The record · Transcript
Council session — 2026-06-17
Transcript from the session's official auto-captions (26,638 words), shown in readable case and split into speaker turns. Speakers are AI-suggested and editor-reviewed (low confidence — auto-captions garble names); each color marks a speaker.
All right. Good afternoon. Welcome to the June 17th, 2026 meeting of the committee of the whole. If we could please do the roll call.
Rebecca pirtle-guiney.
Here.
Ryan Koyama Lane here. Morillo here.
Novick here.
Clark here.
Green here.
Zimmerman. Avalos present. Dunphy.
I'm over here.
Smith.
Kanal here. And christopher, if you could please read the statement of conduct.
Welcome to the meeting of the finance and governance committee of the whole. To testify before this committee in person or virtually. You must sign up in advance in the committee agenda at www.Portland.gov/agenda/committe or by calling 311. Information on engaging with the committee can be found at this link. Registration for virtual testimony closes one hour prior to the meeting in person. Testifiers must sign up before the agenda item is heard. If public testimony will be taken on an item, individuals may testify for three minutes unless the chair states otherwise, your microphone will be muted when your time is over, the chair preserves order disruptive conduct such as shouting, refusing to conclude your testimony or your time is up, or interrupting others testimony or committee deliberations will not be allowed. If you cause a disruption, a warning will be given. Further disruption will results and ejection from the meeting. Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass. Additionally, the committee may take a short recess and reconvene virtually. Your testimony should address the matter being considered when testifying. State your name for the record. If you're a lobbyist, identify the organization represents virtual testify or should unmute themselves when the clerk calls your name. Thank you.
Thank you. Today's agenda. We have the built out committee chair updates that I've promised for a couple meetings. Now. We then have a report from the auditor's office. We'll be having the auditor join us in a moment. And then we also have a discussion on the mayor's proposed members to be appointed or reappointed to the Portland clean energy community benefits fund committee. One thing that I wanted to just flag, we do this reading of the statement of conduct before every meeting. And in the oversight hearing, I talked about that there should probably be some other things that are norms for our committee. And I think it's it's not just exclusive to the oversight hearings, but I think it actually relates to many of the topics that I see coming up on our agendas, not only today, but in the future. Accepting non closure. We this committee is often a place where we're going to take on some big issues that haven't been discussed. What our former council president referred to as the big conversations and framing it that way. And so those don't all get resolved in a single three hour meeting, especially when they're not even the whole three hour meeting. So I think that's an important thing to keep in mind as we go through today. And with that, I will ask if, rebecca, if you can call the first item, please.
Item one committee chair updates document number 2026-206.
All right. So as promised, I have a more built out committee of the whole chair update. I'm actually erring on the side of maybe more information. And we'll see if, given that a lot of this is tentative, we'll see if that comes back to bite me a little bit in the in the future. And in that case, we'll scale back to only what's confirmed. But I wanted to put up some information here. And there's a four part committee chair update. The fourth part is new and is at the suggestion of our council vice president. We'll get to that in a moment. But first, just a couple updates on the meeting calendar. We didn't get a chance to announce that we were going to cancel the June 11th meeting, but working with council president to make sure there was more time for the first reading of the adopted budget. We canceled the June 11th meeting to allow for that. And then we have an upcoming set of meetings here with agenda items that are penciled in or I guess in some cases, penned in. So if it says it's confirmed, that's going to be on the agenda. You're going to see the June 25th agenda post tomorrow. If it's tentative, that's we're hoping for more information or some some last dot the I's cross the t's type of information before locking it in. And then if it's possible. As you can see, there's a couple where it's just a big agenda. We're trying to figure out what to prioritize there. I will also note, although he's not in the room right now, we did move the home forward item later at the request of councilor Zimmerman. So that'll be on July 9th as of right now. And we have also I wanted to just note that the other big appointments that are coming forward are on July 23rd. That's the prosper Portland board. Finally, I'm just going to update something that I just got more information on from council president, which is the moda center term sheet. It says confirmed for July 30th. That remains the same. It will be discussed here. But it also says if needed for August 6th. And so I am