --> 00:32:59.442
<v Unidentified speaker>I also want to recognize the approach to enforcement.

249
00:33:00.179 --> 00:33:16.846
<v Unidentified speaker>Notice of violations, escalating penalties for subsequent violations, and the ability to cure a first alleged violation with discretion to pursue enforcement after that within 45 days creates a fair mechanism that prioritizes compliance while maintaining meaningful consumer protections.

250
00:33:16.990 --> 00:33:22.011
<v Unidentified speaker>That's particularly important because this ordinance applies to retailers of all size.

251
00:33:23.231 --> 00:33:30.788
<v Unidentified speaker>We believe it's possible to protect consumers from unfair pricing practices while preserving the savings they rely on every day.

252
00:33:31.189 --> 00:33:39.323
<v Unidentified speaker>The amended ordinance before you does this and distinguishes between practices that can harm consumers and those that can benefit from them.

253
00:33:39.693 --> 00:33:40.983
<v Unidentified speaker>And finds a workable balance.

254
00:33:41.065 --> 00:33:46.549
<v Unidentified speaker>And for those reasons, we appreciate the proposal before you and the work that went into getting it here.

255
00:33:46.694 --> 00:33:46.936
<v Unidentified speaker>Thank you.

256
00:33:47.049 --> 00:33:51.951
<v Eric Zimmerman>Ms. Dalton, thank you for spending so much time with us, and we appreciate working with you on that.

257
00:33:52.030 --> 00:34:03.509
<v Eric Zimmerman>So colleagues, I would like to move into questions, but I just want to, you know, go a little less formal than the presentation.

258
00:34:03.558 --> 00:34:05.663
<v Eric Zimmerman>But really, our thank you.

259
00:34:05.823 --> 00:34:06.353
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you, Councilor Ryan.

260
00:34:06.480 --> 00:34:07.010
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you to our panel.

261
00:34:07.107 --> 00:34:09.371
<v Eric Zimmerman>And the idea around this, they've summed it up, right?

262
00:34:09.418 --> 00:34:11.329
<v Eric Zimmerman>It's about preventing future exploitation.

263
00:34:12.148 --> 00:34:15.744
<v Eric Zimmerman>It's about preventing future unfair price practices.

264
00:34:15.954 --> 00:34:21.460
<v Eric Zimmerman>It's preventing, I think, a PII market, personally identifiable information market.

265
00:34:21.525 --> 00:34:28.637
<v Eric Zimmerman>It's about preserving loyalty programs and the consumer market that many of us have come to understand.

266
00:34:29.327 --> 00:34:31.719
<v Eric Zimmerman>And it's also preserving large and small businesses.

267
00:34:31.800 --> 00:34:35.965
<v Eric Zimmerman>Small retailers, grocers in our community, which I, I think is important.

268
00:34:36.621 --> 00:34:46.043
<v Eric Zimmerman>You know, there are going to be opportunities, I think, in this next legislative session at the state level, and I think that that is likely to go bigger and farther in terms of the types of things that people buy.

269
00:34:46.956 --> 00:34:49.327
<v Eric Zimmerman>Um, and I think that that will be appropriate for them.

270
00:34:49.697 --> 00:35:06.528
<v Eric Zimmerman>I agree with the sentiment about a patchwork, and I think that the, the ordinance addresses if a patchwork exists that we would be We would be subject to state or federal law if they come about.

271
00:35:06.625 --> 00:35:07.670
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think that's important.

272
00:35:08.420 --> 00:35:17.648
<v Eric Zimmerman>It's also an opportunity for us as Portland moving ahead to set an expectation or a standard, potentially to shape and help the state get it right.

273
00:35:18.275 --> 00:35:22.664
<v Eric Zimmerman>And sometimes we see things at the state move wonderfully, and other times we're left wanting.

274
00:35:22.856 --> 00:35:28.059
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I think this helps us set a tone and an agenda that can be good for the state.

275
00:35:30.106 --> 00:35:38.099
<v Eric Zimmerman>I will not move it now, but I do want to flag it now that you will see in the next item Zimmerman 1 as an amendment.

276
00:35:38.342 --> 00:35:45.815
<v Eric Zimmerman>It adds a single paragraph for a retail price in there and a couple of other administrative word changes.

277
00:35:46.010 --> 00:35:51.402
<v Eric Zimmerman>That is what I will move to replace the existing ordinance.

278
00:35:51.449 --> 00:35:55.902
<v Eric Zimmerman>So a new, a new, I think it's H paragraph, but I wanted you to be aware of that before we go into further discussion.

279
00:35:55.967 --> 00:35:56.146
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you.

280
00:35:59.518 --> 00:36:20.514
<v Eric Zimmerman>But I hope that we're a city who's ready to say that no matter where the technology goes, that when you walk into a grocery store with your cell phone, that the scanner doesn't say, look, it's Eric Zimmerman, let's start setting prices based on him and his specific information because his cell phone walked through the door, and make sure that we continue to set prices based on market and fairness and non-exploitative practices.

281
00:36:20.596 --> 00:36:22.168
<v Eric Zimmerman>So thank you, Chair, for getting us scheduled.

282
00:36:22.327 --> 00:36:33.110
<v Eric Zimmerman>I'm really appreciative to everybody's partnership on this, and I know that Councilor Councilor Smith and Councilor Coimbra Lane have both indicated a desire, a potential desire to add their names as co-sponsors in the future to this.

283
00:36:33.159 --> 00:36:33.784
<v Eric Zimmerman>So thank you.

284
00:36:34.987 --> 00:36:38.983
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor, and thank you to both of our guests for being here today as well.

285
00:36:39.545 --> 00:36:41.695
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Colleagues, we'll move into questions.

286
00:36:41.793 --> 00:36:45.306
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I will note that we do not have anybody signed up for public testimony.

287
00:36:45.596 --> 00:36:50.860
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I also want to note that we have 2 amendments posted, one from Councilor Zimmerman and one from Councilor Murillo.

288
00:36:51.356 --> 00:37:01.864
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Zimmerman, do you prefer Do you prefer to, if your Zimmerman 1 is a replacement, do you prefer to adopt that before we move into discussion or would you like to move into discussion first?

289
00:37:03.278 --> 00:37:04.731
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think that would be most healthy.

290
00:37:04.956 --> 00:37:07.507
<v Eric Zimmerman>Yeah, it's a one add to it.

291
00:37:07.782 --> 00:37:08.523
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think that'd be great.

292
00:37:08.588 --> 00:37:12.172
<v Eric Zimmerman>And then we can just discuss it as it is if we can do that.

293
00:37:12.710 --> 00:37:12.822
<v Luke Zach>Okay.

294
00:37:12.903 --> 00:37:20.085
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And Councilor Murillo, does your amendment, I wanna make sure that we're able to debate your amendment if you plan to move it.

295
00:37:20.759 --> 00:37:24.324
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Is it to the Zimmerman 1 version or the underlying version?

296
00:37:26.019 --> 00:37:32.164
<v Angelita Morillo>For clarity, the new version just amends one line in your current ordinance?

297
00:37:32.422 --> 00:37:33.338
<v Eric Zimmerman>I'm sorry, can you say that again?

298
00:37:35.925 --> 00:37:45.340
<v Eric Zimmerman>It adds F, retail price, and it adjusts a couple of words in the following C.

299
00:37:45.728 --> 00:37:46.052
<v Angelita Morillo>Gotcha.

300
00:37:46.199 --> 00:37:46.523
<v Angelita Morillo>Oh, okay.

301
00:37:46.619 --> 00:37:48.775
<v Angelita Morillo>Sorry, I got confused with what you were saying, Chair.

302
00:37:48.824 --> 00:37:53.748
<v Angelita Morillo>My amendment is to the underlying ordinance, Okay.

303
00:37:55.094 --> 00:38:10.264
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I would suggest in order for us to have this debate that we consider Zimmerman 1, and then if, Councilor, we need to have some conforming language to your amendment, if the body decides to move in that direction, we can work through that.

304
00:38:10.728 --> 00:38:11.467
<v Angelita Morillo>That sounds fine with me.

305
00:38:11.867 --> 00:38:12.027
<v Candace Avalos>Okay.

306
00:38:13.375 --> 00:38:18.025
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So Councilor Zimmerman, if you wanna make that motion before we move to Councilor Murillo, who's in the queue, go right ahead.

307
00:38:18.186 --> 00:38:18.380
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you.

308
00:38:18.429 --> 00:38:19.514
<v Eric Zimmerman>I'd like to move Zimmerman 1.

309
00:38:21.541 --> 00:38:21.849
<v Dan Ryan>Second.

310
00:38:24.150 --> 00:38:32.543
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, colleagues, any debate to Zimmerman 1 so that we can move into debating what our colleague intends to move forward?

311
00:38:34.153 --> 00:38:34.460
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay.

312
00:38:34.733 --> 00:38:38.275
<v Angelita Morillo>Can you, can you just restate quickly what the change does?

313
00:38:38.405 --> 00:38:38.614
<v Dan Ryan>Sure.

314
00:38:39.322 --> 00:38:56.737
<v Eric Zimmerman>So Zimmerman 1 adds a new paragraph F. Retail price means the then-current price of a good offered to a consumer prior to the application of any loyalty or membership of pricing, promotions, limited-time sales, discounts, and fees for premium or additional features.

315
00:38:56.784 --> 00:38:58.585
<v Eric Zimmerman>So that is in the definitions section.

316
00:38:59.597 --> 00:39:02.987
<v Eric Zimmerman>So then the cascading paragraphs all have to adjust by one.

317
00:39:03.983 --> 00:39:16.545
<v Eric Zimmerman>Then in the restrictions and prohibitions paragraph under C, we strike the word available in number 1 and all and add the letter A.

318
00:39:16.641 --> 00:39:16.818
<v Eric Zimmerman>Second.

319
00:39:17.190 --> 00:39:24.014
<v Eric Zimmerman>So offer— offering discounts a consumer through a voluntary loyalty membership rewards program or subscription.

320
00:39:25.275 --> 00:39:33.844
<v Eric Zimmerman>And then the second, number 2 there, offering same changes, offering discounts to a consumer based on etc., etc.

321
00:39:35.125 --> 00:39:51.871
<v Eric Zimmerman>At the very bottom of the document, in the effective date and interaction with other laws, paragraph B, this provision of the chapter will be superseded and unenforceable upon the effective date of any conflicting law passed by the State of Oregon.

322
00:39:52.626 --> 00:39:54.842
<v Eric Zimmerman>And we're inserting a period at the end of State of Oregon.

323
00:39:55.018 --> 00:40:01.168
<v Eric Zimmerman>Currently it has regulating the use of dynamic pricing or surveillance pricing by retail, et cetera, et cetera.

324
00:40:01.617 --> 00:40:06.724
<v Eric Zimmerman>We're striking that to just not be redundant based on the advice of the City Council or City Attorney.

325
00:40:06.789 --> 00:40:06.996
<v Eric Zimmerman>Second.

326
00:40:08.286 --> 00:40:10.163
<v Eric Zimmerman>Those are the— that's the summation of all the changes.

327
00:40:11.630 --> 00:40:11.679
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay.

328
00:40:11.728 --> 00:40:15.228
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Murillo, did you have a question or comments about Zimmerman 1?

329
00:40:16.969 --> 00:40:18.684
<v Angelita Morillo>No, that all sounds fine to me.

330
00:40:18.896 --> 00:40:24.675
<v Angelita Morillo>I think I— so I really like that we are trying to ban surveillance pricing here.

331
00:40:24.951 --> 00:40:26.521
<v Angelita Morillo>I'm very excited about this as a concept.

332
00:40:26.585 --> 00:40:31.034
<v Angelita Morillo>As you know, I'm very into banning AI price fixing overall.

333
00:40:32.974 --> 00:40:37.911
<v Angelita Morillo>I think I have— my amendment has some line-by-line changes.

334
00:40:38.657 --> 00:40:51.184
<v Angelita Morillo>And so I am a little concerned about if I go through this and try to explain it to people, if it has the updated line change that then changes all the lettering, that might be hard for people to follow.

335
00:40:51.621 --> 00:40:53.371
<v Angelita Morillo>But I don't care if other people don't care.

336
00:40:53.548 --> 00:40:55.639
<v Angelita Morillo>I'm just saying that that might make it harder to explain.

337
00:40:58.070 --> 00:41:04.376
<v Angelita Morillo>So up to you guys, but I'm just noting that it might be more difficult to follow, but I have ways of making it easier as well if we can.

338
00:41:04.873 --> 00:41:06.367
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Let's work through that when we get there.

339
00:41:06.719 --> 00:41:06.896
<v Dan Ryan>Okay.

340
00:41:07.121 --> 00:41:12.034
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Um, and let Councilor Zimmerman, since he's bringing this, get to the version he wants.

341
00:41:12.114 --> 00:41:16.804
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And if we need to figure out how to work through the other pieces, we can do that.

342
00:41:17.092 --> 00:41:17.670
<v Angelita Morillo>Okay, no worries.

343
00:41:17.798 --> 00:41:18.954
<v Angelita Morillo>Well, I'm fine with this amendment.

344
00:41:19.019 --> 00:41:19.356
<v Angelita Morillo>Sounds good.

345
00:41:19.405 --> 00:41:20.657
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, great.

346
00:41:21.588 --> 00:41:24.431
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Wendy, we have a motion and a second.

347
00:41:24.478 --> 00:41:27.385
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Could you call the roll on Zimmerman 1, please?

348
00:41:29.157 --> 00:41:32.311
<v Unidentified speaker>And my apologies, can you tell me who moved that?

349
00:41:32.635 --> 00:41:35.353
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Moved by Zimmerman, seconded by Ryan, I believe.

350
00:41:38.211 --> 00:41:40.298
<v Angelita Morillo>Morillo?

351
00:41:40.396 --> 00:41:40.557
<v Angelita Morillo>Aye.

352
00:41:40.800 --> 00:41:41.188
<v Unidentified speaker>Zimmerman?

353
00:41:41.918 --> 00:41:41.998
<v Eric Zimmerman>Aye.

354
00:41:43.130 --> 00:41:43.568
<v Keelan McClymont>Avalos?

355
00:41:43.777 --> 00:41:43.940
<v Candace Avalos>Aye.

356
00:41:44.927 --> 00:41:45.202
<v Keelan McClymont>Ryan?

357
00:41:45.494 --> 00:41:45.541
<v Dan Ryan>Aye.

358
00:41:46.384 --> 00:41:46.918
<v Unidentified speaker>Pirtle-Guiney?

359
00:41:48.918 --> 00:41:48.934
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Aye.

360
00:41:49.097 --> 00:41:52.621
<v Unidentified speaker>Motion to amend the ordinance as shown in Zimmerman 1 passes.

361
00:41:53.527 --> 00:41:53.867
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

362
00:41:54.012 --> 00:42:03.623
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And colleagues, I apologize, as we were having that conversation, we did have somebody in the room sign up So why don't we bring up our testifier and then we'll move into our debate?

363
00:42:04.201 --> 00:42:07.882
<v Eric Zimmerman>Yeah, and I'm going to ask my staff to go print Maria 1 for everybody.

364
00:42:08.090 --> 00:42:08.815
<v Angelita Morillo>I have it printed.

365
00:42:09.025 --> 00:42:09.539
<v Eric Zimmerman>Oh, thank you.

366
00:42:10.248 --> 00:42:12.760
<v Eric Zimmerman>Never mind.

367
00:42:15.239 --> 00:42:19.277
<v Angelita Morillo>Madam Chair, do you want me to explain what my amendment does before the person testifies?

368
00:42:20.360 --> 00:42:20.507
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Sure.

369
00:42:20.621 --> 00:42:24.923
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Why don't we have you walk through the amendment and then before we move into debate, we will hear from our guest testifier.

370
00:42:26.903 --> 00:42:29.240
<v Angelita Morillo>Okay, so I'll be brief for this.

371
00:42:29.436 --> 00:42:33.217
<v Angelita Morillo>It's quite technical, so I apologize for folks who have to follow along.

372
00:42:34.177 --> 00:42:40.721
<v Angelita Morillo>I do have something visually to help make it a little bit easier while we're discussing, but I have an amendment package to introduce.

373
00:42:42.755 --> 00:42:52.594
<v Angelita Morillo>It's to— I want to be clear that it protects discounts and loyalty programs, and it requires that these retailers offer discounts transparently to everyone who is similarly situated.

374
00:42:53.496 --> 00:43:02.697
<v Angelita Morillo>This package basically just aligns us with what other states have done and addresses issues of surveillance pricing in practice and also adds some enforcement mechanisms.

375
00:43:03.130 --> 00:43:05.277
<v Angelita Morillo>So nothing in this limits discounts.

376
00:43:05.695 --> 00:43:08.114
<v Angelita Morillo>It limits discount size from your personal data.

377
00:43:09.141 --> 00:43:13.998
<v Angelita Morillo>And I can get into that further, but I just wanted folks who are coming to testify to have a little bit of background on what that does.

378
00:43:14.831 --> 00:43:17.010
<v Angelita Morillo>And with that, I will pass it off to whoever is coming up.

379
00:43:17.059 --> 00:43:17.331
<v Angelita Morillo>Thanks.

380
00:43:17.460 --> 00:43:17.876
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Great.

381
00:43:17.956 --> 00:43:18.630
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

382
00:43:18.757 --> 00:43:20.472
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Wendy, could you please call our testifier?

383
00:43:21.137 --> 00:43:23.903
<v Unidentified speaker>Rod Pittman, come on up to the dais.

384
00:43:29.809 --> 00:43:30.054
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Welcome.

385
00:43:30.152 --> 00:43:31.478
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you for being here with us today.

386
00:43:33.708 --> 00:43:38.739
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>You want to take a seat and introduce yourself for the record so that our staff have that?

387
00:43:38.931 --> 00:43:42.259
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And then you'll have— are we— what is our clock set at for today?

388
00:43:42.324 --> 00:43:43.184
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>3 minutes, Wendy?

389
00:43:43.525 --> 00:43:48.851
<v Unidentified speaker>It's 3 minutes, and you'll see it as a very small number on the screen in front of you.

390
00:43:50.532 --> 00:43:54.713
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Right down there in front of you, in the middle of the circle.

391
00:43:55.661 --> 00:43:56.161
<v Unidentified speaker>Oh yeah, yeah.

392
00:43:56.304 --> 00:43:56.579
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Perfect.

393
00:43:56.659 --> 00:43:58.137
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So you'll have 3 minutes to go ahead.

394
00:43:59.025 --> 00:44:01.661
<v Eric Zimmerman>I'm gonna do under 60.

395
00:44:03.445 --> 00:44:19.650
<v Eric Zimmerman>I'm Rod Pittman, and I live in the Johns Landing area, but I've lived all over Portland, you know, Downtown, Sellwood, all over Portland.

396
00:44:20.199 --> 00:44:28.824
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I'm just— I just wanted to come and say how grateful that we are that y'all are addressing all of this stuff.

397
00:44:29.693 --> 00:44:58.034
<v Eric Zimmerman>And because if we can get a handle in on this, then we'll be able to do a much better job of getting the potholes and fixed in the police department, or what they need, and make sure that there's no hanky-panky involved being price fixing and things like that.

398
00:44:59.550 --> 00:45:00.804
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you much for your time.

399
00:45:01.163 --> 00:45:01.748
<v Unidentified speaker>Have a great day.

400
00:45:02.679 --> 00:45:04.989
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you so much for being here and for your testimony.

401
00:45:05.054 --> 00:45:06.266
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We appreciate hearing from you.

402
00:45:09.195 --> 00:45:10.248
<v Keelan McClymont>That concludes testimony.

403
00:45:11.380 --> 00:45:13.936
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, colleagues, we will now move into discussion.

404
00:45:15.210 --> 00:45:20.811
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We are at discussion of the underlying, or the now amended, I should say, the now amended ordinance.

405
00:45:22.190 --> 00:45:22.951
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Morillo.

406
00:45:24.731 --> 00:45:27.161
<v Angelita Morillo>Is now the right time to introduce my amendment?

407
00:45:27.467 --> 00:45:27.938
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Go right ahead.

408
00:45:28.358 --> 00:45:29.556
<v Angelita Morillo>Okay, thank you.

409
00:45:31.552 --> 00:45:36.005
<v Angelita Morillo>For folks who are following along online, the amendment was posted online now, so I think you should be able to see that.

410
00:45:36.115 --> 00:45:37.271
<v Angelita Morillo>I'm looking to confirm.

411
00:45:37.672 --> 00:45:39.228
<v Angelita Morillo>Okay, it looks like it is posted online.

412
00:45:40.061 --> 00:45:49.527
<v Angelita Morillo>But for the sake of discussion for our committee, I know that it's quite long and technical, so I have an option to make it a little bit easier to follow my logic.

413
00:45:49.670 --> 00:45:55.510
<v Angelita Morillo>And so I'll share my screen quickly and then go through this quickly and get into discussion.

414
00:45:55.623 --> 00:45:59.168
<v Angelita Morillo>We also have an attorney here who helped us with our amendments.

415
00:45:59.297 --> 00:46:02.536
<v Angelita Morillo>They reviewed them all today, or they reviewed them for a few days.

416
00:46:02.762 --> 00:46:03.972
<v Angelita Morillo>But got final review today.

417
00:46:04.070 --> 00:46:08.507
<v Angelita Morillo>So they're in good standing and just wanted to share that with folks before I get started.

418
00:46:09.460 --> 00:46:12.960
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor, just to clarify, they were reviewed by the City Attorney's Office?

419
00:46:13.331 --> 00:46:13.849
<v Angelita Morillo>Correct, yes.

420
00:46:15.429 --> 00:46:15.606
<v Candace Avalos>Okay.

421
00:46:20.538 --> 00:46:25.135
<v Angelita Morillo>And I hope everyone knows that this is my version of being extremely excited about a policy.

422
00:46:25.248 --> 00:46:29.650
<v Angelita Morillo>So because I really hate price fixing and I really hate AI.

423
00:46:31.786 --> 00:46:34.666
<v Angelita Morillo>I'm trying to see if I can share this slideshow.

424
00:46:34.858 --> 00:46:47.876
<v Angelita Morillo>Looks like it is in— is anyone here for tech support?

425
00:46:47.956 --> 00:46:49.101
<v Angelita Morillo>Can you help me share this slideshow?

426
00:46:49.422 --> 00:46:49.809
<v Angelita Morillo>Thanks.

427
00:46:50.471 --> 00:46:52.244
<v Eric Zimmerman>Yes.

428
00:46:57.338 --> 00:47:18.023
<v Angelita Morillo>Oh, thank you.

429
00:47:18.235 --> 00:47:19.079
<v Eric Zimmerman>I can share this board then.

430
00:47:19.518 --> 00:47:19.858
<v Angelita Morillo>Perfect.

431
00:47:19.907 --> 00:47:20.460
<v Angelita Morillo>Thank you so much.

432
00:47:21.289 --> 00:47:39.471
<v Angelita Morillo>Um, okay, I'll go, I'll go through this quickly because I want to make sure we have time to actually discuss it and go through So surveillance pricing, as we've discussed, it targets different prices at individual consumers, and they do that by using people's private information, and that is called individualized or first-degree price discrimination.

433
00:47:40.483 --> 00:47:49.809
<v Angelita Morillo>So the things that we know that they are collecting on us are what we buy, your debt, where you live, what phone you use, all of those types of things.

434
00:47:49.873 --> 00:47:55.443
<v Angelita Morillo>And we know that, for example, Kroger has profiles that run to 62 pages per household, so a lot of data on people.

435
00:47:55.507 --> 00:48:09.891
<v Angelita Morillo>And what they can infer from that data So they can literally target even your emotional well-being to figure out when to push a product to you.

436
00:48:10.458 --> 00:48:16.710
<v Angelita Morillo>And they can set your price or your discount or your fee to what the model says you as a consumer are going to tolerate.

437
00:48:17.320 --> 00:48:23.184
<v Angelita Morillo>So if you can afford it, or if you're willing to pay more for an item, they have all of that data collected on you to actually push that forward.

438
00:48:23.248 --> 00:48:23.427
<v Angelita Morillo>Thank you.

439
00:48:24.356 --> 00:48:33.974
<v Angelita Morillo>A lot of these companies consume as many as 2,000 different data points on customers to aggregate this and give you your own individual specific price.