assuming that that will still be needed and will revise August 6th accordingly for the future. The next page is just unscheduled potential agenda items, and I organize those in terms of the areas of work that this committee was tasked with for the future. You'll notice several oversight topics are listed under part three. Some of these other things we haven't really mentioned, mentioned in the past or mentioned in the context of committee. The whole. Feel free to review those and get back to me if you have any questions. Part three at the bottom of that second page is again referencing councilor Zimmerman when he was chair of the finance committee last year. I think one of the I thought one of the really good ideas was building a work group where it's a smaller group of councilors that can help ensure that when we have a proposal here, it's fully it's at least baked enough to be worthy of our discussion instead of. We're kind of asking questions around it. And we're not 100% sure what we're debating. So I mentioned two things in here that are items where we know we have to have a conversation, but we don't necessarily know where that conversation could go yet. And so I might ask next week for folks to volunteer if they're interested in being a part of helping prepare that agenda item, the run of show and things like that. And obviously, in one particular case, there's a lot of people who have a direct vested interest and experience in council president elections, and I'll certainly be prioritizing those folks. And then last but not least, I'll get to the new item. Council vice president Olivia Clark asked if we could start hearing what's going on in the other committees. And so I think we are just kind of determining if this is going to work or not, and if so, how many we can do at a time. But I thought we'll start with having a report for the for the benefit of not only the other seven councilors who are not in the committee, but for the public, because I think we might have slightly higher viewership, especially on a Wednesday meeting, to hear from councilor Clark about what's going on in the public works committee. So we're going to probably put a few minutes towards this every time. And I've kind of put a tentative rotation up down below. But first, I'd like to pass it over to councilor Clark to update us.
Olivia Clark: Thanks. Thank you, mister chair. And I want to compliment you on this work plan. I really appreciate getting it and knowing what's coming in advance. I really appreciate that. So just and I'll be very brief and just give you a quick update on what we did at the public works, the last meeting of the public works committee, we did a deep dive into the ODOT, the rose quarter closure, which everybody should have on their radar screen and make everyone and your mailing list aware of what's coming. It's going to be pretty intense closure for 4 to 5 weeks on I-5. It's very complicated for our city, but in the long run, it's going to help everyone. But I know there'll be a lot of questions, and you'll probably hear more about it. As ODOT gears up. So that was the main thing that we talked about at the last meeting. But in for the coming attractions at the next meeting, we're going to be getting an update on the city asset management plan, which is due to come to all of us in September, but we're going to get a little update on how it's going. I'm really looking forward to that. Very important. And I notice it actually dovetails with something that's in the in the city auditor's report today, particularly in regards to parks. We're also going to hear an ordinance from councilors Koyama Lane and councilor Smith to evaluate and implement a no turn on red restriction at signalized intersections within the high crash network. This is going to be an interesting conversation. We'll also hear something on bus benches. There's a glitch in the code. We need to change it to allow the Portland streetcar to advertise on bus benches. Not a high priority. Then in the coming months, just some of the highlights that we anticipate coming. We will be talking about autonomous vehicles. I know we're all very interested in that. We all have varied opinions about it, but we'll be looking at the rule making and potentially some code updates around autonomous vehicles. We'll have an update on the implementation of the transportation utility fee and the street damage restoration fee that we all voted on a while back, and just how that's coming along. And always an update on vision zero. So just really quickly, that's what we're looking forward to. Thank you.
Thank you, chair and vice president Clark. Councilor Green, you have your hand in the queue.
Just briefly, chair Kanal, you opened by saying that we should learn to accept. Non-closure. I think given the remarks from the chair of the public works committee, we should also accept closure in the case of the ODOT work. Sorry, Steve, this is this is your Lane.
That's a no.
That's that is a no. That's good.
Rubbing off on.
You any any other. Yeah. Councilor Avalos.
Candace Avalos: Thank you. So I guess I just wanted to understand should we expect that this will be a reoccurring thing from now on? It sounds like we're piloting it today. So should I be preparing to come with reports from housing committee from now on, or what? What's the plan?
So my intent was to ask, and I just kind of drew names out of a hat here for the other three. Ask councilor Novick to do the next meeting and then yourself the following meeting, but I'd welcome any feedback offline after this. If this is something that's helpful and certainly from the public as well, to know if it's helpful for you to hear about what the other four committees are doing, this is kind of a good place to do it. So we're not taking up a full council agenda time. If we're going to do any sort of updates to the full group. But it's a pilot, we'll see. I think it's a good place to try things out and we'll try it out. So. Yeah. And for those who don't know, the closure is a 14 hour closure. And in July, and then there's a five week closure of I-5 southbound in sort of leading into downtown as you come in from the north. So especially if you live in d2, we definitely will be putting that in our updates, I'm sure, but I just wanted to flag that. That's in September into the beginning of October. All right. Any other questions comments, thoughts. All right. We'll close that out. And rebecca, if you could please call the second item.
Item two presentation of auditor's office results from July 2025 through may 2026. Document number 2026-207.
Thank you. Always a privilege to have our auditor simone rede join us and members of her team. Yeah, please take it away whenever you are ready and whatever order you'd like to go.
Well, good afternoon, committee chair Kanal vice chairs Ryan and Koyama Lane and committee members. I'm siti auditor simone rede, and I'm pleased to share with you some of the results from my office from the period spanning July 2025 to may 2026. The results that are going to be highlighted today have already been shared publicly, and this presentation is really an opportunity for you and community to engage with the results in service of my office's mission, which is to ensure an open and accountable city government. I'm joined today by the city ombudsman and my audit services division director, and I'll also be speaking on behalf of the city archivist who is unavailable to present today. First, I'm going to share two recent projects from our office's archives and records management division. That's an oral history project that gathered stories from people living outside in Portland, and a digital timeline that details the more than 160 year history of the auditor's office, which was published to commemorate the 40th anniversary of performance auditing at the city. Second, you'll hear from city ombudsman jennifer croft, who will share highlights from the ombudsman's annual report and an investigation of the city's accessory, short term rental rules and enforcement methods. And third, audit services director casey jones will share details from two recent audit reports and give you an update on our audit schedule. As a reminder, presentations like this from my office are really meant to engage you in the public. In my office's work, they do not require any action from council. So that said, I want to make sure that we can inform you about all these results before you ask questions of us. So we've allotted some time at the end of this brief presentation to answer your questions, and we can get started with the next slide. And one more. Another one. Thank you. So as I mentioned, I'll be sharing results from archives and records management on behalf of city archivist madeline moya, who is unable to be here today. The archives and records management division operates the Portland archives and records center, also known as parc, and it's responsible for making city administrative and historical records accessible to the public and city employees. It's made up of two work groups archives and records management records management staff provides training and guidance to help city employees comply with Oregon public records law, and they create the city's retention schedules, administer the city's electronic records management system, also known as content manager, and they coordinate transfers of physical records to park for long term storage. Archive staff preserves and provides access to the city's historical records. They arrange and describe historical records so that they are searchable through the archives catalog, known as files, and they provide reference services and access to archival materials of park. They also conduct outreach, create exhibits, and produce oral histories that present Portland history to the public and encourage public use of the city's historical collections. Next slide. So last year, archives and records management partnered with a community organization called street books to collect stories from portlanders. Living outside. Street books is a street library that provides community resources and advocacy for people living outside or at the margins here in Portland, Oregon, street books operates dozens of bike based and place based libraries and librarian services across the city. Even though homelessness is a crisis in most major American cities, very few archives document first person narratives of people experiencing homelessness. Archival records may contain reports, policies and legislation on the topic, but rarely do they capture the perspectives of those directly impacted. From February 2024 to March 2025, archives partnered with street books on an oral history project by going to their library shifts to record oral history interviews, the archivist leaned on the trusted relationships that street books has with their community members when asking people to participate and to speak candidly about their lives. Archives recorded 24 interviews with street books and their staff, as well as patrons who talked about their work building the library program, its challenges, and the transformative relationships that they've developed through this work. The interviews reflect the experiences of portlanders living outside and their interactions with city