440
00:48:36.099 --> 00:48:38.755
<v Angelita Morillo>So are discounts surveillance pricing?

441
00:48:39.027 --> 00:48:42.762
<v Angelita Morillo>I think coupons is a big question that we have in this policy that I want to address.

442
00:48:43.820 --> 00:48:46.731
<v Angelita Morillo>Third-degree price discrimination has always been allowed.

443
00:48:47.992 --> 00:48:50.516
<v Angelita Morillo>It's not surveillance pricing even if personal information is involved.

444
00:48:50.565 --> 00:48:51.034
<v Angelita Morillo>I think that's a good point.

445
00:48:51.487 --> 00:48:57.460
<v Angelita Morillo>So we've always had things like senior, student, or veteran discounts that are in the form of coupons.

446
00:48:57.893 --> 00:49:00.766
<v Angelita Morillo>And those are permissible because they are publicly advertised.

447
00:49:00.847 --> 00:49:02.356
<v Angelita Morillo>So everyone has access to this.

448
00:49:03.271 --> 00:49:11.344
<v Angelita Morillo>Broad consumer segments can access this without having their individual data scrubbed and added into a dataset to be given to them.

449
00:49:11.922 --> 00:49:18.632
<v Angelita Morillo>So the reason that these types of discounts and coupons work is because there is transparency to who they are given to and why.

450
00:49:19.228 --> 00:49:25.864
<v Angelita Morillo>And they're equally applied, which is very different from what we see with these retailers who are aggregating people's data.

451
00:49:27.177 --> 00:49:34.126
<v Angelita Morillo>So the question is that personal data should decide whether you qualify for a public offer, but not how much you individually get.

452
00:49:36.077 --> 00:49:36.934
<v Angelita Morillo>This is just a slide.

453
00:49:36.981 --> 00:49:49.998
<v Angelita Morillo>I won't go through each individual example, but it shows the different offerings that were given to different people based on their own data, experiences, background, et cetera, and the prices that they're willing to tolerate, and I think that's important for us to take a look at.

454
00:49:52.010 --> 00:50:00.541
<v Angelita Morillo>So surveillance discounting is another form of first-degree price discrimination where retailers engage in surveillance pricing, but it's presented as a discount.

455
00:50:00.621 --> 00:50:09.233
<v Angelita Morillo>So people tend to not fight it as much because they don't realize that technically someone else could be getting a better discount or a worse discount based on who they are and what data the company has on them.

456
00:50:10.235 --> 00:50:13.407
<v Angelita Morillo>And that's distributed on an individual basis with their personal data.

457
00:50:15.009 --> 00:50:21.918
<v Angelita Morillo>So the question for me in this policy is, do we regulate individual— do we regulate individualized surveillance discounts?

458
00:50:22.385 --> 00:50:29.175
<v Angelita Morillo>And I think my opinion is that yes, we do have to regulate that as well because it is based on personal data.

459
00:50:29.561 --> 00:50:49.255
<v Angelita Morillo>So whenever individual in a market is offered a different discount based on their willingness and ability to pay, that means that that discount— retailers can show any price as the base that's a form of price discrimination that I want to make sure is accounted for here.

460
00:50:50.699 --> 00:50:57.222
<v Angelita Morillo>So the benefits of regulating surveillance discounting include protecting prices that are predictable, transparent, and fair.

461
00:51:00.184 --> 00:51:06.045
<v Angelita Morillo>Here is another example of what different— what the same shoppers are getting for the same product.

462
00:51:06.092 --> 00:51:18.253
<v Angelita Morillo>I think it's important to note that So under the Zimmerman 1 option, an app that shows you something for $6.49 for an item, another shopper might see for $5.99.

463
00:51:18.931 --> 00:51:22.684
<v Angelita Morillo>Under Councilor Zimmerman's ordinance, it's banned but hard to catch.

464
00:51:22.876 --> 00:51:25.632
<v Angelita Morillo>There's no records of duty, no guarantee of enforcement.

465
00:51:26.326 --> 00:51:28.907
<v Angelita Morillo>With my amendments, it's banned and enforceable.

466
00:51:29.407 --> 00:51:32.005
<v Angelita Morillo>A retail price cannot be based on personal data.

467
00:51:32.070 --> 00:51:32.199
<v Angelita Morillo>Thank you.

468
00:51:33.855 --> 00:51:38.474
<v Angelita Morillo>Under the original ordinance, if there's another example, you and your neighbors see different prices.

469
00:51:39.132 --> 00:51:41.650
<v Angelita Morillo>When caught, the company calls it pricing test.

470
00:51:42.981 --> 00:51:45.820
<v Angelita Morillo>Under the current ordinance, it's not very clearly banned.

471
00:51:46.028 --> 00:51:50.889
<v Angelita Morillo>Only a price based on your personal data is covered, and the company will say a pricing test is not.

472
00:51:51.722 --> 00:51:54.193
<v Angelita Morillo>Under my amendments, it is banned.

473
00:51:54.706 --> 00:52:00.945
<v Angelita Morillo>There are different prices for different shoppers, different prices for different shoppers, whether the reason is your data or a coin flip.

474
00:52:01.137 --> 00:52:02.132
<v Angelita Morillo>Is all banned.

475
00:52:03.289 --> 00:52:05.746
<v Angelita Morillo>Under the third example, the shelf price is $4.99.

476
00:52:06.179 --> 00:52:09.005
<v Angelita Morillo>The app shows you $5.99 with a dollar off.

477
00:52:09.856 --> 00:52:13.132
<v Angelita Morillo>You pay $4.99 with others paying $4.49.

478
00:52:14.110 --> 00:52:15.974
<v Angelita Morillo>Under the current ordinance, that's exempt.

479
00:52:16.134 --> 00:52:19.554
<v Angelita Morillo>Individual consumers can be offered different discounts or different prices.

480
00:52:20.052 --> 00:52:22.331
<v Angelita Morillo>Under my amendments, that is also banned.

481
00:52:23.135 --> 00:52:26.474
<v Angelita Morillo>So surveillance discounting is not permitted for the reasons that we went over earlier.

482
00:52:26.523 --> 00:52:26.699
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

483
00:52:27.197 --> 00:52:34.467
<v Angelita Morillo>And my last example, you get 50 cents off and your neighbor gets a dollar off the same item because a model says that you'll pay more.

484
00:52:35.798 --> 00:52:43.117
<v Angelita Morillo>The current ordinance exempts it by text discounts to a consumer through a voluntary loyalty program.

485
00:52:44.224 --> 00:52:55.876
<v Angelita Morillo>Under mine, that's banned as well because we have seen that certain states are viewing this voluntary data sharing as a loophole that retailers are able to use to continue to collect people's data.

486
00:52:55.925 --> 00:52:56.052
<v Candace Avalos>Thank you.

487
00:52:58.005 --> 00:53:12.934
<v Angelita Morillo>This gives into more examples of what our amendments do, but basically I am just going through line by line and strengthening some of the language and making sure that there aren't loopholes that retailers can use to continue collecting people's data.

488
00:53:15.347 --> 00:53:21.708
<v Angelita Morillo>So I will let folks just read through that on their own time because I want to make sure we're not taking up too much time here.

489
00:53:24.056 --> 00:53:27.106
<v Angelita Morillo>So I want to talk about what stays the same very quickly in this amendment list.

490
00:53:27.235 --> 00:53:33.114
<v Angelita Morillo>The amendments democratize and protect discounts while offering protections to consumers from surveillance discounts.

491
00:53:33.498 --> 00:53:38.606
<v Angelita Morillo>So people who are seniors, students, teachers, veterans, and youth can still get discounts.

492
00:53:39.601 --> 00:53:43.762
<v Angelita Morillo>Coupons, sales, price matching, and rebates— everyone can still get those.

493
00:53:44.740 --> 00:53:50.771
<v Angelita Morillo>Loyalty and rewards programs are still permissible as long as all members are treated equally.

494
00:53:52.679 --> 00:53:56.222
<v Angelita Morillo>Cheaper delivery when you live closer to the store is still available.

495
00:53:56.737 --> 00:54:00.876
<v Angelita Morillo>Pricing error corrections and credits when an order goes wrong, still available.

496
00:54:01.552 --> 00:54:06.831
<v Angelita Morillo>And any sales seasonal prices and prices that rise or fall for everyone are also still permissible.

497
00:54:09.217 --> 00:54:14.030
<v Angelita Morillo>And if folks want a list of our research that we did, we also spoke with a lot of consumer justice thank you.

498
00:54:14.030 --> 00:54:17.389
<v Angelita Morillo>We've also been working with a number of civil rights and social justice organizations to get some of their feedback about what they're seeing.

499
00:54:18.048 --> 00:54:19.800
<v Angelita Morillo>So you can go through some of that if you're interested.

500
00:54:20.769 --> 00:54:26.420
<v Angelita Morillo>I know that Seattle, in their policy, they've been working with over 40 organizations to have these discussions.

501
00:54:27.010 --> 00:54:32.030
<v Angelita Morillo>Antitrust law is very complicated, as we recall from the AI price fixing ban.

502
00:54:32.630 --> 00:54:38.829
<v Angelita Morillo>And so I hope you'll bear with me as we go through all of this, but I'm very excited about this and looking forward to collaborating on it.

503
00:54:38.829 --> 00:54:39.440
<v Angelita Morillo>Thank you.

504
00:54:42.159 --> 00:54:42.882
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

505
00:54:42.961 --> 00:54:49.365
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Is that presentation available to be posted so that folks can look at it?

506
00:54:49.461 --> 00:54:55.320
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And is it clear that it comes from your office so that anybody pulling it up online knows that?

507
00:54:56.668 --> 00:54:57.969
<v Angelita Morillo>It will be available to be posted.

508
00:54:58.048 --> 00:55:05.159
<v Angelita Morillo>They're going to post it right after this committee, and we can make sure that it has our office's information in case anyone has further questions.

509
00:55:05.416 --> 00:55:07.005
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Great, thank you very much.

510
00:55:07.422 --> 00:55:08.418
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

511
00:55:08.626 --> 00:55:11.197
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Um, are you formally moving the amendment?

512
00:55:12.561 --> 00:55:15.516
<v Angelita Morillo>Um, yes, I would like to move this amendment package forward.

513
00:55:15.949 --> 00:55:16.864
<v Angelita Morillo>We can call it Morillo 1.

514
00:55:17.458 --> 00:55:17.876
<v Candace Avalos>Second.

515
00:55:18.132 --> 00:55:23.864
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, uh, with a motion and a second, we're now in discussion to the amendment.

516
00:55:23.978 --> 00:55:26.065
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Is there any discussion to the amendment?

517
00:55:32.487 --> 00:55:32.728
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay.

518
00:55:33.273 --> 00:55:33.385
<v Angelita Morillo>Yeah.

519
00:55:33.786 --> 00:55:35.103
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I'll jump in with a question.

520
00:55:35.360 --> 00:55:38.362
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Um, this is a question actually, Councilor Zimmerman, for you.

521
00:55:38.585 --> 00:55:59.050
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>One of the things that Councilor Murillo showed in those examples that we ran through there were situations where a consumer could pay a higher price than the advertised price or the listed price because there was a price listed or advertised and then a higher price sent to you on an app with a discount that still put it higher.

522
00:55:59.693 --> 00:56:22.237
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Does your underlying— and I, I'm sorry, I just wasn't able to find it going through quickly, so I'm hoping you can direct me more quickly than I can find it myself— does your underlying specify that discounts, um, that, that an advertised price must be the same, or that discounts must be taken from an advertised price?

523
00:56:22.992 --> 00:56:29.740
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I'm wondering if those scenarios are actually Thank you.

524
00:56:30.641 --> 00:56:37.260
<v Eric Zimmerman>Staff, weigh in here if you have it, but I think that where that question is most perfectly addressed is probably in the new F that we just adopted.

525
00:56:37.356 --> 00:56:49.793
<v Eric Zimmerman>Retail price means the then-current price of a good offered to a consumer prior to the application of a loyalty or membership pricing, promotions, limited-time sales, discounts, and fees for premium or additional features.

526
00:56:50.452 --> 00:56:50.822
<v Unidentified speaker>Thank you.

527
00:56:51.916 --> 00:56:52.405
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, so with—.

528
00:56:52.405 --> 00:56:53.170
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think that's what addresses it.

529
00:56:53.708 --> 00:56:57.440
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>F, thank you, because I thought I had seen something here and couldn't find it.

530
00:57:02.927 --> 00:57:07.164
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Um, okay, offered to a consumer.

531
00:57:09.972 --> 00:57:16.034
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So you don't talk about advertised prices at all, but we do with F start to get at those concerns, it looks like.

532
00:57:18.005 --> 00:57:18.391
<v Luke Zach>If I may.

533
00:57:19.273 --> 00:57:21.425
<v Luke Zach>Luke Zach with Councilor Zimmerman, for the record.

534
00:57:22.726 --> 00:57:31.570
<v Luke Zach>The question that you had, we had earlier versions that talked about advertised pricing and stuff along the lines with that.

535
00:57:31.652 --> 00:57:46.244
<v Luke Zach>But what we wanted to get at here with including the definition for the retail price, and it differs from Councilor Murillo's amendment in that our definition of retail price talks about it before there's any sort of applied discounts, any promotional fees, anything like that.

536
00:57:46.356 --> 00:57:46.420
<v Luke Zach>Okay.

537
00:57:48.010 --> 00:57:58.431
<v Luke Zach>And we found that was important, and we heard feedback that it was important to set a starting point for the conversation so there isn't a sort of logical loop of trying to figure out what the retail price is.

538
00:57:59.009 --> 00:58:08.016
<v Luke Zach>And that is important, especially around the dynamic pricing restriction that we talk about, making sure that that is the price that can only increase once a calendar day.

539
00:58:08.643 --> 00:58:08.884
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Got it.

540
00:58:09.061 --> 00:58:09.639
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, thank you.

541
00:58:09.686 --> 00:58:12.014
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>That's really helpful understanding how it ties into that piece.

542
00:58:13.262 --> 00:58:14.489
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Zimmerman, go right ahead.

543
00:58:16.699 --> 00:58:29.831
<v Eric Zimmerman>Chair, I was wondering, since we had 2 of our invited expert testimony, I, I'm digesting this in real time as much as you all are, um, and I'm, I'm interested if you would entertain them coming back to the dais.

544
00:58:30.608 --> 00:58:33.934
<v Eric Zimmerman>I'd like to understand their take on both of these, or from both of them.

545
00:58:34.592 --> 00:58:36.793
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I would be happy to have them come back up.

546
00:58:37.003 --> 00:58:39.139
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Um, Mr. Salvaggio, Ms.

547
00:58:39.188 --> 00:58:46.452
<v Angelita Morillo>Dalton, if either of you have can we also have Attorney Matt Gander come up?

548
00:58:47.692 --> 00:58:51.233
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Let's hear from these 2 individuals, and then I'm happy to have the attorney come up as well.

549
00:58:53.719 --> 00:58:56.246
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Yeah, I think this request was to hear from the speakers.

550
00:58:57.077 --> 00:58:59.048
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Happy to make sure we can hear from the attorney next.

551
00:59:02.980 --> 00:59:07.612
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I'm guessing if we're all just seeing this that you are as well, but if you have any initial thoughts on the document, we can go through it.

552
00:59:08.913 --> 00:59:15.195
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>How this would work on the ground from either of your perspectives, that would be great.

553
00:59:16.079 --> 00:59:18.561
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Mr. Salvaggio, do you wanna start since you spoke first prior?

554
00:59:19.195 --> 00:59:19.536
<v Michael Salvaggio>Sure.

555
00:59:20.411 --> 00:59:22.407
<v Michael Salvaggio>Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the committee.

556
00:59:23.235 --> 00:59:28.436
<v Michael Salvaggio>Again, for the record, Michael Salvaggio representing United Food and Commercial Workers Local 555.

557
00:59:29.619 --> 00:59:37.106
<v Michael Salvaggio>I apologize that I haven't had a significant amount of time To review the Morillo 1 amendments.

558
00:59:38.867 --> 00:59:51.835
<v Michael Salvaggio>But I do want to say firstly that I appreciate Councilor Morillo's very robust analysis.

559
00:59:55.998 --> 01:00:42.563
<v Michael Salvaggio>I'm— I would say that I'm a little concerned in that I— there's a lot to unpack here because there's so much more being added, and I wouldn't want to get into a situation in which we had missed a particularly relevant cross-reference effect, such as there's a reference to, I think in here somewhere, in the definitions where it says any business or agent that sells consumer goods to consumers, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

560
01:00:42.789 --> 01:00:52.842
<v Michael Salvaggio>And I get exactly what the point of that is, in that we don't want a business to say, well, that was really our third-party agent that did that, so our hands are clean.

561
01:00:52.958 --> 01:00:53.041
<v Candace Avalos>Right.

562
01:00:53.856 --> 01:01:07.101
<v Michael Salvaggio>Having said that, it brings up the question for me, how many other areas in the business code don't have or agent after them and yet are just generally accepted to apply to agents?

563
01:01:07.887 --> 01:01:19.802
<v Michael Salvaggio>And I would not want to list that here and then create an implication that part of the business code that did not include that did not include such third-party agents.

564
01:01:21.300 --> 01:01:30.894
<v Michael Salvaggio>That's an example of the type of cross-reference that I would need more time to really dig into before having a solid analysis.

565
01:01:32.000 --> 01:01:54.394
<v Michael Salvaggio>I will say generally with regard to private right of action, although there are areas where my colleague in the grocery industry and I agree and there are areas where we disagree, We will be having a vibrant back and forth at the state level on private right of action, I'm sure.

566
01:01:56.177 --> 01:02:07.588
<v Michael Salvaggio>And I think that that is where we would rather have it as opposed to creating individualized rights of action for a number of cities and counties.

567
01:02:11.356 --> 01:02:14.405
<v Michael Salvaggio>So again, There's a lot to unpack here.

568
01:02:15.096 --> 01:02:37.208
<v Michael Salvaggio>I would need to think very carefully about some of the unintended effects of this, but also the subsection C exemptions in 728.030, I think, involve a lot of unpacking.

569
01:02:37.402 --> 01:02:46.478
<v Michael Salvaggio>For example, we were talking about can discounts be given to people based on certain factors that are more or less than other people?

570
01:02:47.295 --> 01:02:58.411
<v Michael Salvaggio>And initially in subsection C, it says that the restrictions applied at discounts so long as dot, dot, dot, they're of equal value to all who qualify.

571
01:02:58.780 --> 01:03:03.833
<v Michael Salvaggio>But then in sub-sub-2, we see where tiered discount programs exist.

572
01:03:04.474 --> 01:03:13.197
<v Michael Salvaggio>And it says that you can give different tiers of discounts based on prior purchase history.

573
01:03:14.070 --> 01:03:17.233
<v Michael Salvaggio>I just frankly don't know how to parse that without being an attorney at this point.

574
01:03:18.539 --> 01:03:26.855
<v Michael Salvaggio>And so I think we would wanna take this back and subject it to some more scrutiny before rendering a final opinion on it.

575
01:03:26.918 --> 01:03:30.972
<v Michael Salvaggio>But I would rather have the private right of action discussion in Salem.

576
01:03:33.856 --> 01:03:34.322
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

577
01:03:34.594 --> 01:03:35.190
<v Unidentified speaker>Ms. Dalton.

578
01:03:35.543 --> 01:03:40.007
<v Unidentified speaker>Chair Pearl Guiney and members of committee, Amanda Dalton on behalf of the Northwest Grocery Retailer Association.

579
01:03:40.119 --> 01:03:46.672
<v Unidentified speaker>Unfortunately, we're also seeing this in a bit of real time— actually, not in a bit, we really are seeing this in real time.

580
01:03:46.929 --> 01:03:53.739
<v Unidentified speaker>Um, and but I can share a couple of things, primarily because it looks very similar to the language that City of Seattle is considering right at this moment.

581
01:03:54.398 --> 01:03:58.815
<v Unidentified speaker>And so I will echo my concerns that I have been echoing to that council for the last 3 months.

582
01:03:59.617 --> 01:04:15.101
<v Unidentified speaker>Specifically, the most concerning language in the proposed amendment before you is the inclusion of, um, a new C in 0.030 and this requirement that discounts are provided of equal value to all who qualify.

583
01:04:15.983 --> 01:04:18.467
<v Unidentified speaker>That's just not how loyalty programs and discounts work.

584
01:04:19.253 --> 01:04:21.771
<v Unidentified speaker>If you provide equally to all, you're lowering prices for all.

585
01:04:21.835 --> 01:04:22.652
<v Unidentified speaker>That's not a discount.

586
01:04:22.780 --> 01:04:23.871
<v Unidentified speaker>That's not a loyalty program.

587
01:04:23.998 --> 01:04:25.168
<v Unidentified speaker>That's not a membership program.

588
01:04:25.746 --> 01:04:29.625
<v Unidentified speaker>As we have said to that council, that is way— the way that these grocers stay in business.

589
01:04:29.688 --> 01:04:30.554
<v Unidentified speaker>They compete against each other.

590
01:04:30.603 --> 01:04:30.715
<v Unidentified speaker>Thank you.

591
01:04:31.757 --> 01:04:35.188
<v Unidentified speaker>That's how these large union stores compete against non-union stores.

592
01:04:36.597 --> 01:04:53.222
<v Unidentified speaker>So I will say specifically that language alone and the changes presented in this red line compared to the carefully crafted exceptions in Zimmerman 1 give us immediate significant concern that I imagine I could get much more for you once it's kind of thrown through the attorneys' reviews.

593
01:04:53.349 --> 01:05:15.050
<v Unidentified speaker>I can also flag for you, as you continue to go further on the enforcement and penalties, there's a massive new recordkeeping burden you're putting on small and 3 years attached to every single discount and coupon our stores provide is a massive recordkeeping undertaking, especially with a new private right of action with a $1 million cap.

594
01:05:15.146 --> 01:05:17.519
<v Unidentified speaker>It's exactly what we're looking at at the City of Seattle.

595
01:05:18.034 --> 01:05:23.248
<v Unidentified speaker>You put a million-dollar cap on every single product in our stores without giving us the opportunity to cure.

596
01:05:23.889 --> 01:05:26.376
<v Unidentified speaker>And again, I want you to keep in mind, this is language you're looking at.

597
01:05:26.472 --> 01:05:27.130
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Seattle—.

598
01:05:27.563 --> 01:05:28.815
<v Unidentified speaker>City of Seattle is looking at the same.

599
01:05:29.440 --> 01:05:31.318
<v Unidentified speaker>Seattle's exempted small grocers under 20 stores.

600
01:05:31.367 --> 01:05:31.639
<v Unidentified speaker>That's not true.

601
01:05:32.059 --> 01:05:35.304
<v Unidentified speaker>You have no similar exception in what you're looking at right now.

602
01:05:35.385 --> 01:05:40.842
<v Unidentified speaker>So you are looking at a large private right of action on every single retailer, regardless of size.

603
01:05:42.545 --> 01:05:45.485
<v Unidentified speaker>And given that, you scroll down to the bottom, private right of action.

604
01:05:45.677 --> 01:05:54.418
<v Unidentified speaker>I read that very quickly as private rights of action are allowed to be pursued even if the city found no violation to have occurred in sub 1.

605
01:05:55.094 --> 01:05:59.077
<v Unidentified speaker>And then I see a different statutory minimum for a violation the city did find.

606
01:05:59.255 --> 01:05:59.496
<v Lauren Johnson>So—.

607
01:05:59.500 --> 01:06:09.021
<v Unidentified speaker>So that essentially is a double enforcement, allowing a private right of action, a civil lawsuit to be pursued against the grocer separate from a city finding.

608
01:06:09.068 --> 01:06:11.650
<v Unidentified speaker>And so I think that that's by far punitive.

609
01:06:11.697 --> 01:06:30.806
<v Unidentified speaker>And then lastly, and probably most significantly, you heard a lot from us about this earlier, it completely stripes out the preemption and makes this standalone and then run counter to anything that's then adopted at the statewide, putting your Portland area grocers at a significant disadvantage in complying with both at the same time.

610
01:06:30.934 --> 01:06:34.498
<v Unidentified speaker>And so we would ask you not to consider and adopt this amendment today.

611
01:06:35.525 --> 01:06:36.264
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you, Chair.

612
01:06:36.795 --> 01:06:41.306
<v Eric Zimmerman>Um, I'm gonna listen to the rest of the questions, but I appreciate— that's it for my questions right now.

613
01:06:41.387 --> 01:06:41.692
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you.

614
01:06:42.092 --> 01:06:46.829
<v Angelita Morillo>Chair, since this was about my amendments, can I respond to any of that or no?

615
01:06:47.086 --> 01:06:51.501
<v Angelita Morillo>And also, I do want to clarify that, um, committee is the place to bring amendments.

616
01:06:51.663 --> 01:06:56.400
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So, um, I was gonna say that Councilor Ryan was in the queue next.

617
01:06:57.282 --> 01:06:59.610
<v Dan Ryan>I wanted to hear those that were in support.

618
01:06:59.914 --> 01:07:01.760
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, so Councilor Morillo, you are—.

619
01:07:01.760 --> 01:07:02.498
<v Dan Ryan>I just saw this.

620
01:07:03.621 --> 01:07:10.362
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>You are next in the queue, so why don't we turn it to you, and you are welcome to ask any additional questions of our guests as well.

621
01:07:11.326 --> 01:07:13.460
<v Angelita Morillo>Okay, so there was a lot said.

622
01:07:13.653 --> 01:07:29.539
<v Angelita Morillo>First of all, Mr. Salvaggio, really appreciate you guys working on this, and I think you're right, there is a lot to unpack because antitrust law is horrifically complicated, and I feel like me and my team became thank you.

623
01:07:29.925 --> 01:07:32.956
<v Angelita Morillo>I'm very interested in this area of policy.

624
01:07:34.030 --> 01:07:41.215
<v Angelita Morillo>Regarding Councilor Pirtle-Guiney's question on reference price and the Zimmerman 1 definition, it's per person.

625
01:07:41.711 --> 01:07:44.148
<v Angelita Morillo>So the quote is offered to a consumer.

626
01:07:44.679 --> 01:07:49.201
<v Angelita Morillo>Your retail price and your neighbors can differ, so there's nothing to compare yours to.

627
01:07:49.650 --> 01:07:51.958
<v Angelita Morillo>Every real baseline is defined against the public.

628
01:07:52.730 --> 01:07:57.512
<v Angelita Morillo>So in other spaces, it's advertised to the public on a regular basis.

629
01:07:57.626 --> 01:08:00.547
<v Angelita Morillo>New York says openly and actively offered to the public.

630
01:08:00.884 --> 01:08:03.742
<v Angelita Morillo>New Jersey's version says regular course of business.

631
01:08:04.271 --> 01:08:06.036
<v Angelita Morillo>It's the number before the discount.

632
01:08:07.257 --> 01:08:11.494
<v Angelita Morillo>So what we have here is that it's secret.

633
01:08:12.362 --> 01:08:18.172
<v Angelita Morillo>Nothing in the current underlying ordinance requires the retail price to be posted, disclosed, or recorded.

634
01:08:18.637 --> 01:08:20.275
<v Angelita Morillo>It exists only in the company's system.

635
01:08:20.387 --> 01:08:48.100
<v Angelita Morillo>So the baseline is whatever the retailer says I would also say that as far as the concern about small retailers, small and independent retailers don't have the complex data mining operations that companies like Kroger use to do individualized discounting and are at a substantial disadvantage to larger competitors that use data to set their prices based on what they know about you and your preferences as a consumer.

636
01:08:48.516 --> 01:09:02.661
<v Angelita Morillo>So the result of that is that small retailers either lose out or they feel compelled to sell through online platforms and third-party pricing services that price discriminate, denying their ability to independently price goods and services.

637
01:09:03.719 --> 01:09:09.154
<v Angelita Morillo>So the reason we are doing this is it does actually protect small retailers.

638
01:09:09.266 --> 01:09:10.212
<v Angelita Morillo>It's much better for them.

639
01:09:10.854 --> 01:09:21.329
<v Angelita Morillo>And we are pushing for the private right of action because Exhibit A, barred any private right of action, the city will not see most of this.

640
01:09:21.523 --> 01:09:23.850
<v Angelita Morillo>The overcharged shopper is the one with the receipt.

641
01:09:24.368 --> 01:09:31.515
<v Angelita Morillo>Seattle's mayor's office to its council said this is a violation that will have different levels of visibility.

642
01:09:31.627 --> 01:09:37.173
<v Angelita Morillo>So a private right of action as an accountability mechanism is an important part of this implementation process.

643
01:09:41.246 --> 01:09:41.378
<v Angelita Morillo>I—.

644
01:09:41.659 --> 01:09:46.177
<v Angelita Morillo>And I'm really happy to engage more with folks on Discounting and loyalty terms.

645
01:09:46.257 --> 01:09:49.838
<v Angelita Morillo>But to start, every comparator says the same thing.

646
01:09:50.497 --> 01:09:53.917
<v Angelita Morillo>New York says, quote, offered uniformly to any consumer.

647
01:09:54.703 --> 01:09:59.311
<v Angelita Morillo>New Jersey offered to— based upon those conditions, etc.

648
01:09:59.408 --> 01:10:01.864
<v Angelita Morillo>There's a lot of different states that are passing policies around this.

649
01:10:02.010 --> 01:10:07.195
<v Angelita Morillo>So what I'm offering is actually more in line with what's being done in other places as well.

650
01:10:07.837 --> 01:10:08.192
<v Angelita Morillo>Thanks.

651
01:10:08.881 --> 01:10:09.685
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

652
01:10:12.224 --> 01:10:13.256
<v Michael Salvaggio>Sorry, was that a question?

653
01:10:13.797 --> 01:10:14.978
<v Angelita Morillo>I'm not sure.

654
01:10:17.238 --> 01:10:20.162
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I don't— I think that was a statement, not a question.

655
01:10:20.533 --> 01:10:22.974
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor, did you want a— was that a question?

656
01:10:23.021 --> 01:10:24.314
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Did you want a response from our guests?

657
01:10:25.350 --> 01:10:28.798
<v Angelita Morillo>Um, no, no, I just— appreciation for you being here.

658
01:10:29.088 --> 01:10:33.542
<v Angelita Morillo>And yeah, I think that this is a lot to dig into, and I'm glad that we have committees to do that when—.

659
01:10:33.542 --> 01:10:35.885
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, Councilor Ryan.

660
01:10:36.836 --> 01:10:39.868
<v Dan Ryan>Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Councilor Zimmerman, for bringing overarching.

661
01:10:40.449 --> 01:10:47.390
<v Dan Ryan>I have been following this, and what I really appreciated is how you're working with industry so that this could actually be implemented.

662
01:10:48.634 --> 01:10:50.351
<v Dan Ryan>I like that it's proactive for consumers.

663
01:10:51.971 --> 01:10:53.421
<v Dan Ryan>And so anyway, I was all there.

664
01:10:55.716 --> 01:11:04.101
<v Dan Ryan>I did have a pause like others that just saw this in this meeting, and that that I add caution.

665
01:11:04.359 --> 01:11:12.796
<v Dan Ryan>And so I appreciate that those who are closest to the impact are sharing their point of view on the item.

666
01:11:13.560 --> 01:11:22.024
<v Dan Ryan>So I heard enough to know that I won't be supporting the amendment today, but I'm excited to support the overarching— the amendment that we're discussing now.

667
01:11:22.268 --> 01:11:22.511
<v Dan Ryan>Thanks.

668
01:11:25.731 --> 01:11:26.493
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

669
01:11:28.161 --> 01:11:29.850
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Morillo, I'm going to go to Councilor Avalos.

670
01:11:29.948 --> 01:11:30.663
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>She hasn't spoken yet.

671
01:11:30.778 --> 01:11:31.882
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Go right ahead, Councilor Avalos.

672
01:11:34.770 --> 01:11:35.529
<v Candace Avalos>Thank you.

673
01:11:37.569 --> 01:11:42.472
<v Candace Avalos>Okay, trying to parse out what my questions are.

674
01:11:49.274 --> 01:11:59.944
<v Candace Avalos>Um, I think what I'm wanting to understand is I think where I'm getting myself confused, I'm like trying to react to the amendment, but then some of my question might be to the underlying.

675
01:12:00.010 --> 01:12:01.277
<v Candace Avalos>So I'm just going to ask and see where it lands.

676
01:12:03.466 --> 01:12:04.162
<v Candace Avalos>Okay.

677
01:12:04.260 --> 01:12:20.667
<v Candace Avalos>Um, so as it relates to surveillance versus dynamic pricing, um, I guess I just want to better understand, uh, like what we're regulating, right?

678
01:12:20.716 --> 01:12:28.393
<v Candace Avalos>So we've got It seems like there's 2 separate things, surveillance pricing and, and, um, dynamic pricing, right?

679
01:12:28.813 --> 01:12:35.854
<v Candace Avalos>And so for the dynamic side, a retailer can change a price because of supply and demand, inventory, etc.

680
01:12:36.563 --> 01:12:44.125
<v Candace Avalos>Um, so, and every customer is seeing the same price under dynamic pricing.

681
01:12:45.032 --> 01:12:55.207
<v Candace Avalos>Um, so what is the consumer protection, I guess, rationale for the city limiting how frequently that I'm just trying to understand the in-a-day part and what that means.

682
01:12:55.961 --> 01:12:56.810
<v Eric Zimmerman>That is a great question.

683
01:12:57.707 --> 01:13:01.363
<v Eric Zimmerman>So I'm also— I'm going to answer it first, and then if staff, if I miss anything, please weigh in.

684
01:13:01.426 --> 01:13:11.109
<v Eric Zimmerman>So the great question, because we all understand that I'm using the grocery store idea that something might have to move, right?

685
01:13:11.252 --> 01:13:12.775
<v Eric Zimmerman>You got a product, it's time to move it.

686
01:13:12.952 --> 01:13:16.527
<v Eric Zimmerman>You know, you've got like tomatoes need to be moved.

687
01:13:16.719 --> 01:13:17.921
<v Eric Zimmerman>Moving prices makes sense.

688
01:13:18.466 --> 01:13:24.840
<v Eric Zimmerman>Or that you're coming up on, you know, at the end of the day, you like to discount things to get them out.

689
01:13:24.967 --> 01:13:25.835
<v Eric Zimmerman>Okay, got that.

690
01:13:27.231 --> 01:13:31.132
<v Eric Zimmerman>Dynamic pricing in and of itself is not an overarching concern.

691
01:13:31.324 --> 01:13:36.286
<v Eric Zimmerman>Dynamic pricing, while surveillance becomes part of the market, becomes a concern.

692
01:13:36.445 --> 01:13:47.582
<v Eric Zimmerman>Meaning, if dynamic pricing occurs based on the use of surveillance, that's where I think we get into the possibility of the Of the unfair practice.

693
01:13:48.192 --> 01:14:06.761
<v Eric Zimmerman>So by defining what dynamic pricing is and limiting the number of times a day that an item can change prices means that even if surveillance was present, even though we're banning it, if it was present, you're preventing that exploitative thing of dynamic based on the individual instead of dynamic based on the market.

694
01:14:07.082 --> 01:14:12.994
<v Eric Zimmerman>And what we're trying to do is make sure that pricing is not based on the individual and the use of their PII when they walk through the store.

695
01:14:13.042 --> 01:14:13.154
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you.

696
01:14:13.716 --> 01:14:17.020
<v Eric Zimmerman>They are 2 different things, but they do go hand in hand.

697
01:14:17.421 --> 01:14:24.735
<v Eric Zimmerman>The majority of this is really about the surveillance part, but you're hitting a kind of where the 2 items kind of match up.

698
01:14:24.800 --> 01:14:31.072
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I will say, just in the public sphere, these words get used interchangeably quite a lot, which is part of why we've defined it.

699
01:14:31.199 --> 01:14:32.980
<v Eric Zimmerman>Luke or Dan, you'd have anything to add here?

700
01:14:33.445 --> 01:14:38.225
<v Luke Zach>Yeah, just to speak a little bit more around the why once a day and limiting how often.

701
01:14:38.675 --> 01:14:41.546
<v Luke Zach>You know, when we think of dynamic pricing, we often think of things yeah.

702
01:14:41.802 --> 01:14:48.751
<v Luke Zach>Like concert tickets going up when there's lower supply of it, or the cost of water going up when a hurricane hits, that sort of thing.

703
01:14:48.944 --> 01:15:18.895
<v Luke Zach>But we think that there's a possibility here where using that dynamic pricing could be used exploitatively if the retailers start to look at that surveillance information and know what kind of consumers, what demographics, which income levels are shopping when, and might be able to charge, you know, a different price from 10:00 AM to 2:00 PM when someone who has more flexibility or more income might be able to shop versus a price that happens after typical retail hours.

704
01:15:18.960 --> 01:15:28.850
<v Luke Zach>And so we wanted to make sure that we're not being overly prescriptive, but we're doing what we can to keep regular price setting practices and making sure there's not an extra loophole for exploitation there.

705
01:15:29.702 --> 01:15:33.908
<v Eric Zimmerman>And Councilor, apologies, my name's Daniel Lukow with the Portland Bureau of Transportation.

706
01:15:34.036 --> 01:15:35.671
<v Eric Zimmerman>Councilor Zimmerman's office, just to add.

707
01:15:36.615 --> 01:15:40.685
<v Eric Zimmerman>Dynamic pricing, I think, we think of as purely external.

708
01:15:41.101 --> 01:15:42.881
<v Eric Zimmerman>So classically that would apply to like the weather.

709
01:15:43.185 --> 01:15:52.800
<v Eric Zimmerman>Like let's say like there's the sudden heat wave and they wanna apply and there's a desire to charge more for water or ice cream as an example.

710
01:15:53.199 --> 01:15:57.173
<v Eric Zimmerman>That would be something that's not based on PII, that's based purely on external factors.

711
01:15:58.631 --> 01:16:00.667
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so that's why there does need to be some—.

712
01:16:00.667 --> 01:16:00.795
<v Eric Zimmerman>Yeah.

713
01:16:01.423 --> 01:16:04.306
<v Eric Zimmerman>Element for the city to step in and prevent that from being exploited too.

714
01:16:08.885 --> 01:16:18.595
<v Candace Avalos>Okay, so then to Councilor Murillo as it relates to your amendment.

715
01:16:18.644 --> 01:16:34.390
<v Candace Avalos>So I, I think I understand your amendment as far as like your policy intent, but Maybe could you just tell me a little bit more about what you saw in the original ordinance that's making you feel these additional protections were necessary?

716
01:16:34.488 --> 01:16:39.760
<v Candace Avalos>Just tell me a little more of that just so I can understand, and then I have some specific questions.

717
01:16:41.217 --> 01:16:42.467
<v Angelita Morillo>Yeah, thanks for that question.

718
01:16:42.820 --> 01:16:45.095
<v Angelita Morillo>Um, I think the bones here are good.

719
01:16:45.176 --> 01:17:00.264
<v Angelita Morillo>It's just, again, this is a very meaty topic, and I am a little bit concerned that people, I think, Frankly, can barely define some of the things that we're talking about, and they're clearly ready to vote this through when they don't have a full grasp of this.

720
01:17:00.664 --> 01:17:10.065
<v Angelita Morillo>Like, I'm a little frustrated that we always talk about committees as being a place to talk through amendments, and then we're resistant to some of that updating.

721
01:17:11.381 --> 01:17:17.444
<v Angelita Morillo>The ordinance as written right now does not actually address surveillance pricing as it operates in practice.

722
01:17:17.637 --> 01:17:18.631
<v Angelita Morillo>That is the concern that I have.

723
01:17:18.680 --> 01:17:18.856
<v Angelita Morillo>Thank you.

724
01:17:19.641 --> 01:17:27.703
<v Angelita Morillo>So the extent— so to the extent that we're interested in engaging with that reality, we need to have additional discussions.

725
01:17:27.815 --> 01:17:29.065
<v Angelita Morillo>That's just the reality of it.

726
01:17:29.483 --> 01:17:34.019
<v Angelita Morillo>We're also at risk of moving out of alignment with what the state is working on right now.

727
01:17:34.692 --> 01:17:37.560
<v Angelita Morillo>And I think that we do need to be in alignment.

728
01:17:37.657 --> 01:17:48.011
<v Angelita Morillo>I think we either need to have like a workgroup here to really dig into some of the meat of this, or we need to try to join a state workgroup as well to make sure that we're influencing that policy.

729
01:17:50.097 --> 01:17:58.207
<v Angelita Morillo>But to rush through some of this without like a full understanding of it, lacking the enforcement mechanism is concerning to me.

730
01:17:58.608 --> 01:18:06.235
<v Angelita Morillo>What the amendment does is that it closes the loophole that actually allows discounting based on people's personal data.

731
01:18:07.279 --> 01:18:12.948
<v Angelita Morillo>We do have Attorney Matt Gander here as well if people want to ask a little bit more questions about some of the differences.

732
01:18:13.478 --> 01:18:16.095
<v Candace Avalos>I was going to say that because you asked for him earlier and then he didn't come up.

733
01:18:16.256 --> 01:18:21.448
<v Candace Avalos>So maybe could he come up so we could get some more information since he's saying he helped with drafting these?

734
01:18:22.219 --> 01:18:25.552
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So happy to have him come up if you have questions for him, Councilor.

735
01:18:25.632 --> 01:18:32.318
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I think it had sounded like Councilor Murillo had wanted him to, but then didn't ask during her time.

736
01:18:32.398 --> 01:18:33.344
<v Angelita Morillo>So, okay.

737
01:18:34.402 --> 01:18:36.132
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Mr. Leander, welcome.

738
01:18:36.309 --> 01:18:37.479
<v Candace Avalos>Thank you.

739
01:18:38.377 --> 01:18:41.215
<v Candace Avalos>Okay, so the loophole— say one more time.

740
01:18:41.279 --> 01:18:47.578
<v Candace Avalos>The loophole you're closing is you believe that as written without this amendment, it doesn't actually ban surveillance pricing.

741
01:18:48.060 --> 01:18:50.342
<v Candace Avalos>I'm oversimplifying, but is that what I'm hearing you say?

742
01:18:51.153 --> 01:18:56.125
<v Candace Avalos>And therefore, could I ask what is the legal change, how you're closing the loophole?

743
01:18:58.689 --> 01:19:02.048
<v Matt Gander>Matt Gander, Deputy City Attorney.

744
01:19:03.275 --> 01:19:16.463
<v Matt Gander>I think the difference is whether or not you want to regulate the use of personal data in discount programs and the extent to to which you want to regulate that.

745
01:19:17.301 --> 01:19:25.439
<v Matt Gander>And just to get it out of the way, we've advised that these are both legally defensible and have the same legal risk profile.

746
01:19:25.488 --> 01:19:28.185
<v Matt Gander>So right now we're having a policy discussion.

747
01:19:30.905 --> 01:19:31.163
<v Candace Avalos>Thank you.

748
01:19:34.698 --> 01:19:41.091
<v Candace Avalos>Yeah, I think I'm also struggling just with the concept of like how we do this work in committee, right?

749
01:19:41.157 --> 01:19:59.078
<v Candace Avalos>Because obviously Councilor Morillo is bringing forward a legitimate you know, policy suggestion to this policy, we're all digesting it and trying to figure out, you know, what is the ultimate, I guess, intent we're trying to accomplish with the policy.

750
01:19:59.270 --> 01:20:08.439
<v Candace Avalos>And so, yeah, I don't know how to— I'm concerned about like just being like, I don't have any other like specific questions, but I want to talk this out and kind of hear where everyone's at.

751
01:20:08.519 --> 01:20:10.398
<v Candace Avalos>If people are just going to rush through and just— I think we're going to go through the agenda items.

752
01:20:11.056 --> 01:20:15.539
<v Candace Avalos>So I think I'm, I'm stalling a little bit because I'm like, can we have a discussion?

753
01:20:15.636 --> 01:20:17.435
<v Candace Avalos>I don't want this to just be an up or down vote.

754
01:20:17.484 --> 01:20:22.770
<v Candace Avalos>Like, I actually want to talk about the policy outcomes that both are trying to accomplish so that I can weigh where I land.

755
01:20:22.818 --> 01:20:29.646
<v Candace Avalos>So I guess, like, as chair, I just want to know how can we facilitate this in a way that it doesn't just become let's just vote on it and be done with it?

756
01:20:29.712 --> 01:20:36.668
<v Candace Avalos>Because personally, I'm very interested in the concepts that are being introduced in this amendment, but I want to talk it out and I want to hear what people's concerns are.

757
01:20:37.104 --> 01:20:40.030
<v Candace Avalos>And I'd rather workshop that here in the committee where we're told we're supposed to.

758
01:20:40.322 --> 01:20:42.212
<v Candace Avalos>So that's where I'm at.

759
01:20:42.503 --> 01:20:43.101
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

760
01:20:43.149 --> 01:20:46.189
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I don't think anybody has signaled yet where they're at on this.

761
01:20:50.456 --> 01:20:54.644
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So I think you've got a lot more folks in the queue still.

762
01:20:54.693 --> 01:20:57.069
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Hopefully we can have some of that conversation here.

763
01:20:57.636 --> 01:21:01.515
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I know I've got a couple things I want to float as well.

764
01:21:02.689 --> 01:21:04.765
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Morillo, you were next in the queue.

765
01:21:06.099 --> 01:21:14.818
<v Angelita Morillo>Yeah, well, I don't think that's true because I think some folks said, I've heard from 2 people, so I'm done considering the amendment on the table.

766
01:21:15.733 --> 01:21:18.927
<v Angelita Morillo>And I take that very seriously in a policy discussion.

767
01:21:19.121 --> 01:21:19.506
<v Angelita Morillo>I do.

768
01:21:20.791 --> 01:21:38.305
<v Angelita Morillo>But I guess to clarify what Councilor Avalos is saying or questioning, to answer your question, the difference that we have in these policies is that differential discounts are individual pricing because when it's based on personal data.

769
01:21:38.625 --> 01:21:45.719
<v Angelita Morillo>So if you have a paper coupon that just says all veterans get this discount, everyone is getting that same discount.

770
01:21:46.006 --> 01:21:57.047
<v Angelita Morillo>But the difference is that when they are collecting your data and aggregating it based on different things, and you are only seeing that discount, you think that you're getting the full discount, but you don't know what your neighbor is getting.

771
01:21:57.095 --> 01:22:06.289
<v Angelita Morillo>So if you're a senior, So it's still differential even if it's based on some sort of identity factor like being a senior, being a veteran, that type of thing.

772
01:22:06.661 --> 01:22:14.439
<v Angelita Morillo>So that's the loophole that I'm trying to close with this amendment because this is still surveillance pricing.

773
01:22:15.118 --> 01:22:17.692
<v Angelita Morillo>It's just surveillance pricing within a loyalty program.

774
01:22:21.487 --> 01:22:23.201
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Luckily, Councilor Zimmerman, you're next in the queue.

775
01:22:24.765 --> 01:22:32.556
<v Eric Zimmerman>So I think this is a really helpful part of the discussion in terms of how we crafted some of, um, the thoughts here, right?

776
01:22:32.621 --> 01:22:34.594
<v Eric Zimmerman>So I am a veteran.

777
01:22:35.011 --> 01:22:40.238
<v Eric Zimmerman>I will go to certain places and I will be given that discount.

778
01:22:40.622 --> 01:22:40.814
<v Eric Zimmerman>The—.

779
01:22:41.199 --> 01:22:51.204
<v Eric Zimmerman>What is important in that is that there are plenty of places that I go where I don't identify myself as a veteran, and so then they have no way of knowing that I'm a veteran.

780
01:22:51.462 --> 01:22:52.905
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so I don't get that discount.

781
01:22:54.173 --> 01:23:02.454
<v Eric Zimmerman>What I'm highlighting here is that I've chosen, right, if I go to Home Depot or Lowe's, those are 2 places where I seem to use my veterans discount.

782
01:23:03.257 --> 01:23:06.739
<v Eric Zimmerman>I have entered into a program to receive that.

783
01:23:06.868 --> 01:23:10.109
<v Eric Zimmerman>They are aware of that information only because I told them about it.

784
01:23:10.479 --> 01:23:14.506
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I— so that's where I think that we're actually butting up against.

785
01:23:14.570 --> 01:23:17.268
<v Eric Zimmerman>I don't think that that qualifies as surveillance because I supplied it.

786
01:23:17.315 --> 01:23:17.828
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think that's a good point.