services. There are stories such as kevin, a vietnam veteran who finds comfort in nature and birds and trees in our cities, in our city. And lee, a poet who found community through arts and literature, as well as kari, who struggled to find long term housing due to her marital status but is now in an apartment with her husband and dog. Through new narrative and home forward. Next slide. So after recording, archive staff transcribe the interviews and they added the transcripts to the city archives alongside the recordings, making them part of the city's official record. And those are available for listening and viewing in the research room at park, as well as through the archives and records public access portal files. It's also published on the division's website. The division also published a book of transcripts and interview photographs titled keeping the flame of love and creativity alive. And that book is meant to expand access so that all portlanders, including those who are reflected in the oral histories that they that we
Collected can engage with those histories. Copies of the book are available in the park research room on Portland state university's campus, in street books, mobile libraries, and they're also in circulation at all Multnomah county library branches. And I'm pleased to share that the books have been checked out regularly. I also have copies of the books to share with you today, and there's also a digital copy that's linked in this committee agenda item. Finally, I want to recognize outreach archivist devin busby, who's here today. She spearheaded the project from city archives as well as street librarian diana rempe, who worked with us on this project and is also with us today. Next slide. We also celebrated the 40th anniversary of performance auditing at the city of Portland on may 20th, which is the date that voters approved ballot measure 51 in 1986. And that measure amended city charter to allow the auditor to conduct performance audits, archives and records management and audit services, published a web page detailing the history of our nationally recognized audit function, which has conducted more than 250 performance audits in its lifetime. To celebrate, archives created a digital timeline of the auditor's office dating back to the establishment of the city auditor position in 1864, and the timeline details more than 160 years of the auditor's evolving duties and its growing independence. So I encourage you to take a look at that online. It's at Portland.gov/auditor under the news tab. And now I'll hand it over to city ombudsman jennifer croft.
Thank you. Good afternoon councilors. My name is jennifer croft. I'm the city ombudsman and glad to be here today to tell you a little bit about what my office has been up to since my last presentation to you. Next slide please. As a quick recap, we are an independent, impartial advocate for fairness and justice in city government. We take complaints or concerns from anyone who feels the city has harmed them or treated them unfairly, and we may informally resolve those complaints where possible, or we may conduct investigations to determine whether the complaint is substantiated. We can also do investigations and investigate matters at our own initiative. Even in the absence of a complaint, depending on the outcome of our investigations, we may recommend that city bureaus make changes either to address an individual case or to a broader policy or practice or process. If we've identified a systemic problem. Next slide. In April, we released our annual report that covered the calendar year 2025. This report highlights complaints, complaint trends and gives examples of our work during the year. I'll go into a couple of the data points in upcoming slides, but first, I'd like to mention one development that stood out, which was an increase in people who contacted our office who were experiencing homelessness, of complainants who provided information about their housing status, the percentage who said they were experiencing homelessness was 36%, compared to 15% the year before, which was the first year that we began collecting this information. And this included people staying at the city's alternative shelters, or 24 over seven shelters, who contacted us with a variety of concerns, including exits from shelters, staff conduct and issues related to shelter facilities, among others. We also use our annual report to share the outcomes that we've helped complainants achieve, or instances when our recommendations have helped contribute to systemic change. For example, we helped individual community members save more than $300,000 in city fines or fees and helped others regain access to shelter or to their property. In a systemic example. Our recommendations led the water bureau to take steps to better respond to the needs of domestic violence survivors who may be experiencing financial crisis. Next slide. I'll move to a couple of the data points from the report. Here you can see that our office continued to see increased complaint numbers with a 32% increase compared to 2024. Of these 617 complaints that fell under our authority to investigate, we accepted 60% of those for assistance, which means that we either investigated or what was more often the case, we made another type of intervention, such as facilitating communication or providing the complainant with more information. Next slide. The list of bureaus that generated the most complaints or that the most complaints referred to was similar to previous years. Although this was the first time that Portland solutions appears on our chart, we began tracking it separately in mid 2024, and complaints related to the city's homeless services, or livability functions made up a greater share of complaints than in past years, which was connected to the increase in complaints from shelter guests that I mentioned earlier. Next slide. In addition to our work on individual cases and as