787
01:23:18.101 --> 01:23:27.046
<v Eric Zimmerman>Now, if I walked in, as much as I would like to get a discount just because I walked in, I think it's kind of gross that they could know that I was a veteran without telling them.

788
01:23:27.976 --> 01:23:35.988
<v Eric Zimmerman>And what my ordinance does here, and what the amendments— my— what the, what the ordinance does without amendments, is it protects against that.

789
01:23:36.246 --> 01:23:53.386
<v Eric Zimmerman>And that is the nature of personally identifiable information, which is you, as any consumer, can choose what you Ask to participate in, but you shouldn't be put into that situation without your own, um, your, your own volunteering of that status.

790
01:23:53.658 --> 01:23:55.215
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I think that that's an important part.

791
01:23:55.969 --> 01:24:02.979
<v Eric Zimmerman>So for, for that, we discussed that quite a lot, which is why, why does this— why is this important?

792
01:24:03.123 --> 01:24:21.648
<v Eric Zimmerman>And where I've landed as a policymaker is my ability to voluntarily take out the Safeway Rewards program, my ability to voluntarily say I am a senior even if I look old, My ability to voluntarily say I am a veteran is very different than automatic application.

793
01:24:21.695 --> 01:24:24.756
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I think that's what at the heart of this is what we're getting at.

794
01:24:28.560 --> 01:24:45.673
<v Eric Zimmerman>I wanted to— and just in terms of some of the advising and the conversations that we had, I'm just curious, Mr. Salvaggio, why you know, we've seen language from other states, and I'm kind of curious, we made some choices, you guys advised on some things.

795
01:24:45.867 --> 01:24:51.979
<v Eric Zimmerman>What are some of the reasons that we didn't maybe look at or use the language from other states after our learning from them?

796
01:24:52.489 --> 01:24:52.804
<v Unidentified speaker>Sure.

797
01:24:53.480 --> 01:24:54.984
<v Michael Salvaggio>Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the committee.

798
01:24:56.853 --> 01:25:13.564
<v Michael Salvaggio>That's a good question, 'cause obviously I think everyone here that's involved in this, yourselves included, have probably spoken with some out-of-state experts and people that have been working on this, as have we.

799
01:25:15.458 --> 01:25:21.938
<v Michael Salvaggio>And we find it very, very important to gather those concepts, those thoughts, those experiences.

800
01:25:22.534 --> 01:25:31.141
<v Michael Salvaggio>But then also remember that when we draft, we try not to cut and paste from other states because—.

801
01:25:31.141 --> 01:25:31.265
<v Michael Salvaggio>Yeah.

802
01:25:32.081 --> 01:25:38.837
<v Michael Salvaggio>As the effect of terms of art can vary widely from state to state.

803
01:25:39.015 --> 01:25:48.997
<v Michael Salvaggio>And so for example, when I— and I could be wrong, but I think I heard Councilor Murillo refer to the word a consumer as opposed to any consumer.

804
01:25:52.119 --> 01:26:07.310
<v Michael Salvaggio>Oregon's legislative drafting manual has instructions, as granular as it may seem, That expressly equate the word a in that particular circumstance to the— equate it to the word every or any.

805
01:26:08.135 --> 01:26:13.865
<v Michael Salvaggio>And New York, as far as I can tell, does not have such an instruction.

806
01:26:14.519 --> 01:26:24.310
<v Michael Salvaggio>And so that's just to highlight the fact that what means one thing in one state may not mean another thing in another state or another jurisdiction.

807
01:26:24.359 --> 01:26:24.506
<v Michael Salvaggio>Thank you.

808
01:26:25.916 --> 01:26:43.805
<v Michael Salvaggio>And so I see the current Zimmerman 1 draft as, I think, probably more solid, I would say, in terms of those protections.

809
01:26:44.305 --> 01:26:48.033
<v Michael Salvaggio>In terms of loyalty programs as a—.

810
01:26:48.759 --> 01:26:49.904
<v Michael Salvaggio>As a—.

811
01:26:50.707 --> 01:26:58.054
<v Michael Salvaggio>As a workaround, we wholeheartedly agree that there needs to be some kind of lasso around what a loyalty program is.

812
01:26:58.118 --> 01:27:04.719
<v Michael Salvaggio>We can't just have exemptions created and then call loyalty programs.

813
01:27:05.761 --> 01:27:18.073
<v Michael Salvaggio>But to the extent that a consumer in Oregon, meaning every or any consumer, can walk into Fred Meyer, whether you're wearing a barrel and suspenders or whether you're strutting in with a diamond-tipped cane and top hat, yeah.

814
01:27:18.378 --> 01:27:20.246
<v Michael Salvaggio>You're still going to get that same little red card.

815
01:27:21.034 --> 01:27:25.784
<v Michael Salvaggio>And that's going to give you the same terms as anyone else.

816
01:27:25.881 --> 01:27:26.798
<v Michael Salvaggio>Now, if I'm Mr.

817
01:27:26.846 --> 01:27:34.074
<v Michael Salvaggio>Monopoly, I'm probably going to accrue sales that get to my $5 discount a lot quicker than if I'm not.

818
01:27:35.731 --> 01:27:43.546
<v Michael Salvaggio>But the equity of terms does not necessarily guarantee an equity of outcomes under those terms.

819
01:27:45.480 --> 01:28:19.225
<v Michael Salvaggio>But from our perspective and our opinion, as long as those terms are being distributed equitably and as long as we are basing these discounts from the kind of lodestone of the established retail price, which is what's advertised to consumers, I feel, uh, um, feel much, much more, uh, uh, confident in that, in that approach.

820
01:28:19.681 --> 01:28:25.389
<v Unidentified speaker>And Chair Pirtle-Guiney and Councilor Zimmerman, if I may, um, so to date, 4 states have passed this.

821
01:28:26.250 --> 01:28:31.841
<v Unidentified speaker>Maryland, Connecticut don't take effect until October, so there's a lot of unknown about the policy before you.

822
01:28:32.612 --> 01:28:38.528
<v Unidentified speaker>Uh, New Jersey and New York, which is still waiting for its governor to sign, I believe as of Monday last week.

823
01:28:38.929 --> 01:28:41.043
<v Unidentified speaker>Um, you know, those are a lot coming online.

824
01:28:41.252 --> 01:28:44.039
<v Unidentified speaker>I think we also learn a lot from what hasn't happened.

825
01:28:44.792 --> 01:28:54.614
<v Unidentified speaker>Colorado's legislation was vetoed by their governor, specifically citing concerns about the impact on affordability coupons, loyalty programs, manufacturer coupons.

826
01:28:55.528 --> 01:29:04.516
<v Unidentified speaker>The state of California just spent 6 months on this policy, and on the eve before they adjourned, it died and did not advance to the Senate floor on a concurrence vote.

827
01:29:04.837 --> 01:29:12.260
<v Unidentified speaker>Specifically from the Democrat chair of the Privacy Committee, citing concerns around affordability and its impact on coupons and loyalty programs.

828
01:29:12.854 --> 01:29:14.909
<v Unidentified speaker>So this is not something that we take lightly.

829
01:29:15.746 --> 01:29:18.122
<v Unidentified speaker>It is something that we do very intentionally and thoughtfully.

830
01:29:18.958 --> 01:29:22.588
<v Unidentified speaker>So I would urge that similar caution and concern as you approach these issues.

831
01:29:22.654 --> 01:29:26.300
<v Unidentified speaker>And I will also share, Mr. Salvaggio and I are both at the Oregon table.

832
01:29:26.990 --> 01:29:27.922
<v Unidentified speaker>It has only had one meeting.

833
01:29:28.034 --> 01:29:29.850
<v Unidentified speaker>It is at 60 minutes of conversation.

834
01:29:29.962 --> 01:29:30.926
<v Unidentified speaker>There is no draft.

835
01:29:31.006 --> 01:29:32.019
<v Unidentified speaker>There is no specifics.

836
01:29:32.884 --> 01:29:37.145
<v Unidentified speaker>I know that Representative Chotson welcomes engagement.

837
01:29:37.194 --> 01:29:39.188
<v Unidentified speaker>I know that Councilor Zimmerman has had those conversations.

838
01:29:39.600 --> 01:29:41.056
<v Unidentified speaker>He's looking to what Portland is doing.

839
01:29:41.154 --> 01:29:42.432
<v Unidentified speaker>He's watching what we're doing.

840
01:29:43.096 --> 01:29:45.105
<v Unidentified speaker>And I think we'll take that into consideration.

841
01:29:45.219 --> 01:29:48.244
<v Unidentified speaker>And so urge you to continue to engage at that statewide level as well.

842
01:29:49.743 --> 01:29:50.081
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you.

843
01:29:51.739 --> 01:29:56.667
<v Eric Zimmerman>With respect to— there was a point made about advertised price earlier.

844
01:29:56.828 --> 01:29:59.944
<v Eric Zimmerman>And just to note, you know, when we say I was going to say, we wrote things with attorneys.

845
01:30:00.167 --> 01:30:03.649
<v Eric Zimmerman>Mr. Gander and Naomi Sheffield both worked on this with us.

846
01:30:03.729 --> 01:30:08.012
<v Eric Zimmerman>This may be the most lawyered ordinance I've ever participated in.

847
01:30:08.077 --> 01:30:10.997
<v Eric Zimmerman>So we also, of course, have gone through many machinations of this.

848
01:30:11.911 --> 01:30:22.963
<v Eric Zimmerman>But I just want to note in terms of advertise that the advice that we got was that the removal of all restrictions that had to do with, quote, advertised was due to compelled speech First Amendment concerns.

849
01:30:23.157 --> 01:30:24.311
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so that did come up.

850
01:30:24.376 --> 01:30:24.712
<v Eric Zimmerman>I wanted to address that.

851
01:30:24.761 --> 01:30:24.969
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you.

852
01:30:28.997 --> 01:30:34.135
<v Eric Zimmerman>I am listening to these— to this discussion, and this is a large, large, large amendment.

853
01:30:34.551 --> 01:30:40.845
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so this is a helpful conversation between all 5, and I will continue to do that.

854
01:30:41.359 --> 01:30:45.452
<v Eric Zimmerman>And once complete, you know, decide where I'm at on it.

855
01:30:45.547 --> 01:30:52.402
<v Eric Zimmerman>But I think the point we just heard, colleagues, is one thing I would like to remind you about with respect to what could happen at the city council level.

856
01:30:52.451 --> 01:30:52.546
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you.

857
01:30:54.358 --> 01:31:14.667
<v Eric Zimmerman>I hope that we act so that when the state acts, it can take up the mantle of this type of pricing in the service industry, not the goods industry, because we have done so good at the goods industry version that they can look at ours and say, okay, here are the couple of tweaks we would make at the state, but generally Portland got it right.

858
01:31:15.051 --> 01:31:27.608
<v Eric Zimmerman>Because I think the more exploitative and already in existence is happening in the Uber and airline and hotel markets that we're not prepared to take action on, the state is.

859
01:31:27.800 --> 01:31:29.452
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think that these can be complementary.

860
01:31:30.591 --> 01:31:46.774
<v Eric Zimmerman>But also, I think when you hear about what will go on at the state is that it's very likely— we've seen already other states that I think have similar legislative bents— is that it may not come together, and then we will miss another full session where no action occurs.

861
01:31:46.871 --> 01:31:48.329
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so I don't want to muddy that.

862
01:31:49.051 --> 01:31:52.354
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I take those, those different state examples pretty seriously.

863
01:31:52.417 --> 01:31:56.601
<v Eric Zimmerman>So I'll hold for now, Chair, and happy to answer other questions as they come up.

864
01:31:56.649 --> 01:31:56.970
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you.

865
01:31:57.627 --> 01:31:58.750
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

866
01:31:59.376 --> 01:32:01.042
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I am next in the queue.

867
01:32:01.378 --> 01:32:07.342
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And Mr. Gander, I'm wondering if you can help me out on this advertised price issue.

868
01:32:08.112 --> 01:32:23.563
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I have some thoughts on the broader amendment and approach here, but one piece that Councilor Murillo spoke to that stood out to me was whether the new definition, the new— what number is that?

869
01:32:23.645 --> 01:32:25.060
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>New F, retail price.

870
01:32:26.689 --> 01:32:31.023
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>The then current price kind of starts us off at that advertised price.

871
01:32:31.135 --> 01:32:35.259
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And Councilor Zimmerman just shared that you had had concerns over that language.

872
01:32:36.109 --> 01:33:00.225
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I'm wondering if there's anything that you can share about the meaning of then current price in the new F retail price definition to help me understand whether we're starting people at the same baseline that you're then getting some level of discount potential from, or whether that still allows for a different baseline for different consumers.

873
01:33:00.904 --> 01:33:01.148
<v Eric Zimmerman>Sure.

874
01:33:03.158 --> 01:33:07.221
<v Matt Gander>So if you look at the definition of surveillance yes.

875
01:33:07.302 --> 01:33:11.719
<v Matt Gander>In the ordinance pricing, it uses the phrase retail price, right?

876
01:33:11.815 --> 01:33:20.109
<v Matt Gander>And it establishes how or what one cannot do in calculating a retail price.

877
01:33:20.432 --> 01:33:30.632
<v Matt Gander>And so to minimize First Amendment risk, we have advised that you should focus on the terms of the transaction, right?

878
01:33:30.698 --> 01:33:38.981
<v Matt Gander>The, the price that is offered to a consumer And focus on regulating that, the, the actual economic transaction.

879
01:33:39.109 --> 01:33:49.207
<v Matt Gander>And maybe you could say that the advertised price is the price that's offered, but the language we've recommended is offered, which is consistent with First Amendment risk.

880
01:33:49.304 --> 01:33:59.354
<v Matt Gander>So if you look at retail price, that, that defines the baseline price that is offered to a consumer, as you've said.

881
01:33:59.627 --> 01:34:02.591
<v Matt Gander>And then the difference between the ordinances yes.

882
01:34:02.929 --> 01:34:22.180
<v Matt Gander>Is that Councilor Zimmerman has said you cannot do surveillance pricing in calculating that baseline price, but you can consider information particular to the consumer in calculating discounts and promotions and fees, right?

883
01:34:22.662 --> 01:34:45.573
<v Matt Gander>And Councilor Murillo's amendment says all of the things that you can't do in the surveillance pricing definition, Right, you cannot do when you're determining both the baseline price or the discounts or the fees that are charged to a consumer unless they fit under the exemptions.

884
01:34:46.488 --> 01:34:53.416
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>But you didn't have the same concern with advertised price in the definition of retail price in the amendment?

885
01:34:58.016 --> 01:34:59.391
<v Matt Gander>Which amendment are you talking about?

886
01:34:59.698 --> 01:35:07.993
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Uh, Morillo 1 defines retail price including the price at which a consumer good is advertised.

887
01:35:09.847 --> 01:35:22.914
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I know this is just a small piece, but it seems like it has a— if the definition means something different, it seems like that has an impact.

888
01:35:23.350 --> 01:35:25.024
<v Angelita Morillo>What page are you looking at?

889
01:35:25.298 --> 01:35:25.734
<v Dan Ryan>This is—.

890
01:35:25.734 --> 01:35:27.555
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I'm looking at F.

891
01:35:27.909 --> 01:35:28.554
<v Unidentified speaker>Thanks.

892
01:35:28.859 --> 01:35:30.036
<v Eric Zimmerman>Retail price.

893
01:35:31.890 --> 01:35:46.161
<v Matt Gander>Um, I will say we were working on this definition kind of up to the deadline, so I think it's a question for the carrier about whether or not they want to keep advertised in the definition from a legal risk perspective.

894
01:35:46.418 --> 01:35:47.905
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, so the risk is the same.

895
01:35:48.115 --> 01:35:57.055
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I'm trying to understand why the language in the underlying and it sounded like a concern was raised that wasn't raised in Morillo 1.

896
01:35:57.168 --> 01:36:01.381
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>You had said that they were both equally fine, so I wanted to understand that.

897
01:36:01.447 --> 01:36:03.720
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So it sounds like you have that concern either way.

898
01:36:05.141 --> 01:36:24.354
<v Matt Gander>I think commercial speech is defined as speech that proposes the terms of a transaction, and we advise that we should be regulating the price that is offered to consumers as opposed to regulating other types of speech that happens in the marketplace.

899
01:36:26.935 --> 01:36:49.507
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, colleagues, I continue as we go through this debate to feel like there's this proposal before us which is looking at, um, upward pressure on prices, future technology, making sure that we don't go down a path that has not been entered here.

900
01:36:49.956 --> 01:36:57.957
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And then an amendment that looks at downward pressure and coupons and a current practice.

901
01:36:58.149 --> 01:37:12.710
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And Councilor Murillo, I'm really interested in us having a broader conversation about that current practice, but I'm also kind of interested in getting this ban on a future practice out the door as quickly as possible.

902
01:37:13.688 --> 01:37:33.627
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Um, so my current inclination Is to say let's move the underlying and let's come back to this question about whether there are problems with the current practice, which is a little bit different from the underlying, in the future.

903
01:37:33.806 --> 01:37:52.550
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I'm also looking at the definitions, and in the underlying personal data, right, defined as we've talked about So surveillance pricing means offering or facilitating the offering of a retail price for a consumer good that is based on personal data.

904
01:37:54.050 --> 01:37:59.372
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Restrictions: surveillance pricing is not allowed, right?

905
01:37:59.421 --> 01:38:02.082
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>A vendor may not engage in surveillance pricing.

906
01:38:03.194 --> 01:38:37.185
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So we are in the underlying moving forward with I understand there are still questions about discount programs, but I, like I said, I keep coming back to the idea that that is a much broader topic, and we need to get this ban on surveillance pricing out quickly so that we're signaling to the legislature that we're doing this whether or not they do, um, as they move forward this year.

907
01:38:37.233 --> 01:38:37.345
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

908
01:38:37.442 --> 01:38:41.720
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So that's where I currently sit.

909
01:38:41.768 --> 01:39:05.273
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We've got 2 more people in the queue, but I just, I want to note that, Councilor Avalos, you asked for a sense of where people are, and I keep feeling like these are 2 very different discussions, one on future technology that we need to put a stop to before it gets here, and one on current practices that we might want to delve deeper into.

910
01:39:05.320 --> 01:39:05.480
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

911
01:39:06.905 --> 01:39:21.965
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And take the time to figure out if those current practices are actually making things more expensive under the veil of saying that it's making things more affordable, which is certainly a question that we should give some time and thought to.

912
01:39:23.649 --> 01:39:24.961
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Murillo, you're next in the queue.

913
01:39:27.471 --> 01:39:28.248
<v Angelita Morillo>Yeah, thanks for that.

914
01:39:28.378 --> 01:39:31.828
<v Angelita Morillo>Can you clarify what you mean by things that are happening in the future?

915
01:39:32.608 --> 01:39:37.564
<v Angelita Morillo>Do you mean that the coupon discount thing does not apply I'm just a bit confused.

916
01:39:38.515 --> 01:40:04.927
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We've heard that the use of personal data in surveillance pricing is, as far as folks who have spoken today know, not happening in grocery stores in our area, but that the technology is coming online as we get the electronic pricing on shelves and things like that that could allow it to happen.

917
01:40:05.231 --> 01:40:11.976
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>In the future, and that we therefore need to signal as quickly as possible that this is something that can't happen here.

918
01:40:12.362 --> 01:40:12.601
<v Angelita Morillo>I see.

919
01:40:12.713 --> 01:40:18.561
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So that to me feels like a let's as quickly as possible say this cannot happen here.

920
01:40:19.731 --> 01:40:33.639
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>There is this broader conversation that you've brought up, and I really appreciate you bringing it up, about whether consumer data-driven coupons are actually making things more expensive for people as opposed to more affordable.

921
01:40:33.752 --> 01:40:39.738
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>For people, which I think we should absolutely take up and have broader discussions about as we think about affordability.

922
01:40:40.739 --> 01:40:45.971
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>For me, that requires talking to a lot more experts and understanding that issue more deeply.

923
01:40:46.809 --> 01:40:52.150
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And I agree that committees are the place to dig in on issues like that.

924
01:40:52.216 --> 01:41:03.404
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>But because I am also hearing that we need to signal as quickly as possible about surveillance pricing, I'm wanting to take on these 2 issues, which feel to me like distinct issues that could be but don't have to be done together.

925
01:41:03.470 --> 01:41:03.618
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

926
01:41:09.399 --> 01:41:10.000
<v Angelita Morillo>Okay.

927
01:41:10.000 --> 01:41:10.699
<v Angelita Morillo>Thanks.

928
01:41:10.699 --> 01:41:14.340
<v Angelita Morillo>That's helpful to understand where you're coming from.

929
01:41:14.340 --> 01:41:14.899
<v Angelita Morillo>I agree.

930
01:41:14.899 --> 01:41:21.560
<v Angelita Morillo>I think we, you know, I do want to make sure that it doesn't come to Oregon and then we're backtracking afterwards.

931
01:41:22.359 --> 01:41:24.939
<v Angelita Morillo>But I do want to clarify a few things that I heard today.

932
01:41:25.260 --> 01:41:35.380
<v Angelita Morillo>So under both the underlying ordinance and my amendment, you can still join a program or identify as a veteran or another protected class and still be able to participate in the program.

933
01:41:35.380 --> 01:41:35.399
<v Angelita Morillo>Okay.

934
01:41:37.274 --> 01:41:44.546
<v Angelita Morillo>Under Councilor Zimmerman's, once you do, the store can use what it knows about you to decide how big that discount is.

935
01:41:45.090 --> 01:41:49.043
<v Angelita Morillo>That was reiterated by our attorney, Matt Gander, who worked on both of these.

936
01:41:50.206 --> 01:41:55.085
<v Angelita Morillo>Under ours, under our amendment, everyone who qualifies gets the same discount.

937
01:41:55.945 --> 01:42:00.930
<v Angelita Morillo>So that is the first instance of using personal information to give discounts.

938
01:42:00.979 --> 01:42:01.028
<v Angelita Morillo>Okay.

939
01:42:01.332 --> 01:42:02.262
<v Angelita Morillo>Different prices.

940
01:42:02.617 --> 01:42:04.350
<v Angelita Morillo>That is still surveillance pricing.

941
01:42:04.929 --> 01:42:07.546
<v Angelita Morillo>It's just that it's hidden within the loyalty program.

942
01:42:08.332 --> 01:42:13.101
<v Angelita Morillo>So the FTC and other parties already refer to this as surveillance pricing.

943
01:42:13.695 --> 01:42:14.722
<v Angelita Morillo>And I think that you're right.

944
01:42:14.819 --> 01:42:24.020
<v Angelita Morillo>What we are doing here today and what passes through Portland City Council is setting a really important precedent for what the legislature does moving forward.

945
01:42:24.533 --> 01:42:26.091
<v Angelita Morillo>But we also can—.

946
01:42:26.091 --> 01:42:26.429
<v Angelita Morillo>Thank you.

947
01:42:27.166 --> 01:42:44.762
<v Angelita Morillo>Accidentally signal to the legislature that we are willing to pass a surveillance pricing policy that is supposed to ban it, that actually has a huge gaping hole and allows it to move forward anyways, under the guise that we're doing something for Portlanders or for Oregonians and making things better for them.

948
01:42:45.692 --> 01:42:51.349
<v Angelita Morillo>So we don't gain a lot by getting this out the door, especially rushing this through committee.

949
01:42:52.167 --> 01:43:00.969
<v Angelita Morillo>All we do is signal our inability to have a serious conversation about some of the loopholes that are still Very present in this policy.

950
01:43:02.444 --> 01:43:07.884
<v Angelita Morillo>And the public, they're not going to be served by us saying that we banned something if we can't enforce it.

951
01:43:08.958 --> 01:43:14.173
<v Angelita Morillo>So if we don't have any enforcement mechanisms in this, then the point is moot either way.

952
01:43:15.216 --> 01:43:17.335
<v Angelita Morillo>So I really care about this policy.

953
01:43:18.394 --> 01:43:18.442
<v Angelita Morillo>I—.

954
01:43:18.827 --> 01:43:22.228
<v Angelita Morillo>Zimmerman knows I texted him very excitedly when I saw he was bringing this forward.

955
01:43:22.966 --> 01:43:32.814
<v Angelita Morillo>And I'm worried that if we don't address these loopholes, it's not going to do thank you, Councilor.

956
01:43:33.122 --> 01:43:33.835
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Avalos.

957
01:43:38.480 --> 01:43:59.127
<v Candace Avalos>Okay, um, I think where I'm landing is I share a concern around the loophole, and I don't Obviously, Councilor Morillo has brought her version of how to close that loophole, and that's what we're considering.

958
01:44:04.757 --> 01:44:26.421
<v Candace Avalos>I'm trying to understand maybe from Amanda, based on how you were reacting to it at first, like, it seems like both policies allow for loyalty programs, allow for some kind of specialization based on yes.

959
01:44:26.777 --> 01:44:43.949
<v Candace Avalos>But the difference being that under the current underlying, they could also, on top of that, the grocer, I guess, on top of that, could add more specialization to that loyalty program based on their personal data.

960
01:44:44.048 --> 01:44:46.791
<v Candace Avalos>This is how I'm interpreting what Councilor Morillo is saying.

961
01:44:47.592 --> 01:44:54.667
<v Candace Avalos>So I guess, can you explain what is your concern about that specifically?

962
01:44:54.731 --> 01:45:06.685
<v Candace Avalos>Because it's, you know, ultimately, if we're trying to ban surveillance pricing— and I think the other thing I'm getting confused about is like, this is about in the future, because it's like, there's all this technology.

963
01:45:06.860 --> 01:45:09.347
<v Candace Avalos>So what, the grocers haven't used it?

964
01:45:09.395 --> 01:45:10.086
<v Candace Avalos>Some of them are using it?

965
01:45:10.134 --> 01:45:10.519
<v Candace Avalos>I can't remember.

966
01:45:10.567 --> 01:45:11.417
<v Candace Avalos>I'm sure you said the history.

967
01:45:11.480 --> 01:45:12.587
<v Candace Avalos>I just can't remember right now.

968
01:45:12.668 --> 01:45:27.711
<v Candace Avalos>But— yeah, so the but yeah, so why don't we start with the first question, which is just what is your— why are you against us making that more clear that surveillance pricing or whatever can't be used even in loyalty if it already has some protections?

969
01:45:27.823 --> 01:45:30.016
<v Candace Avalos>Both of them have protections for loyalty programs.

970
01:45:31.547 --> 01:45:34.461
<v Unidentified speaker>Yeah, um, and Chair Pirtle-Guiney and Councilor Avalos, appreciate the question.

971
01:45:34.557 --> 01:45:37.274
<v Unidentified speaker>So, um, a couple things.

972
01:45:37.340 --> 01:45:46.662
<v Unidentified speaker>One, I think as you heard from the definitions in these policies are really important and highly technical, and so like every word does matter.

973
01:45:46.726 --> 01:46:02.743
<v Unidentified speaker>And it is very confusing because I think the other piece too to think— keep in mind is, as you had said earlier, this is regulating 2 different things, dynamic and surveillance, and it's also regulating grocery and all retail, including online retail, of all consumer goods.

974
01:46:02.792 --> 01:46:04.060
<v Unidentified speaker>So we are not just talking about food, right?

975
01:46:04.125 --> 01:46:04.189
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Yes.

976
01:46:04.462 --> 01:46:05.904
<v Unidentified speaker>So it is really massive.

977
01:46:07.043 --> 01:46:14.020
<v Unidentified speaker>So how each of these apply to each of those buckets, and I'm just here on behalf of grocery retail, and so you don't have a broader retail perspective on it.

978
01:46:14.068 --> 01:46:19.503
<v Unidentified speaker>So I can tell you specifically for grocery, and maybe this is where some of the confusion comes in.

979
01:46:19.936 --> 01:46:23.560
<v Unidentified speaker>Part of the problem is your definition of personal information includes purchase history.

980
01:46:23.626 --> 01:46:29.173
<v Unidentified speaker>So if you think about consumer behavior or even inferences, right, about a consumer's purchase history.

981
01:46:29.253 --> 01:46:41.512
<v Unidentified speaker>So for example, today a grocery retailer may share purchase history data with a third-party manufacturer like Coca-Cola because we know that Mr. Salvaggio drinks a lot of Diet Coke.

982
01:46:41.833 --> 01:46:45.765
<v Unidentified speaker>He hasn't purchased Diet Coke in a month, and so he may need a coupon for $2, right?

983
01:46:46.887 --> 01:46:50.627
<v Unidentified speaker>And so this is, I think, where the grocery industry looks at this issue a little bit differently.

984
01:46:51.060 --> 01:46:58.554
<v Unidentified speaker>We support prohibiting using personal information to raise prices, but we absolutely use purchase history in our loyalty programs.

985
01:46:58.601 --> 01:47:05.704
<v Unidentified speaker>It's the core of those loyalty programs to provide our consumers with coupons and discounts that are relevant to them and their shopping behaviors.

986
01:47:05.818 --> 01:47:08.797
<v Unidentified speaker>And so that's maybe where the two kind of confuse the issue.

987
01:47:08.877 --> 01:47:18.123
<v Unidentified speaker>So we're not using your personal information, we're not using your address, we're not using your income, we're not using all these horrific kind of examples and worst-case scenarios to drive prices.

988
01:47:19.037 --> 01:47:24.101
<v Unidentified speaker>But we are using your purchase history and sometimes household information to build those loyalty programs.

989
01:47:24.166 --> 01:47:27.643
<v Unidentified speaker>And again, I do want to say those are loyalty programs consumers opt into.

990
01:47:28.171 --> 01:47:42.296
<v Unidentified speaker>And I'll just make a plug, Oregon has some of the strongest consumer protections in the state, including the Oregon Consumer Privacy Act, which was just passed by the legislature a few years ago that actually lets consumers opt out of their data being sold or shared.

991
01:47:42.344 --> 01:47:50.967
<v Unidentified speaker>And so that's a really significant law that not every state, including Washington, doesn't even have, that was passed that does apply to grocery stores and our loyalty program.

992
01:47:51.033 --> 01:47:53.469
<v Unidentified speaker>So that consumer data has a ton of protections wrapped around it.

993
01:47:53.997 --> 01:47:54.944
<v Unidentified speaker>I don't know if that helps.

994
01:47:55.488 --> 01:48:04.257
<v Candace Avalos>Well, I guess then a follow-up is what I'm understanding in Murillo 1 is that you still can use purchase history, it's just more narrow, right?

995
01:48:04.322 --> 01:48:06.198
<v Candace Avalos>Like it's the tier thing, right?

996
01:48:06.261 --> 01:48:08.506
<v Candace Avalos>So maybe can you help me understand that, Councilor Murillo?

997
01:48:08.570 --> 01:48:16.506
<v Candace Avalos>Because it sounds like you still are allowing for purchase history, it's just that definition of like personal data that maybe we're grappling with.

998
01:48:16.586 --> 01:48:19.167
<v Candace Avalos>But isn't the intent that they still could use that?

999
01:48:19.230 --> 01:48:23.720
<v Candace Avalos>So So if I buy a lot of cat food, I could get a coupon for cat food because that's my history.

1000
01:48:24.318 --> 01:48:26.579
<v Candace Avalos>But yeah, can you just help me understand that better?

1001
01:48:27.359 --> 01:48:28.707
<v Angelita Morillo>Yeah, that is exactly correct.

1002
01:48:29.347 --> 01:48:30.021
<v Angelita Morillo>You have it right.

1003
01:48:32.097 --> 01:48:49.354
<v Angelita Morillo>I do think the, you know, I do want my colleagues to consider too that the Oregon Consumer Privacy Act that protects some of the consumers under Oregon state law was directly fought by the person who is lobbying us on this surveillance pricing ordinance right now.

1004
01:48:50.391 --> 01:48:59.408
<v Angelita Morillo>So let's not pretend that that context does not exist when we talk about who's presenting before us and who is giving us a policy that may have a loophole for giant retailers.

1005
01:49:01.449 --> 01:49:11.105
<v Unidentified speaker>And Chair Pirtle-Guiney, if I may just weigh in and encourage the record to go back, I actually supported it and was on the workgroup and served on it for 2 years under Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum.

1006
01:49:12.106 --> 01:49:15.318
<v Unidentified speaker>But yeah, details matter, and we're not going to support everything that's put on the table.

1007
01:49:15.802 --> 01:49:20.279
<v Unidentified speaker>I will say though, we disagree with the premise that you outlined in terms of the Councilmember Herbold.

1008
01:49:20.279 --> 01:49:23.960
<v Unidentified speaker>I think the councilor's comment about the Morillo amendment just narrowing it, I actually think it will eliminate it.

1009
01:49:24.340 --> 01:49:27.029
<v Unidentified speaker>And it's that application of equal to all.

1010
01:49:27.260 --> 01:49:31.460
<v Unidentified speaker>And because that's just not the way loyalty programs and coupons work, it's not provided equally to all.

1011
01:49:31.460 --> 01:49:33.289
<v Unidentified speaker>It is specific to your purchase history.

1012
01:49:33.699 --> 01:49:36.319
<v Unidentified speaker>And so those programs are customized to the consumer.

1013
01:49:36.319 --> 01:49:44.300
<v Unidentified speaker>And so I understand there's a philosophical difference in terms of wanting us to offer discounts or lower prices to everyone on every product on our shelf.

1014
01:49:44.300 --> 01:49:50.135
<v Unidentified speaker>It's just not how grocery, and I think significantly to this policy, because it's much different than Seattle.

1015
01:49:50.230 --> 01:49:51.306
<v Unidentified speaker>Seattle is just about grocery.

1016
01:49:51.403 --> 01:49:52.622
<v Unidentified speaker>This is also about retail.

1017
01:49:53.345 --> 01:49:58.079
<v Unidentified speaker>So equal to all products on your shelf online and at the brick-and-mortar stores is just very, very different.

1018
01:49:58.304 --> 01:50:00.407
<v Candace Avalos>Why, why are you saying that it would be eliminated?

1019
01:50:00.470 --> 01:50:10.470
<v Candace Avalos>Is it because it would be too hard to implement and so you would choose to just get rid of it entirely, or is it because there's some actual barrier that would mean you could not implement a loyalty program under these conditions?

1020
01:50:10.806 --> 01:50:20.881
<v Unidentified speaker>Yeah, I think probably the easiest way to understand it is It's the same way if somebody's, say, campaigning and you're using direct mail and you have a limited budget and you're going to talk to voters that are likely to turn out.

1021
01:50:21.411 --> 01:50:27.649
<v Unidentified speaker>These manufacturers and retailers have similar limited budgets, and I want somebody that's going to keep coming back to buy Diet Coke.

1022
01:50:29.029 --> 01:50:38.108
<v Unidentified speaker>Same thing, one of the examples that's come up in some of the other communities is there was a comment that this doesn't impact small grocers or small businesses, and it's actually not at all accurate.

1023
01:50:38.412 --> 01:50:51.493
<v Unidentified speaker>One of the ways that we target is where it actually lets competing products so if you're a small coffee producer and you want to compete with Starbucks, maybe you offer a $5 discount on somebody who buys Starbucks every month or every week.

1024
01:50:52.216 --> 01:50:54.914
<v Unidentified speaker>The only way you know that is based on their purchase history.

1025
01:50:55.347 --> 01:50:58.319
<v Unidentified speaker>So again, it's that equally applied to all philosophical difference.

1026
01:50:58.399 --> 01:51:00.020
<v Unidentified speaker>Again, it's just not how it works.

1027
01:51:00.085 --> 01:51:01.064
<v Unidentified speaker>Budgets are limited.

1028
01:51:01.112 --> 01:51:05.061
<v Unidentified speaker>We have to target based on what the consumer wants and where they're going to come back to.

1029
01:51:05.222 --> 01:51:05.479
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

1030
01:51:08.032 --> 01:51:09.684
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor, did you have anything additional?

1031
01:51:10.823 --> 01:51:13.822
<v Candace Avalos>Let's see, let me look.

1032
01:51:14.689 --> 01:51:20.527
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Then it looks like Mr. Salvaggio may have a response to your previous question if you're interested in that.

1033
01:51:20.606 --> 01:51:21.233
<v Candace Avalos>Sure, sure, go ahead.

1034
01:51:21.328 --> 01:51:23.719
<v Michael Salvaggio>Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the committee.

1035
01:51:25.018 --> 01:51:34.545
<v Michael Salvaggio>I just wanna say very quickly to take a few steps back from the minutia of the loyalty programs and just recontextualize.

1036
01:51:35.234 --> 01:51:43.453
<v Michael Salvaggio>These are programs That are designed to get union store shoppers continuing to come into union stores.

1037
01:51:44.193 --> 01:52:01.149
<v Michael Salvaggio>And I wanna just reemphasize how important that is for us in that we depend on that predictability of customer inflow for not only revenue that we expect to share in, but also—.

1038
01:52:01.149 --> 01:52:01.613
<v Michael Salvaggio>Yeah.

1039
01:52:02.840 --> 01:52:06.393
<v Michael Salvaggio>In terms of staffing and shifts and whatnot.

1040
01:52:08.380 --> 01:52:26.113
<v Michael Salvaggio>These are fundamental issues to our members, and I would not want to see those programs harmed inadvertently because we're trying to sew up a too tight ordinance here.

1041
01:52:27.713 --> 01:52:39.291
<v Michael Salvaggio>I also just have to say, For the record, in good conscience, my colleague here and I, we agree sometimes, we disagree sometimes, and when we agree, we work together.

1042
01:52:39.338 --> 01:52:41.739
<v Michael Salvaggio>When we disagree, we fight like cats and dogs.

1043
01:52:41.851 --> 01:52:54.713
<v Michael Salvaggio>But I have never, ever known her to misapply or mislead anyone that she's been in front of, including myself.

1044
01:52:55.547 --> 01:53:04.564
<v Michael Salvaggio>And I, just like I would expect the same courtesy, I don't feel that it's appropriate to make those suggestions.

1045
01:53:06.055 --> 01:53:07.131
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you.

1046
01:53:07.917 --> 01:53:09.055
<v Candace Avalos>Councilor, anything further?

1047
01:53:09.216 --> 01:53:11.221
<v Candace Avalos>I'll leave it at that for now and hear what others say.

1048
01:53:11.430 --> 01:53:11.671
<v Candace Avalos>Thanks.

1049
01:53:11.927 --> 01:53:12.009
<v Dan Ryan>Okay.

1050
01:53:12.649 --> 01:53:15.747
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Colleagues, I'll note that it is 3:50.

1051
01:53:16.484 --> 01:53:24.426
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We're a little past time on this, but I want to make sure everybody in the queue is able to ask any additional questions before we move to a vote.

1052
01:53:24.475 --> 01:53:26.095
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Zimmerman, did you have anything further?

1053
01:53:27.979 --> 01:53:28.445
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you, Chair.

1054
01:53:29.766 --> 01:53:36.577
<v Eric Zimmerman>I thought it might be responsible to kind of just discuss a little bit about philosophy and how I approach this.

1055
01:53:37.108 --> 01:53:41.666
<v Eric Zimmerman>And we certainly have been working on this for so many months that we've gone round and round.

1056
01:53:41.779 --> 01:54:00.710
<v Eric Zimmerman>Many of the issues that we're discussing today are things that my team and our conversations with our attorneys and with advocates We've landed here because I largely believe it's not our role to, as a city, do anything that, even if you pull the thread a little bit, is price setting, right?

1057
01:54:00.757 --> 01:54:14.985
<v Eric Zimmerman>That's where I think that the market— if you're a third-party delivery app, for instance, I think that you have a relationship with your consumer that is important, that you get to say if you're a $5 delivery fee person or a $25 delivery fee person.

1058
01:54:15.034 --> 01:54:15.354
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think that's a good point.

1059
01:54:15.756 --> 01:54:17.394
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think that that's fine.

1060
01:54:17.442 --> 01:54:22.885
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think that being set based on PII is where I'm trying to involve the city.

1061
01:54:23.880 --> 01:54:41.747
<v Eric Zimmerman>But being able to have baseline prices, being able to have loyalty programs, being able to ensure that whatever service is being offered, whatever good is being offered, is that it is based on that company's market assessment and not on, on PII and surveillance.

1062
01:54:41.796 --> 01:54:42.037
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think that's fine.

1063
01:54:42.405 --> 01:54:44.798
<v Eric Zimmerman>Those are all achievable in the underlying.

1064
01:54:45.698 --> 01:54:51.766
<v Eric Zimmerman>The, um, you know, we, we did publish this original document.

1065
01:54:51.832 --> 01:54:54.271
<v Eric Zimmerman>It was supposed to be heard on, on August 11th.

1066
01:54:54.609 --> 01:55:02.364
<v Eric Zimmerman>Um, in that time, you know, we continued to work on how do we make this better, and, and that's what you saw in Zimmerman 1.

1067
01:55:02.493 --> 01:55:06.202
<v Eric Zimmerman>It was a single paragraph add and a couple words later that was changed.

1068
01:55:08.458 --> 01:55:12.921
<v Eric Zimmerman>I'm cautious about the amendment, Maria 1, as it's been proposed.

1069
01:55:13.002 --> 01:55:21.990
<v Eric Zimmerman>It's largely a rewrite, and that, that is giving me a little bit of heartburn in terms of reacting to it.

1070
01:55:22.685 --> 01:55:36.457
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I do think that it gets to the heart of what we largely, in our discussions and what I'm trying to protect, it actually is interrupting that protection of the loyalty programs and the application of those protections.

1071
01:55:36.569 --> 01:55:50.078
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I do think it gets closer to what I think is an unintended consequence of some price setting or elimination of what we would consider the market today.

1072
01:55:50.238 --> 01:55:58.926
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so for those reasons, you know, this has been a helpful conversation, but this is a massive amendment that I won't be prepared to support today.

1073
01:55:59.201 --> 01:56:11.435
<v Eric Zimmerman>But I do think that this was I think that this was a worthy— and I want to thank you, Chair, for giving it so much time, because this was a worthy conversation on a meaty topic that is moving faster than most legislative bodies can move.

1074
01:56:11.578 --> 01:56:18.710
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so I think that that is the responsible action, and I agree with you in terms of getting, getting the original out there.

1075
01:56:19.335 --> 01:56:26.514
<v Eric Zimmerman>I appreciate, but I do disagree with some of the items that were laid out in the second presentation about what what does that mean?

1076
01:56:26.561 --> 01:56:31.389
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think it's important to distinguish what Maria 1 does versus, versus the underlying, but they're all important points.

1077
01:56:32.336 --> 01:56:45.533
<v Eric Zimmerman>There's a philosophy in how we draft legislation here that I think you're seeing my style come out, which is minimal in order to be clear versus verbose in order to hit every angle.

1078
01:56:45.886 --> 01:57:00.238
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I think setting a tone in our legislation is for what is and is not acceptable in Portland was the goal from which which I wrote this one, and I recognize that we are approaching it slightly different, but I believe everybody here has a similar goal in place.

1079
01:57:01.173 --> 01:57:04.268
<v Eric Zimmerman>And for that, I do appreciate this conversation and everybody who's weighed in.

1080
01:57:04.479 --> 01:57:07.917
<v Eric Zimmerman>And for this amendment, I, I will pass on it today though.

1081
01:57:08.063 --> 01:57:08.323
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you.

1082
01:57:09.846 --> 01:57:10.445
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

1083
01:57:10.493 --> 01:57:11.385
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Morillo.

1084
01:57:12.987 --> 01:57:13.554
<v Angelita Morillo>Thank you for that.

1085
01:57:17.023 --> 01:57:22.313
<v Angelita Morillo>Um, in terms of application of the law, There is no room for the debate.

1086
01:57:23.579 --> 01:57:26.520
<v Angelita Morillo>This policy will either solve the problem or it will not.

1087
01:57:27.532 --> 01:57:34.706
<v Angelita Morillo>And I want to say that my amendment again does not touch the loyalty programs.

1088
01:57:35.233 --> 01:57:36.371
<v Angelita Morillo>I can't say that enough.

1089
01:57:38.192 --> 01:57:41.154
<v Angelita Morillo>It still permits discounts based on purchase history.

1090
01:57:41.850 --> 01:57:44.604
<v Angelita Morillo>I'm going to read you a direct quote from the amendment in case it's unclear.

1091
01:57:44.668 --> 01:57:44.814
<v Angelita Morillo>Thank you.

1092
01:57:45.422 --> 01:57:51.036
<v Angelita Morillo>Discounts offered to a subset of rewards program members based exclusively on prior purchase history.

1093
01:57:51.501 --> 01:58:02.984
<v Angelita Morillo>Tiered discount programs may not consider information about consumers' price sensitivity or any personal data beyond what is necessary to identify the consumer as eligible for the tiered discount.

1094
01:58:03.881 --> 01:58:13.054
<v Angelita Morillo>So if we care about the exact type of inferences and data exploitation that the FTC is talking about, That has to be included.

1095
01:58:14.192 --> 01:58:19.560
<v Angelita Morillo>And to say that this type of data is not being collected on people is inaccurate.

1096
01:58:19.657 --> 01:58:24.096
<v Angelita Morillo>This has been very extensively studied and it is being used against people.

1097
01:58:25.091 --> 01:58:37.304
<v Angelita Morillo>So we added the additional words not for the sake of being verbose or for making it overcomplicated or difficult to comprehend or to have a gotcha on my colleagues.

1098
01:58:37.431 --> 01:58:38.841
<v Angelita Morillo>I was told committee is the place to bring amendments.

1099
01:58:38.907 --> 01:58:39.323
<v Angelita Morillo>I think that's a good point.

1100
01:58:41.475 --> 01:58:46.453
<v Angelita Morillo>Because I don't want to bring it up full council and catch everyone by surprise and then be, be in trouble for that too.

1101
01:58:48.389 --> 01:58:53.305
<v Angelita Morillo>I brought it because I actually really care about solving this problem and I'm excited about this policy.

1102
01:58:54.676 --> 01:59:05.148
<v Angelita Morillo>And regarding the idea that we should ban this now and then fix the discount issue later, a differential price and a personalized discount are the same transaction described from 2 ends.

1103
01:59:05.231 --> 01:59:05.315
<v Angelita Morillo>Yes.

1104
01:59:06.167 --> 01:59:18.149
<v Angelita Morillo>If you pay $4.99 and your neighbor pays $4.49 for the same item because of your data, that's differential pricing, whether the store got there by marking you up or by marking your neighbor down.

1105
01:59:18.712 --> 01:59:22.646
<v Angelita Morillo>The store chooses the label, and it will always choose discount.

1106
01:59:23.610 --> 01:59:28.220
<v Angelita Morillo>That's why ban differential pricing now, discounts later bans nothing now.

1107
01:59:29.070 --> 01:59:38.421
<v Angelita Morillo>Under Zimmerman 1, the retail price So any differential delivered as a discount is outside the ban by definition.

1108
01:59:39.256 --> 01:59:42.703
<v Angelita Morillo>Every documented case is delivered by that— is delivered that way.

1109
01:59:43.247 --> 01:59:49.243
<v Angelita Morillo>Kroger's coupons, Instacart's shifting original price, DoorDash's personalized promotions.

1110
01:59:50.077 --> 01:59:56.698
<v Angelita Morillo>Seattle's mayor's office was asked whether a $1 discount to one shopper and none to another is functionally a form of individualized pricing.

1111
01:59:56.746 --> 01:59:57.259
<v Angelita Morillo>I think that's a fair question.

1112
01:59:57.619 --> 02:00:00.149
<v Angelita Morillo>Pricing, even if the company calls it a discount?

1113
02:00:00.636 --> 02:00:02.323
<v Angelita Morillo>And the answer is that yes, it is.

1114
02:00:04.277 --> 02:00:06.609
<v Angelita Morillo>We should continue to have the discussion.

1115
02:00:08.244 --> 02:00:18.640
<v Angelita Morillo>And if we're not willing to have one more hour to discuss this, to really solve the problem, I think that's a shame because I think this is a really cool policy.

1116
02:00:18.849 --> 02:00:21.023
<v Angelita Morillo>I'm excited about the people that brought this forward.

1117
02:00:21.152 --> 02:00:32.444
<v Angelita Morillo>I support but I also don't wanna support a policy that says it's gonna do something and leave a bunch of loopholes that doesn't actually protect the people that we claim we're trying to protect.

1118
02:00:33.229 --> 02:00:35.618
<v Angelita Morillo>I also wanna remind people that we're in committee.

1119
02:00:36.195 --> 02:00:42.724
<v Angelita Morillo>This is a really big issue for a lot of people, and we have 2 invited testimony folks up here.