part of that work, we're always keeping an eye out for any trends or patterns that may point to the city causing more systemic harm or unfairness. And an example of a systemic review that we completed during the recent period is a report we published in March about accessory short term rental rules and enforcement. We undertook this investigation after receiving individual complaints from short term rental operators who had inadvertently run afoul of the rules and been hit with huge fines. Next slide. Our investigation found that portland's enforcement is more punitive than other cities. For example, the maximum fine for first time violator is at least 27 times higher than any other city that we surveyed. We also learned that more than half of operators in Portland who were fined particularly high amounts may have been. People of color have a recent history of immigration or belong to the LGBTQ plus community that may be linked to the city's reliance on complaints from the public to identify violators. And my office has previously raised concerns about the inequitable impacts of complaint based enforcement. Data we reviewed also suggests that that heavy reliance on complaints is ultimately inefficient. In addition, portland's rules are more complex than what we saw in other cities and are difficult to enforce. Based on our findings, we recommended changes in the city's rules and enforcement methods to reduce harm and increase equity and effectiveness. In response to our report, the city administration agreed to explore issuing warnings before fines, as we recommended, but referred to council for decisions on changing the rules and reducing fines. My colleague tony Green, who led the investigation, and I have been having conversations about the report with staff of councilors who serve on the housing and permitting committee, and we look forward to council support on the implementation of our recommendations. I will stop there. Thank you for your attention. Also for the instances when your office have referred community members to us, we do appreciate those referrals. I look forward to your questions, and I will hand over to casey.
Thanks, jennifer. Good afternoon. My name is casey jones. I use he him pronouns and I serve as the audit services director. Today I'll be mentioning work that we've released in the last year with more focus on two most recent audits. I'll also remind you of the audits we have underway and look forward to your questions. Next slide. This is a quick refresher on audit services work. Our division conducts performance audits of city programs, manages a contract with an outside accounting firm for the city's annual financial audit, and administers the city's fraud hotline for tips of fraud, waste and abuse. We also monitor and report on the status of audit recommendations through our audit impact report and our recommendation dashboard. Next slide. So this is a run through of our four most recent reports dating back to October 2025. This includes our 2024 audit impact report that summarizes the results of our follow up work. We found, broadly, that city bureaus had yet to implement a little over half of our audit recommendations, but the implementation rate did increase over last year, as did the response rate from bureaus. We found that leadership was challenged with prioritization in getting outstanding recommendations implemented. The parks fiscal management audit was also released in October. We found that parks does not have enough resources for its existing programs and maintenance obligations, but continues to invest in new assets. This was released right around the time that the parks levy was was up for a vote. And I remember a lot of council discussion around this. And as councilor Clark mentioned, there's a strong overlap in this project's findings with our asset management audit that predated it. So our audit recommends that parks integrate new investment decisions with existing maintenance obligations and clearly communicate fiscal strategies. So I'll get more in depth on our two most recent audits released in 2026. In the next two slides. So our first audit released in 2026 was our climate justice audit. The city uses a climate justice approach to address climate change, recognizing that climate change impacts the most vulnerable communities first and hardest since the transition to a new form of government in 2024, the city took steps to elevate climate work. However, work still remains to make climate actions more effective. Our audit, released in February, examined how the city prioritized and coordinated its climate work. Actions in the city's climate action plans fall under two categories climate mitigation and climate adaptation. Individual or collaborating bureaus are responsible for completing these actions, and the difference seen here is that climate mitigation focuses on reducing planet warming emissions. While climate adaptation focuses on making communities more resilient. We found that centralized authority and defined coordination structures would help the city follow through on its climate commitments. Additionally, a realistic funding plan could help overcome the challenges or the challenge of addressing competing priorities. These internal changes would provide clearer direction to bureaus and help to better prioritize and coordinate climate work. This audit also examined whether the city considered the impacts of climate change on the community, and how the city integrated community involvement into its climate work. We found that developing a climate adaptation strategy would help the city to more effectively address community impacts, especially for the portlanders most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. We found that increased transparency could help build trust with external partners and help ensure climate actions are implemented. And we found that guidance from community engagement strategy could help achieve