1120
02:00:43.429 --> 02:00:51.631
<v Angelita Morillo>We don't have exactly like a broad consensus from the public about whether or not they want this to include the loyalty discounts as well.

1121
02:00:52.728 --> 02:00:57.426
<v Angelita Morillo>And I think that that's a loss and that's not great for our policymaking.

1122
02:00:58.170 --> 02:01:00.886
<v Angelita Morillo>So I understand, I can see the writing on the wall.

1123
02:01:00.951 --> 02:01:05.333
<v Angelita Morillo>We're probably gonna push this through committee without doing our due diligence, and that's fine.

1124
02:01:05.462 --> 02:01:09.012
<v Angelita Morillo>But we are leaving a huge hole in this policy, and I think that's a damn shame.

1125
02:01:11.289 --> 02:01:11.899
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

1126
02:01:12.064 --> 02:01:12.771
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Ryan.

1127
02:01:13.036 --> 02:01:13.728
<v Dan Ryan>Yes, thank you, Chair.

1128
02:01:13.810 --> 02:01:14.600
<v Dan Ryan>It's time to vote.

1129
02:01:16.332 --> 02:01:16.961
<v Dan Ryan>I call for the vote.

1130
02:01:17.654 --> 02:01:21.989
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, um, we have one more person in the queue.

1131
02:01:22.070 --> 02:01:25.862
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Avalos, did you want to speak or can we move to a vote?

1132
02:01:30.747 --> 02:01:40.072
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Ryan, might I suggest that you move to not, um, that you move to close the queue so that we don't have to vote on voting, which I think would take longer than letting Councilor Avalos speak?

1133
02:01:40.350 --> 02:01:41.789
<v Dan Ryan>That's the chair's prerogative.

1134
02:01:41.789 --> 02:01:42.779
<v Dan Ryan>I just wanted to move this along.

1135
02:01:42.970 --> 02:01:44.670
<v Dan Ryan>We're in a circle mode at this moment.

1136
02:01:44.670 --> 02:01:44.930
<v Candace Avalos>Great.

1137
02:01:44.930 --> 02:01:47.909
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Why don't we close the queue and we will move to a vote after Councilor Avalos.

1138
02:01:52.550 --> 02:01:54.689
<v Candace Avalos>Yeah.

1139
02:01:54.689 --> 02:01:55.390
<v Eric Zimmerman>Hmm.

1140
02:01:55.390 --> 02:01:59.750
<v Candace Avalos>Well, I'm actually a bit disappointed because I was looking forward to hearing what you were going to say.

1141
02:01:59.750 --> 02:02:02.689
<v Candace Avalos>So I thought you were going to offer your perspective on the way you're moving.

1142
02:02:02.689 --> 02:02:03.149
<v Dan Ryan>I did earlier.

1143
02:02:03.149 --> 02:02:03.909
<v Dan Ryan>I'm sorry you didn't hear it.

1144
02:02:03.909 --> 02:02:04.489
<v Dan Ryan>I made it really quick.

1145
02:02:04.489 --> 02:02:08.063
<v Candace Avalos>No, I heard, but I was you know, I just thought you were going to add more to that.

1146
02:02:08.207 --> 02:02:10.530
<v Candace Avalos>So, um, okay.

1147
02:02:12.210 --> 02:02:16.990
<v Candace Avalos>Well, um, yeah, I think I'm, I'm feeling very conflicted about this.

1148
02:02:17.072 --> 02:02:32.371
<v Candace Avalos>I definitely, um, agree with the intent here of, um, Councilor Murillo's amendment, and I'll— I will vote to pass it, um, because I think that it's something we should keep discussing, um, but it doesn't appear it will.

1149
02:02:32.891 --> 02:02:49.994
<v Candace Avalos>Um, and so I think I guess I'm just unsure how I'm going to feel when it comes to council because I think there are some serious gaps that, um, Morillo one identified that I'm, you know, for the sake of the community, that those gaps, closing those gaps will help.

1150
02:02:50.219 --> 02:02:52.350
<v Candace Avalos>Um, I'm very interested in discussing more.

1151
02:02:52.479 --> 02:03:07.002
<v Candace Avalos>So yeah, I guess, um, and you know, if this does not, this amendment doesn't pass, then I would encourage Councilor Morillo to bring it I think it's important that we bring this back to full council so we can have a broader discussion, because I do think that other councilors might take interest in it.

1152
02:03:07.131 --> 02:03:12.313
<v Candace Avalos>I think the discussion we're having is fruitful, and I think we're all— we all share a similar intent here.

1153
02:03:13.162 --> 02:03:16.050
<v Candace Avalos>We just obviously feel like we can go about it a different way.

1154
02:03:16.146 --> 02:03:19.530
<v Candace Avalos>So thank you, Councilor Murillo, for bringing that forward.

1155
02:03:19.579 --> 02:03:38.855
<v Candace Avalos>I know it's difficult to propose such a big amendment, and, you know, the way that we've structured our work at council just makes for some of this disconnectedness, which is really frustrating for us because it's just like we got to work in committee and then committee's not enough and then we go to council and then people don't want to talk there.

1156
02:03:38.920 --> 02:03:45.278
<v Candace Avalos>And it just feels like there's always a blocked door instead of an open door, and that makes policymaking hard.

1157
02:03:45.359 --> 02:03:52.872
<v Candace Avalos>So I think that's just my general feeling about how this has gone, but I plan to support it and eager to see where the discussion goes at council.

1158
02:03:53.113 --> 02:03:53.225
<v Unidentified speaker>Thanks.

1159
02:03:53.289 --> 02:03:53.386
<v Dan Ryan>Thank you.

1160
02:03:54.252 --> 02:03:55.023
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilors.

1161
02:03:55.198 --> 02:04:00.475
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Colleagues, I just want to note that we've had a significant amount of workshopping on this.

1162
02:04:00.828 --> 02:04:03.217
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We've had a significant amount of discussion.

1163
02:04:04.195 --> 02:04:12.488
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We are doing the work that we are supposed to do, and if this amendment fails, it's not because we've not had the discussion over it.

1164
02:04:13.240 --> 02:04:36.372
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I understand that there are concerns with the process of this body, and that's something that I think we can work but I hope that we don't continue to use committee as a platform to launch concerns without any work of the body to address them.

1165
02:04:37.260 --> 02:04:45.524
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I personally think that the process we have of committees and a full council vote is important, and I appreciate the conversation we've had today.

1166
02:04:45.573 --> 02:04:45.751
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

1167
02:04:46.417 --> 02:05:11.555
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Because it has aired for me an issue that I might be interested in us taking up in the future, a really important one that although I don't feel we have the experts in the room today to address, and although I hope we can move something forward today, whether the underlying or an amended version depending on how you all vote, that I think needs to be moved forward today.

1168
02:05:14.159 --> 02:05:18.265
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>There's important conversation that has been had and issues identified.

1169
02:05:20.520 --> 02:05:22.521
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Wendy, could you please call the vote on Morillo 1?

1170
02:05:24.699 --> 02:05:24.957
<v Unidentified speaker>Thank you.

1171
02:05:25.021 --> 02:05:26.938
<v Unidentified speaker>Yes, may I ask a procedural question?

1172
02:05:27.389 --> 02:05:32.171
<v Unidentified speaker>Morillo, did you intend to supersede Zimmerman 1, or is it inclusive of Zimmerman 1?

1173
02:05:33.974 --> 02:05:34.319
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I believe—.

1174
02:05:34.548 --> 02:05:36.340
<v Angelita Morillo>Didn't Zimmerman 1 pass first?

1175
02:05:36.438 --> 02:05:37.029
<v Unidentified speaker>Yes.

1176
02:05:37.176 --> 02:05:47.319
<v Unidentified speaker>And so but if there's conflicts between the two, if your amendment is of the original ordinance, then yours would supersede Zimmerman 1.

1177
02:05:47.704 --> 02:05:52.248
<v Unidentified speaker>Otherwise, if you say it's inclusive of Zimmerman 1, then we'd reconcile those differences.

1178
02:05:52.907 --> 02:05:53.100
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Gotcha.

1179
02:05:53.195 --> 02:06:06.891
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So when they conform it, I believe the one conflict would be the definition of F. So are you intending to capture the other changes within Zimmerman 1 but supersede Zimmerman 1's F with your F?

1180
02:06:08.240 --> 02:06:09.076
<v Angelita Morillo>Yeah, that's fine with me.

1181
02:06:10.489 --> 02:06:11.677
<v Unidentified speaker>Thank you so much for clarifying.

1182
02:06:13.154 --> 02:06:18.261
<v Unidentified speaker>So motion to amend the ordinance 2026-308 as shown in Murillo 1.

1183
02:06:18.856 --> 02:06:20.863
<v Unidentified speaker>Murillo?

1184
02:06:22.229 --> 02:06:30.805
<v Angelita Morillo>I, I, and I believe I heard Mike say that he was interested in taking this back to his attorney, so I'll be sending the language to them for further discussion for full council.

1185
02:06:32.764 --> 02:06:33.197
<v Unidentified speaker>Zimmerman?

1186
02:06:33.567 --> 02:06:33.774
<v Eric Zimmerman>No.

1187
02:06:35.060 --> 02:06:35.444
<v Keelan McClymont>Avalos?

1188
02:06:35.556 --> 02:06:35.702
<v Candace Avalos>Aye.

1189
02:06:36.600 --> 02:06:36.873
<v Unidentified speaker>Ryan?

1190
02:06:37.243 --> 02:06:37.323
<v Dan Ryan>No.

1191
02:06:37.868 --> 02:06:38.703
<v Unidentified speaker>Pirtle-Guiney?

1192
02:06:38.832 --> 02:06:39.154
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>No.

1193
02:06:40.518 --> 02:06:48.064
<v Unidentified speaker>The amendment— oh, sorry, uh, fails with, uh, 2 aye votes and 3 nay votes.

1194
02:06:48.337 --> 02:06:57.230
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, colleagues, that moves us back to discussion on the underlying, which I think we have pretty substantially discussed in discussing the amendment, so I'm hoping we can move to a vote there.

1195
02:06:57.457 --> 02:06:59.666
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Pretty quickly so we can move to a break.

1196
02:06:59.989 --> 02:07:00.429
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Zimmerman.

1197
02:07:00.965 --> 02:07:01.418
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you.

1198
02:07:01.679 --> 02:07:05.317
<v Eric Zimmerman>I— the reason I got in quickly was I do think we've had largely the discussion.

1199
02:07:05.447 --> 02:07:10.578
<v Eric Zimmerman>I want to lift up what is, I think, going to be a good action today.

1200
02:07:10.837 --> 02:07:12.354
<v Eric Zimmerman>I hope that this has support.

1201
02:07:12.760 --> 02:07:19.939
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think that a discussion on an amendment is a worthwhile endeavor almost all the time, and we have done that now for a couple of hours.

1202
02:07:21.015 --> 02:07:54.878
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I don't want that tone to override what I think is an incredibly positive step for the City of Portland, for the consumers of Portland, for every shopper in Portland and setting an example for other states, for other cities, for this, for our state, because the exploitation of one's personal data as technology makes that easier and easier, as we know that there are companies who are pitching retailers of all types that they can come in and tell a retailer, we'll tell you more about your consumer than you could ever know and you can set prices based upon that.

1203
02:07:55.386 --> 02:08:02.953
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think us saying no thank you to that and setting a clear example and a clear way of doing business in Portland is the right step.

1204
02:08:03.001 --> 02:08:06.640
<v Eric Zimmerman>So I want to appreciate everybody who's helped us work on this.

1205
02:08:06.783 --> 02:08:13.948
<v Eric Zimmerman>I want to appreciate my team in particular who helped us go through the eaches and for a healthy conversation.

1206
02:08:15.039 --> 02:08:21.259
<v Eric Zimmerman>And I look forward to defending this at City Council so that we can protect Portland consumers.

1207
02:08:22.657 --> 02:08:23.154
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you, Chair.

1208
02:08:23.461 --> 02:08:24.425
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

1209
02:08:24.729 --> 02:08:25.389
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Morillo.

1210
02:08:26.497 --> 02:08:26.930
<v Angelita Morillo>Thank you.

1211
02:08:28.265 --> 02:08:35.302
<v Angelita Morillo>With regards to process, I do have to address that we had a brief presentation last committee, not really any time for discussion.

1212
02:08:35.511 --> 02:08:37.488
<v Angelita Morillo>This was our big discussion committee hearing.

1213
02:08:38.564 --> 02:08:50.127
<v Angelita Morillo>We have had 2 hours to discuss antitrust law, which is one of the most complicated areas of law, frankly, because we're talking about technology, and we're talking about a very complicated legal area.

1214
02:08:50.753 --> 02:08:56.189
<v Angelita Morillo>And you guys made the algorithmic price fixing ban go through committee 3 separate times.

1215
02:08:56.606 --> 02:09:01.979
<v Angelita Morillo>I had to return it back once because, again, very complicated legal area and we had to protect the city for it.

1216
02:09:02.475 --> 02:09:11.904
<v Angelita Morillo>I heard from Mike Salvaggio up there that he was interested in the amendment and wanted to bring it back to his attorneys and that they needed to review a potential option.

1217
02:09:12.337 --> 02:09:15.015
<v Angelita Morillo>So to me, that is not that is not sitting with the amendments.

1218
02:09:15.127 --> 02:09:17.435
<v Angelita Morillo>That is not processing any of the language.

1219
02:09:18.350 --> 02:09:20.833
<v Angelita Morillo>But we're just moving it out of committee as I thought we would.

1220
02:09:20.978 --> 02:09:21.363
<v Angelita Morillo>That's fine.

1221
02:09:22.100 --> 02:09:29.520
<v Angelita Morillo>What this ordinance leaves on the table is essentially creating a policy that is the same sticker with different discounts.

1222
02:09:30.627 --> 02:09:36.670
<v Angelita Morillo>So to a consumer, this is how Kroger, Instacart, and DoorDash actually do it.

1223
02:09:37.182 --> 02:09:38.353
<v Angelita Morillo>There are different fees.

1224
02:09:38.448 --> 02:09:51.854
<v Angelita Morillo>Premium fees are carved out of the retail price and a personalized mandatory the ban says that a specific consumer account or device, not a group.

1225
02:09:53.074 --> 02:09:53.974
<v Angelita Morillo>Pricing tests.

1226
02:09:54.824 --> 02:10:07.225
<v Angelita Morillo>And, and just like a lot of other holes that are in this policy, so anything the city can't see because there are no records, there's no private suit, $1,000 total for a first offense and nothing if the company stops within 45 days.

1227
02:10:07.289 --> 02:10:07.386
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

1228
02:10:07.451 --> 02:10:07.578
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

1229
02:10:08.559 --> 02:10:29.024
<v Angelita Morillo>So if we are trying to signal to the legislature that we are serious about banning surveillance pricing at the city level, unfortunately what we are signaling by moving this forward today without any changes is that we are okay with moving forward a more symbolic policy that does not actually remove the loopholes that would actually stop this.

1230
02:10:30.086 --> 02:10:34.775
<v Angelita Morillo>And I'm really sad about this because I think it's a really cool idea and a really important issue.

1231
02:10:34.824 --> 02:10:34.969
<v Angelita Morillo>Thank you.

1232
02:10:36.365 --> 02:10:47.140
<v Angelita Morillo>But because of that, I had to explain myself pretty strongly to the public who's watching this because I will be voting no and I don't want it to be misconstrued why I can't support this today.

1233
02:10:47.590 --> 02:10:47.926
<v Angelita Morillo>Thank you.

1234
02:10:48.152 --> 02:10:50.623
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor Morillo.

1235
02:10:50.672 --> 02:10:53.931
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Seeing no one else in the queue, Wendy, could you please call the roll?

1236
02:10:54.992 --> 02:10:55.184
<v Unidentified speaker>Thank you.

1237
02:10:55.233 --> 02:10:56.051
<v Unidentified speaker>May I have a motion?

1238
02:10:56.694 --> 02:10:57.287
<v Unidentified speaker>Second?

1239
02:10:57.865 --> 02:11:01.759
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I believe— Didn't we—.

1240
02:11:01.759 --> 02:11:03.279
<v Eric Zimmerman>I'll move it for adoption of the full council.

1241
02:11:03.328 --> 02:11:07.113
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Had a motion and a second from Zimmerman and Ryan.

1242
02:11:08.891 --> 02:11:09.926
<v Unidentified speaker>I think that was the amendment.

1243
02:11:10.007 --> 02:11:10.912
<v Unidentified speaker>Thank you so much.

1244
02:11:11.074 --> 02:11:12.094
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Oh, I apologize.

1245
02:11:12.190 --> 02:11:12.918
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>That was Zimmerman 1.

1246
02:11:13.176 --> 02:11:13.501
<v Candace Avalos>Okay.

1247
02:11:14.631 --> 02:11:15.114
<v Unidentified speaker>Morillo?

1248
02:11:16.547 --> 02:11:17.354
<v Angelita Morillo>Regretfully, no.

1249
02:11:18.238 --> 02:11:18.706
<v Unidentified speaker>Zimmerman?

1250
02:11:18.963 --> 02:11:19.011
<v Unidentified speaker>Aye.

1251
02:11:20.091 --> 02:11:20.476
<v Unidentified speaker>Avalos?

1252
02:11:26.846 --> 02:11:28.945
<v Candace Avalos>Yeah, I feel conflicted about this vote.

1253
02:11:29.250 --> 02:11:36.653
<v Candace Avalos>Um, I feel unsatisfied by where we're landing and feel there are some important gaps.

1254
02:11:37.421 --> 02:11:41.043
<v Candace Avalos>Um, my vote is symbolic because it's going to pass out.

1255
02:11:41.188 --> 02:11:45.546
<v Candace Avalos>I'm going to vote yes, but, uh, I reserve the right to reach out.

1256
02:11:45.626 --> 02:11:51.667
<v Candace Avalos>I want to talk to the stakeholders and see how we can improve it, um, as it's on its way to council.

1257
02:11:51.715 --> 02:11:58.332
<v Candace Avalos>So I'll vote yes now, but Ryan?

1258
02:11:58.627 --> 02:11:58.644
<v Dan Ryan>Aye.

1259
02:11:59.329 --> 02:11:59.755
<v Unidentified speaker>Pirtle-Guiney?

1260
02:12:01.349 --> 02:12:01.364
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Aye.

1261
02:12:01.823 --> 02:12:06.002
<v Unidentified speaker>The motion to refer is— the ordinance as amended is approved.

1262
02:12:08.270 --> 02:12:10.577
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, colleagues, we are going to take a 10-minute break.

1263
02:12:10.625 --> 02:12:12.399
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We have 2 items left on the agenda.

1264
02:12:12.497 --> 02:12:20.529
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I will be talking to our colleagues during that break to figure out how much time they need and if we may need to move one of these items when we get back.

1265
02:12:20.659 --> 02:12:29.451
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I will make I just want to make a quick announcement about what we're still moving forward with today so that anybody here for either agenda item 5 or 6 has as much notice as possible.

1266
02:12:29.886 --> 02:12:31.786
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Please be back here at 4:17.

1267
02:12:39.271 --> 02:12:39.993
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

1268
02:23:33.879 --> 02:23:40.244
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you all for being back.

1269
02:23:40.885 --> 02:23:47.665
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We are going to go ahead and reconvene.

1270
02:23:48.644 --> 02:24:06.472
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Um, Councilor Zimmerman believes we can get through the next item which his office brought forward quite quickly, so we are going to move ahead assuming that we will complete agenda item So I'd ask that everybody who is here for both of those items stay.

1271
02:24:07.658 --> 02:24:09.952
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Wendy, could you please open agenda item 4 for us?

1272
02:24:10.962 --> 02:24:13.047
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I'm sorry, we renumbered 5 and 6.

1273
02:24:13.175 --> 02:24:13.960
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Agenda item 5.

1274
02:24:14.234 --> 02:24:14.956
<v Unidentified speaker>Yes, thank you.

1275
02:24:15.036 --> 02:24:21.001
<v Unidentified speaker>Item number 5, document number 2026-286, Protect Portland Firefighters from Job-Related Risks.

1276
02:24:21.995 --> 02:24:22.252
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

1277
02:24:22.476 --> 02:24:25.699
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And this again comes from Councilor Zimmerman's office.

1278
02:24:25.763 --> 02:24:26.661
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Zimmerman, would you like to introduce the item?

1279
02:24:26.822 --> 02:24:29.868
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>To introduce this item before we hear from our fire chief.

1280
02:24:30.269 --> 02:24:30.814
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thank you.

1281
02:24:31.135 --> 02:24:39.086
<v Eric Zimmerman>I'd like to just open this item by noting that occupational cancer is the number one killer of firefighters in the United States.

1282
02:24:39.792 --> 02:24:47.424
<v Eric Zimmerman>Firefighters are nearly 10% more likely to develop cancer and almost 15% more likely to die from cancer than the general public.

1283
02:24:48.306 --> 02:24:55.488
<v Eric Zimmerman>PFAS chemicals have historically been added to protective gear to serve as a critical moisture barrier.

1284
02:24:56.243 --> 02:25:04.995
<v Eric Zimmerman>While advances in material science have been made and the amount of PFAS reduced, protective gear remains a source of carcinogenic exposure.

1285
02:25:05.764 --> 02:25:13.731
<v Eric Zimmerman>Portland firefighters need gear that shields against hazards encountered on the job and not gear that adds to a known cancer risk.

1286
02:25:14.436 --> 02:25:19.743
<v Eric Zimmerman>Unfortunately, PFAS-free fire turnouts are not yet commercially viable.

1287
02:25:20.191 --> 02:25:42.459
<v Eric Zimmerman>However, to ensure that there is a quick transition once there is a viable option, I'm seeking to establish the PFAS Replacement subfund within the Portland Fire and— excuse me, Fire and Rescue Fire Capital Fund, so we can offset large one-time costs outside of the normal 5-year cycle of turnout replacement for Portland Fire.

1288
02:25:44.149 --> 02:25:51.763
<v Eric Zimmerman>With that, I wanted to invite our chief to present to us and describe a little bit more about the problem we're solving and what we'd hope to achieve.

1289
02:25:51.893 --> 02:25:54.307
<v Eric Zimmerman>So thank you, colleagues, and Chief Johnson.

1290
02:25:57.842 --> 02:25:59.891
<v Lauren Johnson>For the opportunity to be here with you today.

1291
02:26:00.166 --> 02:26:02.168
<v Lauren Johnson>For the record, I'm Lauren Johnson, the Fire Chief.

1292
02:26:02.778 --> 02:26:12.233
<v Lauren Johnson>I want to thank Councilor Zimmerman for your advocacy and to let you all know that this resolution aligns with Portland's core values.

1293
02:26:12.894 --> 02:26:30.676
<v Lauren Johnson>I'll give more specific details about PFAS in the remainder of the presentation, but I wanted to highlight that committing to a change that improves firefighter health and safety and moves toward more sustainable, environmentally friendly product is fiscally responsible, collaborative, and simply the right thing to do.

1294
02:26:31.271 --> 02:26:32.183
<v Lauren Johnson>Next slide, please.

1295
02:26:33.594 --> 02:26:38.117
<v Lauren Johnson>So I'll start by sharing a broad overview of PFAS and how they're impacting firefighters.

1296
02:26:39.014 --> 02:26:42.206
<v Lauren Johnson>PFAS are a large group of human-made chemicals.

1297
02:26:42.638 --> 02:26:48.346
<v Lauren Johnson>By some definitions, there are more than 3,000 different types, and they've been around since the mid-20th century.

1298
02:26:48.395 --> 02:26:48.506
<v Lauren Johnson>Thank you.

1299
02:26:49.197 --> 02:26:52.632
<v Lauren Johnson>They're commonly used on products that we all encounter in daily life.

1300
02:26:53.387 --> 02:26:56.807
<v Lauren Johnson>They're used as waterproofing and stain protection coatings.

1301
02:26:57.320 --> 02:27:03.886
<v Lauren Johnson>They're sometimes referred to as forever chemicals because they don't readily break down in the environment or in the human body.

1302
02:27:04.704 --> 02:27:15.429
<v Lauren Johnson>And because they've been so widely used for so long, we encounter them everywhere from the goods on our grocery store shelves to the products that we use and we wear and in the soil and in our water.