those climate goals. We recommend that city leadership provide clearer direction to ensure the city follows through on its climate commitments. And we also recommend that city leadership work in collaboration with the sustainability and climate commission to more effectively address community climate impacts and build trust with external groups. We presented these results to the sustainability and climate commission shortly after the audit was released. Next slide. Next was the arts education and access fund audit. Before I start, I want to note that recent council actions have changed elements of the arts tax that were in place at the time of the audit. And align with a lot of the findings that we made. So Portland voters approved a $35 income tax in 2012 to pay for arts teachers and provide grants to arts organizations. Each year, an average of $11.2 million from the arts tax flows into the arts, education and access fund. This chart shows how the city distributes money from the arts tax to pay for tax collection. Elementary arts teachers, city coordination and grants. Our audit objective was to determine if the city had managed the arts, education and access fund to assure high quality arts, education and arts access to students and underserved communities. The scope of the audit was the city's management of the arts access fund. Between November 2012 and October 2025. We focused on city actors with fund responsibilities, so the office of arts and culture, revenue division, grants management division, and we found that the tax has expanded arts education for elementary school students. But the city did not establish goals or metrics until recently. So as a result, the city has not been able to effectively monitor school district performance or assess differences in students experiences across and within districts. Grants from the fund have provided valuable support to arts organizations, but the amount available for grants is shrinking. Grants are provided only after collection costs and payments to districts are made, as you can see in the graphic here, because those costs are rising and the tax is not adjusted for inflation, the funds purchasing power is eroding. We found that the city's method for calculating payments to districts either further limits the amount available for grants, or does not fully compensate districts. Despite promises to voters, the city has not ensured that these grants improve access to arts and culture for students and underserved communities. The city code and the way the city distributes funding do not prioritize improving access, and the city cannot determine or demonstrate that most grants improved access because it's not holding grantees to specific outcomes. Then we also found that the city's monitoring responsibilities and the oversight committees role and authority are not well defined, increasing the risk that the arts access fund is not used as intended. We make recommendations to strengthen the city's monitoring and coordination of arts education, maximize funding available for grants, ensure grants, improve arts access and advance program goals, and improve financial monitoring and oversight. And also, in this case, we presented our results to the arts access fund oversight committee after the audit was released. Next slide. The next item I'd like to speak about is the annual audit schedule. Our next audit schedule will be released tomorrow and provided to each of you directly upon release. As noted by auditor rede and our office's budget work session, the city auditors requested budget for fiscal year 2627. Cut one performance auditor position to help respond to the city's financial or fiscal crisis. Therefore, we've selected one fewer topic for this audit schedule to reflect our reduced capacity. Despite this, the schedule maintains coverage of the city's service areas and continues audits already underway, including an audit of prosper Portland. Per our agreement with the agency, we developed the audit schedule by collecting ideas for potential audits all year long. We have an online forum where the public can suggest topics. Auditors may also identify potential topics while conducting audits. We also engage with you all and other city leaders to understand what issues are important to you and your constituents. We shared a listing of topics under consideration with the public and community groups through a survey, to understand which programs and services they would most like to see audited. We met as an audit team to discuss the potential topics and analyze them based on a variety of risk categories. The list of topics for the next fiscal year was then finalized. Based on those risk scores, can bring coverage across service areas and our capacity. We will also be convening a focus group with community groups to discuss whether there are areas in these topics that we've chosen, where community members are able to contribute their lived experiences to an audit. Next slide. And we have six performance audits currently underway. We are finishing our audit of 911 in emergency communications focused on the bureau's training efforts. That report will be released next week and you all will get a copy on Monday. Our audit of the city's gun violence reduction efforts is in field work and focused on the ceasefire program and the office of violence prevention, trauma and violence impacted families program. And then our audits of cybersecurity prosper portland's grant management, citywide equity, and Portland solutions are all in their planning phase. This is where auditors gather information on the program, identify criteria, and develop audit objectives to focus on during field work. We update council when audits begin and when we've chosen an objective or objectives. Once complete, we also provide council with an embargo copy of the audit report and official response before it is released publicly. And I think that's it. Next slide is for questions.