1303
02:27:17.146 --> 02:27:21.593
<v Lauren Johnson>And unfortunately, we know that firefighters have had additional routes of PFAS exposure.

1304
02:27:22.105 --> 02:27:32.201
<v Lauren Johnson>Firefighting foam is a product that we spray through hoses to help extinguish fires, and the foam used by most fire departments across the country has historically contained PFAS.

1305
02:27:32.957 --> 02:27:37.915
<v Lauren Johnson>Recently, manufacturing requirements has removed PFAS from the foam.

1306
02:27:38.253 --> 02:27:43.918
<v Lauren Johnson>That's been phased out, but it's been for a long time a primary source of groundwater contamination.

1307
02:27:45.155 --> 02:27:51.058
<v Lauren Johnson>And current firefighters and retirees have been exposed to a significant amount just in the course of our daily duties.

1308
02:27:52.389 --> 02:27:55.630
<v Lauren Johnson>Some occupational exposures are not currently preventable.

1309
02:27:56.128 --> 02:27:59.480
<v Lauren Johnson>They occur during fire and other hazardous materials emergencies.

1310
02:27:59.754 --> 02:28:05.240
<v Lauren Johnson>And so during and after these active fire responses, we make every effort to mitigate these hazards.

1311
02:28:05.289 --> 02:28:08.031
<v Lauren Johnson>And I'll explain a little bit more about that in the next few slides.

1312
02:28:08.978 --> 02:28:21.031
<v Lauren Johnson>And finally, PFAS like Councilor mentioned, has been historically present in the turnout gear that we wear, and this is because it is a durable water repellent that's applied to the outer shell and the inner layers of firefighting gear.

1313
02:28:21.191 --> 02:28:34.385
<v Lauren Johnson>And as you can imagine, it's critical that we provide turnout gear that can let firefighters' body heat and sweat move away from our skin, but does not let in superheated water and moisture or contaminants like blood and chemicals.

1314
02:28:35.075 --> 02:28:35.540
<v Lauren Johnson>Next slide, please.

1315
02:28:35.798 --> 02:28:48.646
<v Lauren Johnson>So these slides have given you an idea of the challenge that we face when it comes to balancing firefighter health and wellness against the dangers associated with meeting our mission of extinguishing fires and preserving life and property.

1316
02:28:49.863 --> 02:29:00.967
<v Lauren Johnson>Councilor Zimmerman's resolution notes that the startling fact that firefighting has been categorized by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a Group 1 carcinogen.

1317
02:29:01.398 --> 02:29:05.869
<v Lauren Johnson>So that's the highest risk category, and it's the same category that tobacco smoke is in.

1318
02:29:05.949 --> 02:29:05.996
<v Lauren Johnson>Wow.

1319
02:29:07.424 --> 02:29:15.059
<v Lauren Johnson>Firefighter cancer rates have been increasing throughout my career, and fire departments are making big efforts to mitigate the hazards of occupational exposure.

1320
02:29:15.684 --> 02:29:21.877
<v Lauren Johnson>These efforts include cleaning our apparatus and gear after every fire and wearing our breathing apparatus for much longer.

1321
02:29:22.743 --> 02:29:30.971
<v Lauren Johnson>And they also include doing everything we can to encourage manufacturers to make changes to, to the chemical composition of the tools and the equipment that we use.

1322
02:29:31.565 --> 02:29:34.019
<v Lauren Johnson>And the change in firefighting foam is one example of this.

1323
02:29:34.519 --> 02:29:36.488
<v Lauren Johnson>Next slide, please.

1324
02:29:40.355 --> 02:29:51.040
<v Lauren Johnson>Another manufacturing change that firefighters are advocating for and that this resolution supports is to completely remove PFAS from all layers of turnout gear.

1325
02:29:51.914 --> 02:30:01.358
<v Lauren Johnson>The waterproofing properties of certain PFAS currently play an important role in protecting firefighters from contaminants, especially petroleum products and bloodborne pathogens.

1326
02:30:02.215 --> 02:30:10.706
<v Lauren Johnson>And there's also certain types of PFAS that can withstand exposure to harsh chemicals and temperatures and must be superheated before they begin to degrade or off-gas.

1327
02:30:11.545 --> 02:30:20.407
<v Lauren Johnson>So as you can understand, these qualities meet a really specific need for firefighter protective gear, and that also explains why it's so hard to find a suitable replacement.

1328
02:30:21.547 --> 02:30:22.158
<v Lauren Johnson>Next slide, please.

1329
02:30:23.680 --> 02:30:23.959
<v Lauren Johnson>Maybe.

1330
02:30:27.967 --> 02:30:28.849
<v Lauren Johnson>There we go.

1331
02:30:29.730 --> 02:30:37.472
<v Lauren Johnson>So it's important for you to know that we're in the best type of protective gear, the best suited gear for us in our working environment right now.

1332
02:30:38.243 --> 02:30:48.854
<v Lauren Johnson>And that really means that we assess that— what we do is we take the types of risks and conditions that we're exposed to, and then we choose appropriately matched levels of protection when it comes to turnout gear.

1333
02:30:49.864 --> 02:31:03.700
<v Lauren Johnson>We know that our current turnout gear contains PFAS in one layer, It's completely encapsulated, and when this particular setup of bunker gear is studied, we do not see firefighters becoming contaminated with that type of PFAS.

1334
02:31:04.693 --> 02:31:12.405
<v Lauren Johnson>However, we still maintain the importance of keeping good hygiene practices in place so that the gear and our members get clean after each fire.

1335
02:31:13.671 --> 02:31:24.586
<v Lauren Johnson>And you can see here on this slide that the professional unions, both of firefighters and fire chiefs, have formally called for turnout gear manufacturers to develop gear that's completely free of PFAS.

1336
02:31:25.507 --> 02:31:32.685
<v Lauren Johnson>And so we're watching as the textile advancements take place so that we can be ready to buy a new product once safety and performance standards are proven.

1337
02:31:33.978 --> 02:31:34.690
<v Lauren Johnson>Next slide, please.

1338
02:31:39.290 --> 02:31:41.733
<v Lauren Johnson>Oh, goodness.

1339
02:31:41.845 --> 02:31:44.515
<v Lauren Johnson>It's like we've got a gremlin in the slides.

1340
02:31:44.921 --> 02:31:45.795
<v Lauren Johnson>So there we go.

1341
02:31:46.021 --> 02:31:46.328
<v Lauren Johnson>Thank you.

1342
02:31:47.361 --> 02:31:50.523
<v Lauren Johnson>This slide describes our current cost and replacement schedule.

1343
02:31:50.572 --> 02:31:59.018
<v Lauren Johnson>So each set of turnout gear is approximately $4,500 in today's dollars, and we usually buy about 175 sets each year.

1344
02:31:59.852 --> 02:32:10.032
<v Lauren Johnson>There is a mandatory retirement of all turnout gear 10 years after the date of manufacture, and with our rates of wear and tear, we usually get about 7 to 8 years out of a set.

1345
02:32:10.948 --> 02:32:17.498
<v Lauren Johnson>Portland has accounted for and planned for these purchases a few different ways, but what's relevant for today's conversation is the idea of the substation.

1346
02:32:17.547 --> 02:32:17.594
<v Lauren Johnson>Okay.

1347
02:32:18.860 --> 02:32:29.670
<v Lauren Johnson>The resolution that's before you establishes a PFAS replacement subfund that would allow general fund underspend to be saved in preparation for a wholesale transition to PFAS-free gear.

1348
02:32:30.615 --> 02:32:31.479
<v Lauren Johnson>Next slide, please.

1349
02:32:35.479 --> 02:32:43.679
<v Lauren Johnson>So I appreciate the work that the councilor's office did to carefully craft this resolution so that it does provide for a responsible path forward.

1350
02:32:44.365 --> 02:32:52.907
<v Lauren Johnson>We're committed to giving the city administrator annual updates on the timeline, challenges, and projected costs for the transitioning to PFAS-free gear.

1351
02:32:54.060 --> 02:33:00.263
<v Lauren Johnson>And we've emphasized that there's not currently enough data to show that there's a suitable alternative for Portland Fire to change into.

1352
02:33:01.111 --> 02:33:09.764
<v Lauren Johnson>We want to be sure to avoid what's known as a regrettable substitution, which is when a hazardous substance is replaced with another that is equally or even more harmful.

1353
02:33:10.423 --> 02:33:14.879
<v Lauren Johnson>And that usually happens because of an incomplete hazard analysis or regulatory gaps.

1354
02:33:15.230 --> 02:33:19.174
<v Lauren Johnson>An example that many of you may remember is with BPA replacements.

1355
02:33:19.382 --> 02:33:33.601
<v Lauren Johnson>So when this move happened, bisphenol A was replaced with bisphenol S and bisphenol F, and then the science showed that those alternatives really had similar health hazards compared to the original substance that they had replaced.

1356
02:33:34.066 --> 02:33:42.379
<v Lauren Johnson>So obviously a premature move like that would damage trust be expensive to overcome, and could result in worse safety outcomes for firefighters.

1357
02:33:43.600 --> 02:33:56.754
<v Lauren Johnson>And that leads me to the last point on this slide, which is that I believe this resolution has the right balance of direction and patience so that Portland Fire is prepared to transition when PFAS-free gear is proven and readily available.

1358
02:33:58.056 --> 02:34:01.332
<v Lauren Johnson>And if it'll give it to us, how about the next slide?

1359
02:34:02.327 --> 02:34:02.825
<v Lauren Johnson>There we go.

1360
02:34:03.050 --> 02:34:03.179
<v Lauren Johnson>Okay.

1361
02:34:03.388 --> 02:34:06.310
<v Lauren Johnson>Okay, so I want to close by summarizing what this resolution does.

1362
02:34:07.049 --> 02:34:10.246
<v Lauren Johnson>It affirms your support for Portland firefighters' health and safety.

1363
02:34:10.921 --> 02:34:15.852
<v Lauren Johnson>It directs us to monitor the science and changes associated with PFAS-free turnout gear.

1364
02:34:16.719 --> 02:34:21.489
<v Lauren Johnson>It requires a change to PFAS-free gear once it's proven to be safe and effective.

1365
02:34:22.165 --> 02:34:28.845
<v Lauren Johnson>And it establishes the subfund to help spread the costs of this transition out over several years, provided that there is underspend.

1366
02:34:28.895 --> 02:34:29.006
<v Lauren Johnson>Thank you.

1367
02:34:29.952 --> 02:34:37.314
<v Lauren Johnson>And finally, it has an accountability piece built in where annual reporting is required from the bureau to the CA and then from the CA to council.

1368
02:34:38.067 --> 02:34:38.902
<v Lauren Johnson>Next slide, please.

1369
02:34:40.233 --> 02:34:41.933
<v Lauren Johnson>So that's the last slide for me.

1370
02:34:42.542 --> 02:34:45.590
<v Lauren Johnson>And I want to thank you all for your service here on the committee.

1371
02:34:45.670 --> 02:34:54.923
<v Lauren Johnson>I don't usually get, get to see this particular group, but thank you for that and your service to council overall, but also specifically for calling attention to firefighter health.

1372
02:34:56.340 --> 02:35:02.760
<v Lauren Johnson>Thank you, Chief.

1373
02:35:02.760 --> 02:35:04.790
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Zimmerman, did you have anything to close with?

1374
02:35:04.819 --> 02:35:07.120
<v Eric Zimmerman>Thanks, Chief, for spending your time with us.

1375
02:35:07.120 --> 02:35:10.000
<v Eric Zimmerman>You're a very busy person, so I appreciate it.

1376
02:35:10.000 --> 02:35:21.020
<v Eric Zimmerman>Colleagues, what we're really seeing here is the department has, once this technology becomes available, the ability to make those regular new purchases each year, and that's going to save us a lot of money.

1377
02:35:21.162 --> 02:35:23.087
<v Eric Zimmerman>Each year or so as things expire.

1378
02:35:23.327 --> 02:35:40.783
<v Eric Zimmerman>What we're really talking about is, can we carve out the ability for them to make a larger purchase so that it's, uh, when that, when that technology is available and the garments are ready, so that we're not in a 5 to 7 year cycle of waiting before everybody in the department has a new set of turnouts?

1379
02:35:40.879 --> 02:35:46.094
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so that's really the meat of what we're talking about, and it comes from savings within their own department year over year.

1380
02:35:46.174 --> 02:35:49.798
<v Eric Zimmerman>And So I appreciate your entertaining of this resolution.

1381
02:35:50.154 --> 02:35:51.836
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

1382
02:35:52.662 --> 02:35:54.296
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Wendy, do we have anybody signed up to testify?

1383
02:35:56.059 --> 02:35:56.879
<v Keelan McClymont>No, we don't have anyone.

1384
02:35:57.073 --> 02:35:59.584
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, then let's move right into discussion.

1385
02:35:59.631 --> 02:36:00.452
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Avalos?

1386
02:36:00.918 --> 02:36:04.653
<v Candace Avalos>Yeah, thank you so much for your presentation.

1387
02:36:06.781 --> 02:36:08.628
<v Candace Avalos>Just a couple of logistical questions.

1388
02:36:08.726 --> 02:36:15.918
<v Candace Avalos>So as it relates to the amount of the future transition.

1389
02:36:16.513 --> 02:36:25.481
<v Candace Avalos>Do we have a range for what a wholesale transition could ultimately cost compared to the roughly $787K that we're already spending annually on replacement gear?

1390
02:36:25.934 --> 02:36:31.328
<v Lauren Johnson>Yeah, I can— I'm awful at math, but I can do that calculation.

1391
02:36:33.355 --> 02:36:43.340
<v Lauren Johnson>It would, in today's dollars, if we did 4,500 by 700 firefighters, That's what we would get for a total for everybody to get into one set.

1392
02:36:44.215 --> 02:36:46.906
<v Lauren Johnson>We actually have 2 sets just for logistics.

1393
02:36:47.542 --> 02:36:55.706
<v Lauren Johnson>Once they wear their A set and it becomes dirty because of an exposure, they swap into a B set while the A set gets washed.

1394
02:37:00.486 --> 02:37:12.702
<v Candace Avalos>And then this is a— since this is a resolution, so this is about telling the— I guess help me understand the part about like setting aside money, you know, general fund underspend.

1395
02:37:13.248 --> 02:37:20.753
<v Candace Avalos>Is it that we're telling the mayor that as he prepares the first budget that, you know, if there's underspend that we're putting it into a pot?

1396
02:37:20.816 --> 02:37:22.551
<v Candace Avalos>Like, just help me understand the logistics of that.

1397
02:37:22.888 --> 02:37:24.673
<v Eric Zimmerman>Yeah, uh, great.

1398
02:37:24.897 --> 02:37:31.485
<v Eric Zimmerman>It's essentially— it's establishing, or, or I guess it's a resolution asking and directing the administration to establish the fund.

1399
02:37:32.248 --> 02:37:41.172
<v Eric Zimmerman>And like a lot of financial policies, things like we use 50% of our one-time on capital, or we use it— this is essentially one of those types of policies.

1400
02:37:41.688 --> 02:37:55.675
<v Eric Zimmerman>And so our— I would say if the council passes this, the goal would be that we would see a budget crafted by the administration that recognizes this resolution and it recognizes the—.

1401
02:37:55.675 --> 02:37:56.636
<v Eric Zimmerman>The need.

1402
02:37:57.496 --> 02:38:08.929
<v Eric Zimmerman>Year-end savings or underspend of the, of the bureau and frontloads that into this subfund, keeping those what were fire funds, keeping them in fire, but just for use at a later date.

1403
02:38:09.475 --> 02:38:13.264
<v Candace Avalos>Is that something, I guess, like, that's binding to us?

1404
02:38:13.408 --> 02:38:21.790
<v Candace Avalos>Like, would we look at that and say— because all, all bureaus have underspend to some extent, and that all kind of just is color money and it gets put random places.

1405
02:38:21.838 --> 02:38:24.343
<v Candace Avalos>I guess I'm trying to understand how's it going to show up to us?

1406
02:38:24.391 --> 02:38:25.628
<v Candace Avalos>Like, is it on the mayor's level?

1407
02:38:25.675 --> 02:38:26.478
<v Candace Avalos>Is it on our level?

1408
02:38:26.558 --> 02:38:34.411
<v Candace Avalos>Do we need to take a certain action based on this resolution in the next budget that says we've already agreed that this money can't be put towards other things?

1409
02:38:35.084 --> 02:38:47.898
<v Eric Zimmerman>I think it's more of a signaling of a set of priorities and values than it is a hard and fast— we can always, as the Budget Committee, I believe the Budget Committee can always say we're choosing to not follow that resolution that we passed for these reasons.

1410
02:38:48.653 --> 02:38:53.583
<v Eric Zimmerman>But it allows us to signal where we, where we can and where we do want it to go.

1411
02:38:54.112 --> 02:38:56.039
<v Eric Zimmerman>It's not interrupting the budget cycle.

1412
02:38:56.263 --> 02:39:04.516
<v Eric Zimmerman>It is just creating a place that if this council wants to signal and set aside money, that it can in the, in the upcoming budgets process.

1413
02:39:05.047 --> 02:39:05.850
<v Candace Avalos>Okay.

1414
02:39:06.717 --> 02:39:13.316
<v Candace Avalos>And then, um, Chief, you had mentioned, uh, the cost of $4,500, right, for the equipment.

1415
02:39:13.363 --> 02:39:14.842
<v Candace Avalos>I guess maybe I was getting confused.

1416
02:39:15.131 --> 02:39:21.494
<v Candace Avalos>Is the alternative or the thing that we're working towards already available, we just can't afford it, or it hasn't been created yet?

1417
02:39:22.200 --> 02:39:23.438
<v Lauren Johnson>So it's a little bit of both.

1418
02:39:23.518 --> 02:39:28.162
<v Lauren Johnson>There is one manufacturer that claims to be completely PFAS-free.

1419
02:39:28.675 --> 02:39:34.620
<v Lauren Johnson>So in the industry, we're looking for more testing that's third-party testing to verify.

1420
02:39:34.829 --> 02:39:40.034
<v Lauren Johnson>And I would just say the market isn't there yet, so there's no competition for that.

1421
02:39:40.451 --> 02:39:44.897
<v Lauren Johnson>Particular set of turnout gear that's marketed as PFAS-free.

1422
02:39:45.505 --> 02:39:52.742
<v Lauren Johnson>So we really need that to evolve a little bit more to make sure— what we have seen, the outer— so there's 3 layers to the garment.

1423
02:39:52.806 --> 02:39:55.549
<v Lauren Johnson>The outer shell used to have PFAS-free.

1424
02:39:55.613 --> 02:39:58.148
<v Lauren Johnson>That's where we needed most of the water shedding to happen.

1425
02:39:58.582 --> 02:40:02.529
<v Lauren Johnson>And all manufacturers have gotten rid of PFAS in that outer shell.

1426
02:40:02.673 --> 02:40:06.811
<v Lauren Johnson>And what we're seeing is a faster wear and tear because you don't have the same protection.

1427
02:40:07.630 --> 02:40:18.210
<v Lauren Johnson>And for firefighters, what that translates to is more heat coming through, a greater rate of burns, a shorter life of that garment that should last 10 years.

1428
02:40:18.307 --> 02:40:19.880
<v Lauren Johnson>Maybe it only lasts 5 now.

1429
02:40:20.425 --> 02:40:24.825
<v Lauren Johnson>So we need that technology to improve before it's the right choice for Portland.

1430
02:40:25.549 --> 02:40:25.805
<v Candace Avalos>I see.

1431
02:40:26.271 --> 02:40:31.745
<v Candace Avalos>And then, so are you saying, I guess, where's that trigger of like when we decide the technology is good?

1432
02:40:31.810 --> 02:40:33.689
<v Candace Avalos>Like, is that something you're going to make a call on?

1433
02:40:33.736 --> 02:40:43.657
<v Candace Avalos>Is it that— and what if If the market does not produce more alternatives, like, is there going to be a point where we say we can't keep waiting for the market to produce new things, so we're going to go with this current thing?

1434
02:40:44.329 --> 02:40:46.900
<v Lauren Johnson>So I, I would say I'm not sure.

1435
02:40:47.094 --> 02:40:52.497
<v Lauren Johnson>I think that it's important for us to report every year to the CA kind of what the status of the market is.

1436
02:40:53.442 --> 02:40:58.317
<v Lauren Johnson>I do want to be clear that the gear that we're in right now, we don't have concerns, is shedding.

1437
02:40:58.511 --> 02:41:01.154
<v Lauren Johnson>We do believe that that PFAS is thank you.

1438
02:41:01.445 --> 02:41:13.647
<v Lauren Johnson>I think the concern is safe and as it's contained, but long-term, right, I think as a city we have concerns about wanting to make sure that we support purchases that are more environmentally friendly.

1439
02:41:13.762 --> 02:41:18.528
<v Lauren Johnson>And so I think you're going to see the city and state largely moving away from PFAS.

1440
02:41:19.125 --> 02:41:21.127
<v Lauren Johnson>So that could force a change, right?

1441
02:41:21.288 --> 02:41:22.725
<v Lauren Johnson>We saw that happen in California.

1442
02:41:23.819 --> 02:41:33.337
<v Lauren Johnson>But what I would like in terms of maintaining you know, a pretty high standard for firefighter safety is that we continue to report to you guys, here's how the market's changing.

1443
02:41:33.852 --> 02:41:45.212
<v Lauren Johnson>And once you see other fire departments that are similar to Portland making this move, and we watch those wear test trials so that we know how it's impacting their fires, then we'll be ready to pull the trigger.

1444
02:41:46.048 --> 02:41:55.393
<v Lauren Johnson>And I think just to speak to the sub fund place, you know, normally we would have to turn any savings any savings over, right?

1445
02:41:55.457 --> 02:41:57.413
<v Lauren Johnson>We don't get to carry that year over year.

1446
02:41:57.781 --> 02:42:11.296
<v Lauren Johnson>One thing that this could really help us with is if we know that that suitable alternative is on the horizon, we might hold back a year or 2 from purchasing the regular amount of sets that we need, we usually do.

1447
02:42:11.471 --> 02:42:24.127
<v Lauren Johnson>We might say instead of the 175, let's only buy 100 because we really think this is just around the corner and that's where we can wonderful.

1448
02:42:24.222 --> 02:42:24.479
<v Candace Avalos>Thank you.

1449
02:42:24.609 --> 02:42:24.801
<v Candace Avalos>That's all.

1450
02:42:25.042 --> 02:42:25.429
<v Lauren Johnson>Yes, ma'am.

1451
02:42:26.537 --> 02:42:27.115
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

1452
02:42:27.275 --> 02:42:29.364
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Morillo.

1453
02:42:29.590 --> 02:42:31.389
<v Angelita Morillo>Thank you so much for being here to present on this.

1454
02:42:31.519 --> 02:42:33.786
<v Angelita Morillo>This seems like a pretty simple yes to me.

1455
02:42:34.495 --> 02:42:38.150
<v Angelita Morillo>You know, it's very common sense that we should protect our firefighters from PFAS.

1456
02:42:39.020 --> 02:42:53.145
<v Angelita Morillo>My understanding of the policy, just for clarity, based on some of Councilor Avalos's questions, is that this is a little bit more signaling intent for the future because it doesn't necessarily do anything or hold us to anything today since the technology isn't available.

1457
02:42:53.193 --> 02:42:56.209
<v Angelita Morillo>So this is just saying this is something we want to do if we can.

1458
02:42:57.084 --> 02:42:58.576
<v Angelita Morillo>So it seems like an easy yes.

1459
02:42:59.059 --> 02:42:59.255
<v Dan Ryan>Thanks.

1460
02:42:59.420 --> 02:42:59.764
<v Lauren Johnson>Thank you.

1461
02:43:01.208 --> 02:43:02.355
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor Morillo.

1462
02:43:03.799 --> 02:43:28.950
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Zimmerman, I'm looking out and we don't have anybody from our finance office here today, But when this comes forward to council, if it passes out of committee today, can you make sure that we have some information about what other financial policies we have that this would— I hate to say come into conflict with, but what are other things where we say underspend should go to X?

1463
02:43:29.048 --> 02:43:30.899
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Because I know we have a few policies like that.

1464
02:43:31.623 --> 02:43:38.970
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>This seems like a no-brainer to support to me, but I do think the context is important of understanding what else we've said that about as we move it forward.

1465
02:43:39.274 --> 02:43:39.595
<v Eric Zimmerman>Will do.

1466
02:43:39.979 --> 02:43:41.038
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, I appreciate that.

1467
02:43:41.198 --> 02:43:41.807
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Ryan?

1468
02:43:41.998 --> 02:43:45.075
<v Dan Ryan>Yes, thank you, Chair, and thank you, Councilor Zimmerman and Chief Johnson.

1469
02:43:45.122 --> 02:43:45.908
<v Dan Ryan>It's good to see you.

1470
02:43:46.084 --> 02:43:46.341
<v Lauren Johnson>You too.

1471
02:43:46.405 --> 02:43:51.100
<v Dan Ryan>And, uh, I just want to say this is a, a very proactive day for you, Councilor Zimmerman.

1472
02:43:51.291 --> 02:43:54.352
<v Dan Ryan>You're, um, making sure that we're on ahead of the curve.

1473
02:43:54.880 --> 02:43:58.614
<v Dan Ryan>And this, um, I also want to thank you for educating the public on this topic.

1474
02:43:59.288 --> 02:44:13.822
<v Dan Ryan>Um, coming here does that, and I know that you're in complete agreement and alignment with labor So it's kind of the second item in a row where we've had management and labor come together, which is always a good sign that we're probably supposed to move something along.

1475
02:44:14.320 --> 02:44:15.559
<v Dan Ryan>And thank you so much.

1476
02:44:15.704 --> 02:44:18.087
<v Dan Ryan>I learned a lot, and I'm excited to move this along.

1477
02:44:18.425 --> 02:44:18.924
<v Michael Salvaggio>Thank you.

1478
02:44:20.615 --> 02:44:21.341
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

1479
02:44:21.486 --> 02:44:27.167
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Colleagues, seeing no one else in the queue, Chief, thank you so much for being here and for all of the information.

1480
02:44:28.691 --> 02:44:33.192
<v Eric Zimmerman>And, um, I move to move the resolution to I move before City Council with recommendation for full adoption.

1481
02:44:33.434 --> 02:44:33.823
<v Dan Ryan>Second.

1482
02:44:34.242 --> 02:44:36.808
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, Wendy, could you please call the roll?

1483
02:44:38.069 --> 02:44:38.279
<v Keelan McClymont>Morillo.

1484
02:44:39.779 --> 02:44:39.810
<v Angelita Morillo>Aye.

1485
02:44:40.940 --> 02:44:41.454
<v Unidentified speaker>Zimmerman.

1486
02:44:41.793 --> 02:44:41.875
<v Eric Zimmerman>Aye.

1487
02:44:42.681 --> 02:44:43.067
<v Unidentified speaker>Avalos.

1488
02:44:43.342 --> 02:44:43.373
<v Candace Avalos>Aye.

1489
02:44:44.147 --> 02:44:44.422
<v Unidentified speaker>Ryan.

1490
02:44:44.858 --> 02:44:44.906
<v Dan Ryan>Aye.

1491
02:44:45.889 --> 02:44:46.698
<v Unidentified speaker>Pirtle-Guiney.

1492
02:44:47.134 --> 02:44:47.280
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Aye.

1493
02:44:48.265 --> 02:44:49.284
<v Unidentified speaker>The motion is approved.

1494
02:44:49.495 --> 02:44:54.652
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Great, that moves us to our last item on the agenda.

1495
02:44:54.814 --> 02:45:02.503
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I would like us to start this item, get through the presentation, and if we can get to a vote, fantastic, but if not, we will At least have begun the work.

1496
02:45:02.551 --> 02:45:04.474
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I know we have a few guests here today for it.

1497
02:45:05.157 --> 02:45:07.031
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Wendy, could you please call agenda item 6?

1498
02:45:08.430 --> 02:45:08.709
<v Unidentified speaker>Yes, thank you.

1499
02:45:08.790 --> 02:45:17.995
<v Unidentified speaker>Item number 6, document number 2026-309, support the preservation of court access to protect taxpayers from extreme weather costs.

1500
02:45:19.649 --> 02:45:23.076
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, Councilor Novick, thank you for your patience with us today.

1501
02:45:23.126 --> 02:45:32.382
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I know we're running a little bit behind, but you have brought this thank you.

1502
02:45:32.754 --> 02:45:36.502
<v Steve Novick>Uh, Chair Pirtle-Guiney, members of the committee, my name is Steve Novick.

1503
02:45:36.647 --> 02:45:38.733
<v Steve Novick>Thanks for the opportunity to be before you today.

1504
02:45:39.622 --> 02:45:48.583
<v Steve Novick>Uh, the resolution I bring to you today, it denounces legislation that some Republicans have proposed in the U.S. House and Senate.

1505
02:45:49.181 --> 02:45:58.427
<v Steve Novick>Now, I realize that we could spend every minute of every week denouncing legislation that Republicans have introduced in the House and Senate, and I don't want to open the floodgates.

1506
02:45:58.557 --> 02:46:05.851
<v Steve Novick>But when Breach Collective came to me suggesting I bring this resolution, there are a couple of factors that made me less worried about opening the floodgates.

1507
02:46:09.309 --> 02:46:21.007
<v Steve Novick>A number of jurisdictions around the country—states, cities, and counties—including Multnomah County—have brought lawsuits against the fossil fuel industry to hold them accountable for damages caused by climate change.

1508
02:46:21.684 --> 02:46:23.717
<v Steve Novick>The lawsuits focus on the deceptive conduct.

1509
02:46:24.577 --> 02:46:26.167
<v Steve Novick>Of the fossil fuel companies.

1510
02:46:26.842 --> 02:46:44.873
<v Steve Novick>The resolution you see in front of you quotes liberally from the complaint filed by the state of Delaware, which details that as far back as 1959, the fossil fuel companies knew everything they needed to know about climate change and kept on pretending for decades that it wasn't real.

1511
02:46:46.110 --> 02:46:53.393
<v Steve Novick>One of the reasons I wanted to bring this resolution actually is just to give people the opportunity to read the Delaware— the elements of Delaware complaint.

1512
02:46:56.665 --> 02:47:13.826
<v Steve Novick>Right now, there is legislation in the House and Senate under the name Stop Climate Shakedowns Act to preempt all of these cases, to say that states, cities, counties cannot bring such cases against the fossil fuel companies.

1513
02:47:13.877 --> 02:47:14.076
<v Dan Ryan>Thank you.

1514
02:47:15.788 --> 02:47:23.002
<v Steve Novick>So one of the reasons I thought it was appropriate during this resolution is that this legislation would directly affect our ability to act.

1515
02:47:23.563 --> 02:47:30.855
<v Steve Novick>If we ever decided to join Multnomah County or bring our own lawsuit against the fossil fuel companies, this would stop us from doing that.

1516
02:47:31.881 --> 02:47:48.349
<v Steve Novick>Another reason, frankly, that this resolution appealed to me is that at my last job with the Oregon State Attorney General's Office, we were part of coalitions that, that were constantly filing amicus briefs defending the right of cities and counties and states to bring these suits in state court.

1517
02:47:48.878 --> 02:47:54.108
<v Steve Novick>What was usually going on was the fossil fuel companies were trying to remove the suits to federal court.

1518
02:47:54.252 --> 02:47:59.129
<v Steve Novick>We were going in saying, no, this should— these suits should properly be brought in state court.

1519
02:47:59.706 --> 02:48:04.182
<v Steve Novick>So bringing this resolution struck me as kind of a continuation of work that I was doing in my last job.

1520
02:48:05.015 --> 02:48:07.951
<v Steve Novick>So this, I mean, I would hope is a no-brainer.

1521
02:48:08.128 --> 02:48:15.135
<v Steve Novick>We should maintain our right That cities, states, and counties should maintain our right to go to court to seek redress of grievances.

1522
02:48:15.652 --> 02:48:18.296
<v Steve Novick>There should not be a special carve-out for the fossil fuel companies.

1523
02:48:19.313 --> 02:48:21.166
<v Steve Novick>So I ask for your support for this resolution.

1524
02:48:23.421 --> 02:48:24.246
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor.

1525
02:48:24.635 --> 02:48:26.156
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Colleagues, questions?

1526
02:48:26.254 --> 02:48:29.718
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Actually, before we move to questions, I believe we do have somebody signed up to testify.

1527
02:48:30.260 --> 02:48:33.068
<v Unidentified speaker>We have one person signed up to testify, Charisse Bach.

1528
02:48:33.618 --> 02:48:36.879
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Okay, why don't we take our public testimony first, and then we will move to questions.

1529
02:48:38.887 --> 02:48:39.820
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Welcome, how are you?

1530
02:48:45.399 --> 02:48:47.665
<v Cherise Bach>Hello, councilors, I'm doing pretty well, thank you.

1531
02:48:47.795 --> 02:48:49.769
<v Cherise Bach>I'm Cherise Bach, I use she/her pronouns.

1532
02:48:49.865 --> 02:48:59.886
<v Cherise Bach>I'm the climate policy director for 350 PDX, and so, uh, we bring our support for this, and thank you to Councilor Novick for bringing up this resolution.

1533
02:49:00.677 --> 02:49:20.485
<v Cherise Bach>Uh, we submitted testimony on behalf of ourselves as well as An organizational sign-on letter from 6 organizations from Portland and around the state that you can look at, and a couple more have joined since I sent that in, so it will also grow as we get to the— hopefully the full council.

1534
02:49:21.271 --> 02:49:38.200
<v Cherise Bach>And so this is an issue that we've been working on kind of at the state level and has been something that's really popular with folks that Councilor Novick mentioned the federal bills that are going on.

1535
02:49:38.264 --> 02:49:42.670
<v Cherise Bach>There are also some at different state levels, and so we're concerned about those.

1536
02:49:42.929 --> 02:49:56.380
<v Cherise Bach>And we're also wanting to pass something at the state level that would help us recover funds that fossil fuel companies have gained in profits while causing climate harm in the last several decades.

1537
02:49:56.429 --> 02:50:15.369
<v Cherise Bach>So we're asking that the council pass a resolution and so we're part of Make Polluters Pay Coalition with over 50 groups from around the state that's working on a climate Superfund bill at the state level that would help to recover some of those costs from damages to past climate harms.

1538
02:50:16.186 --> 02:50:36.863
<v Cherise Bach>And so this would help kind of indicate Portland's support for those types of actions that we really do need to be able to have the option to use litigation and legislation To make sure that we can pay for those climate damages that at this point taxpayers are having to pay for because we're already experiencing those climate emergencies.

1539
02:50:38.084 --> 02:50:41.987
<v Cherise Bach>So I think that is basically all I have to say.

1540
02:50:42.197 --> 02:50:46.806
<v Cherise Bach>There have been bills passed in New York and Vermont to make polluters pay.

1541
02:50:47.335 --> 02:50:56.121
<v Cherise Bach>The Climate Superfund is based on kind of the Superfund model of, you know, making the companies that cause the soil and water pollution pay those damages.

1542
02:50:56.170 --> 02:50:58.547
<v Cherise Bach>So this would extend the concept to air pollution.

1543
02:50:59.381 --> 02:51:02.209
<v Cherise Bach>So I encourage you to vote yes for this resolution.

1544
02:51:02.352 --> 02:51:13.724
<v Cherise Bach>And then also, if you're interested in signing on to a national sign-on letter— thank you, Councilor Novick and Councilor Murillo, for already signing that national letter— let me know and I'll send you the information.

1545
02:51:14.301 --> 02:51:30.588
<v Cherise Bach>And I hope that also, as you're looking at Portland's legislative slate, that you will support the Climate Superfund bill at the state level and indicate that Portland would like something like that to pass so that the state gets money to deal with climate emergencies that would pass on down to cities and counties.

1546
02:51:31.006 --> 02:51:31.263
<v Cherise Bach>Thank you.

1547
02:51:31.648 --> 02:51:37.283
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you so much for being here with us today and for, um, submitting that written testimony.

1548
02:51:40.147 --> 02:51:41.246
<v Keelan McClymont>That concludes testimony.

1549
02:51:42.379 --> 02:51:45.710
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Great, colleagues, that moves us into discussion and debate.

1550
02:51:47.677 --> 02:51:50.875
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Does anybody have any questions for Councilor Novick or comments?

1551
02:51:51.228 --> 02:51:52.537
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Avalos, go right ahead.

1552
02:51:54.520 --> 02:51:57.950
<v Candace Avalos>Yeah, thank you, Councilor Nowak, for bringing this up.

1553
02:51:59.229 --> 02:52:09.685
<v Candace Avalos>I wonder if you can help me parse something out based on your logic for this resolution, because I know we just had a conversation about citizen suits around Zenith.

1554
02:52:09.734 --> 02:52:13.618
<v Candace Avalos>I know that's an ongoing issue, but I just am seeing a similarity.

1555
02:52:13.665 --> 02:52:16.975
<v Candace Avalos>I'm trying to understand your thinking of how this is different from that.

1556
02:52:17.557 --> 02:52:29.497
<v Candace Avalos>Um, because the Green-Murillo amendment that we discussed, um, and this resolution obviously involve very different legal mechanisms, but they both raise this broader question about access to courts as a tool for accountability.

1557
02:52:30.075 --> 02:52:39.770
<v Candace Avalos>Uh, I know you had some concerns about the citizen enforcement mechanism in that amendment, um, but this resolution strongly affirms preserving access to courts in the climate accountability context.

1558
02:52:39.834 --> 02:52:41.744
<v Candace Avalos>So could you just share, uh, how you distinguish those two?

1559
02:52:41.808 --> 02:52:42.658
<v Candace Avalos>Yeah, I mean, I think that's a great question.

1560
02:52:43.329 --> 02:52:48.059
<v Steve Novick>Thank you, Councilor Avalos.

1561
02:52:48.059 --> 02:52:58.850
<v Steve Novick>So this resolution is about maintaining the rights of local and state governments to sue the fossil fuel industry for the damages caused by climate change.

1562
02:52:59.559 --> 02:53:09.280
<v Steve Novick>Um, the amendment brought by Councilors Green and Murillo would allow for the general public to sue to enforce the enforce rights of local and state governments to sue the fossil fuel industry for damages caused by climate change.

1563
02:53:09.280 --> 02:53:09.319
<v Steve Novick>Thank you.

1564
02:53:09.718 --> 02:53:17.056
<v Steve Novick>A specific contract between the city and another party, which to me is a very different thing.

1565
02:53:18.067 --> 02:53:25.838
<v Steve Novick>Also, I think that the effect of passing that amendment would be to, in fact, in effect, invite the fuel company to sue the city.

1566
02:53:26.931 --> 02:53:29.564
<v Steve Novick>So I have concerns about that.

1567
02:53:30.769 --> 02:53:47.197
<v Steve Novick>But also, there is a long tradition of states and cities and counties being able to go to state court to seek redress of grievances, there is not a long tradition of using citizen suits to enforce contracts between cities and other entities.

1568
02:53:47.710 --> 02:53:52.465
<v Steve Novick>Normally, the people who sue to enforce a contract are the parties to a contract.

1569
02:53:52.850 --> 02:54:10.212
<v Steve Novick>There's limited circumstances in which outside parties are referred to as third county beneficiaries, but they're quite limited where there's that there's not a history of the general public being able to sue to enforce contracts between cities and other entities.

1570
02:54:11.763 --> 02:54:12.004
<v Candace Avalos>Thank you.

1571
02:54:12.102 --> 02:54:18.657
<v Candace Avalos>So the distinction you're making is that government and government entities should be able to sue, but individual citizens should not be able to sue?

1572
02:54:18.900 --> 02:54:20.340
<v Candace Avalos>Is that the difference?

1573
02:54:20.745 --> 02:54:22.816
<v Steve Novick>No, no, Councilor, that is not the distinction.

1574
02:54:23.010 --> 02:54:24.076
<v Candace Avalos>Okay, tell me one more time then.

1575
02:54:24.141 --> 02:54:24.627
<v Candace Avalos>What did I miss?

1576
02:54:24.870 --> 02:54:38.506
<v Steve Novick>My distinction is between, um, bringing a lawsuit bringing a lawsuit against companies for climate damages is different than bringing a lawsuit to enforce a contract between 2 entities.

1577
02:54:39.025 --> 02:54:39.886
<v Candace Avalos>Okay, got it.

1578
02:54:40.550 --> 02:54:41.492
<v Candace Avalos>Okay, thanks for explaining.

1579
02:54:41.768 --> 02:54:42.028
<v Candace Avalos>That's all.

1580
02:54:42.497 --> 02:54:43.227
<v Steve Novick>Thank you.

1581
02:54:45.328 --> 02:54:46.363
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you, Councilor Avalos.

1582
02:54:47.916 --> 02:54:49.096
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I'll jump in.

1583
02:54:50.115 --> 02:54:52.412
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Novick, thank you for bringing this forward.

1584
02:54:53.389 --> 02:55:07.137
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>When I first saw it, I was a bit concerned about this taking us down an unsustainable path of passing resolutions about what is happening at the federal level, and I really appreciate your explanation about the difference here.

1585
02:55:09.229 --> 02:55:21.488
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We spent our entire committee last— I guess that's 2 weeks ago— talking about climate change and the fact that we need to be doing more as as a city to meet our own climate goals.

1586
02:55:21.537 --> 02:55:27.220
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So the timing here is incredibly, it's incredibly well-timed.

1587
02:55:28.585 --> 02:55:54.601
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Climate change is imposing growing costs on our city, whether those are costs related to distributing air conditioners, costs related to cooling shelters, costs related to creating safe spaces when we have smoke events in the city from nearby wildfires, and the health costs of Portlanders that are associated with all of those things.

1588
02:55:54.648 --> 02:55:59.813
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We know that our costs are going up because of the actions of these fossil fuel companies.

1589
02:55:59.878 --> 02:56:05.058
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So I, I see a nexus here that is an important one.

1590
02:56:05.876 --> 02:56:18.250
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And the fact that this is about preserving our rights as a city is an important nexus as well that helps me see this as different from opening up that broader path, as you suggested.

1591
02:56:19.840 --> 02:56:33.884
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I actually think this is a really important resolution for us to pass, not just one that we could, but one that we must, because we need to send the signal that council wants us to engage in more lawsuits.

1592
02:56:35.020 --> 02:56:39.394
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>The mayor has the ability, and I should say more lawsuits around climate change.

1593
02:56:40.118 --> 02:56:42.305
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>The mayor has the ability to sign on to lawsuits on behalf of the city.

1594
02:56:42.352 --> 02:56:42.674
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I think that's a good point.

1595
02:56:44.220 --> 02:56:47.429
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>But if the mayor chooses not to, council could also take action there.

1596
02:56:48.009 --> 02:56:56.388
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And I think that this resolution is an important signal for us to send to the mayor that we'd like to see him be more proactive in this area.

1597
02:56:57.096 --> 02:57:08.748
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And it's an important step for us to take to then be able to point to if we choose as a body to direct the administration to enter into some of these lawsuits.

1598
02:57:08.942 --> 02:57:09.200
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you.

1599
02:57:09.350 --> 02:57:10.200
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Lawsuits in the future.

1600
02:57:10.263 --> 02:57:14.323
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So I think there's a lot we can build on from this resolution should we move it forward.

1601
02:57:15.461 --> 02:57:26.435
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We know that our community is directly impacted by climate change and that when communities are harmed by climate change, we must have those legal avenues before us to be able to take actions.

1602
02:57:26.611 --> 02:57:28.521
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So thank you for bringing this forward.

1603
02:57:29.420 --> 02:57:35.114
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you for, for the work that you've done in this area, and I will look forward to supporting today.

1604
02:57:37.441 --> 02:57:38.597
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Councilor Ryan, go right ahead.

1605
02:57:38.967 --> 02:57:39.207
<v Dan Ryan>Sure.

1606
02:57:39.304 --> 02:57:41.968
<v Dan Ryan>I, real quick, I just want to say thank you, Councilor Novick.

1607
02:57:42.095 --> 02:57:50.120
<v Dan Ryan>Um, this is important, it's timely, and it's— it gets to the accountability that I keep hearing Portlanders want, um, that is crystal clear to them.

1608
02:57:50.521 --> 02:57:53.745
<v Dan Ryan>So I really appreciate that this will hopefully pass today.

1609
02:57:54.130 --> 02:58:02.218
<v Dan Ryan>I think, um, there's a lot of agreement up here, and, uh, I appreciate that Councilor Novick got on— got, got this to us, um, today.

1610
02:58:02.299 --> 02:58:02.834
<v Dan Ryan>Okay, thank you.

1611
02:58:04.908 --> 02:58:14.871
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Colleagues, seeing no one else in the queue, um, this is a resolution, uh, so do we have a motion to move it?

1612
02:58:15.530 --> 02:58:17.933
<v Dan Ryan>Yeah, I'll— uh, Novick can't do it.

1613
02:58:17.997 --> 02:58:18.793
<v Dan Ryan>Novick can't do it.

1614
02:58:19.119 --> 02:58:22.139
<v Dan Ryan>Um, I move item— sorry, I wasn't prepared for this.

1615
02:58:22.997 --> 02:58:32.709
<v Dan Ryan>I move to, um, I move the motion to support this resolution to support the preservation of court access to taxpayers and extreme weather costs.

1616
02:58:32.934 --> 02:58:35.983
<v Dan Ryan>Um, and so, um, do I have a second?

1617
02:58:36.273 --> 02:58:37.757
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>I'll second.

1618
02:58:39.790 --> 02:58:40.905
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And could we call the roll?

1619
02:58:42.940 --> 02:58:43.951
<v Angelita Morillo>Morillo.

1620
02:58:44.161 --> 02:58:44.450
<v Dan Ryan>Motion.

1621
02:58:45.125 --> 02:58:45.174
<v Angelita Morillo>Aye.

1622
02:58:46.282 --> 02:58:46.717
<v Unidentified speaker>Zimmerman.

1623
02:58:48.179 --> 02:58:48.726
<v Eric Zimmerman>Absent.

1624
02:58:49.545 --> 02:58:49.898
<v Keelan McClymont>Avalos.

1625
02:58:50.108 --> 02:58:50.156
<v Candace Avalos>Aye.

1626
02:58:51.827 --> 02:58:52.090
<v Unidentified speaker>Ryan.

1627
02:58:52.449 --> 02:58:52.466
<v Dan Ryan>Aye.

1628
02:58:53.102 --> 02:58:53.575
<v Unidentified speaker>Pirtle-Guiney.

1629
02:58:54.899 --> 02:58:54.915
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Aye.

1630
02:58:55.603 --> 02:58:56.995
<v Unidentified speaker>The motion to refer is approved.

1631
02:58:57.943 --> 02:58:59.308
<v Unidentified speaker>With 4 aye votes and 1 absent.

1632
02:59:00.272 --> 02:59:00.706
<v Unidentified speaker>Thank you.

1633
02:59:00.817 --> 02:59:04.206
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And thank you, Councilor Novick, for bringing this to our committee today.

1634
02:59:04.527 --> 02:59:07.497
<v Candace Avalos>Thank you.

1635
02:59:08.059 --> 02:59:11.334
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Colleagues, we are through our agenda.

1636
02:59:12.058 --> 02:59:29.346
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>In 2 weeks, we will have a presentation on Advance Portland, which is our city's economic development policy, and a first opportunity to talk about this is a topic we will come back to in the future.

1637
02:59:29.971 --> 02:59:36.711
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We will then have a discussion around the city's policy for privatizing publicly owned land.

1638
02:59:36.792 --> 02:59:43.692
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We do have a policy at the city for how bureaus need to move forward if they would like to sell land that is currently publicly owned.

1639
02:59:44.398 --> 02:59:49.518
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And our council has at various times suggested that we revisit that policy.

1640
02:59:49.613 --> 02:59:49.807
<v Keelan McClymont>Thank you.

1641
02:59:50.000 --> 02:59:52.809
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We may want to revisit that policy.

1642
02:59:52.858 --> 03:00:10.233
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>So we'll have an opportunity to learn more about what is currently on the books, begin a discussion about what we might want to do there moving forward, and then hear a specific request to transfer property currently owned by the city to a private entity.

1643
03:00:11.147 --> 03:00:13.734
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>We will be back in 2 weeks for those conversations.

1644
03:00:14.039 --> 03:00:15.595
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>Thank you all for the debate today.

1645
03:00:15.805 --> 03:00:18.343
<v Elana Pirtle-Guiney>And with that, I will close our committee meeting.