Thank you, director jones. So before I open it up to questions, I just wanted to share two more updates with you. One is that the auditor's office has undergone an outside assessment of its human resources internal controls, and that's pursuant to a charter requirement that took effect in 2017. That assessment found that we had processes, processes in place and that they were working effectively to ensure compliance with our rules and procedures in ten different areas of human resource management. And it also identified opportunities to clarify documentation, standardize processes, and provide additional supervisor training to improve consistency. The assessment and our response will be made public next Monday and accessible online at Portland.gov/auditor. Under the new tab. And lastly, the auditor's office will be participating in a variety of community events this summer to inform portlanders about our services, which is a goal of our community engagement strategy. You can find us at the juneteenth festival this Saturday at willis albina park Sunday parkways in east Portland on June 28th and downtown Portland on September 13th. The Portland pride parade on Sunday, July 19th and welcoming week in September. So thank you for your attention and now I will open it up to your questions.
Thank you auditor rede. Thank you, jennifer and casey as well. We do not have any testifiers on this item. We did open it up for public testimony, but we do have several counselors in the queue. So I'll just kick that off and pass it to councilor. Koyama Lane and councilor Clark will be next.
Olivia Clark: Thank you chair. Kanal. First, thank you. Auditor rede. As a fellow elected official, I want to appreciate you and the important work that is often underappreciated and unseen that you do for our city. And when I see the different audits that are underway, it's really a reminder that your office ensures that the city's work is just and efficient and executing its services under the rule of law and the myriad policies that council also puts in motion. So I want to acknowledge you and your team and specifically also want to offer my sincerest thank yous to our archives and records management. My team has made multiple requests this past year, and each time we received really cordial, timely responses and the archival records around the archives that we requested one time folks even really quickly pulled together last minute some historical documents when we were honoring minoru yasui day here as counsel. And so there were many folks that got to before the meeting down in the atrium, see some historical documents of the incarceration signs that were put up, you know, on these streets. And it was really powerful. Thank you to our to ombudsman croft and your team for helping make sure that Portland residents and businesses are treated as fairly as possible. We have, you know, looked through the the report and findings around short term rentals. And it's pretty grave. There's a lot of inequity that is clear financially, racially. I understand that your office has shared your research and findings with dca oliveira and relevant bureaus, and that there maybe have been some discussions related to recommendations from you all. It appears that there are there are a number of them that would be really helpful for the city to consider in improving our short term rental practices. I'm currently very concerned about the inequity implications of our current practices. I'm interested in working with your team with the dc, a with c, a lee on our programs to address this. And I also would like to say I'd really like to see the. Our new chief equity equity officer tilghman included in this. I would love to see. I was just thinking, oh, maybe donnie's not here. If. If you're open, I would love to hear if there are any thoughts about next steps about like what commitments can be made. Are you kind of waiting for councilors to take a lead? Yeah, I would love to hear from you. Dca oliveira. And I'm, I've already talked to a put some feelers out with some other some of my colleagues about if there is policy around this that I would love to bring this forward and be as supportive as possible.
Yeah. Donnie oliveira for the record, thank you, councilor. Madam monitor team, thank you for letting me pop up here. So going back actually a year and a half, I just want to acknowledge the ombudsman's office, working with us, providing some recommendations that we were initially able to implement last last spring. They were modest, but they were in response to some feedback they had given us. We have the updated recommendations a little bit more broad in scope. Some are going to require procedural updates, some are gonna require some code changes. The good news is we also were simultaneously doing some analysis through bts on those more durable code changes that would would frankly, enhance our code if for the public to appreciate. Portland was one of the first cities to adopt accessory short term rental code. And so now many cities have since updated and learned from our experiences. So now it's time for us to recalibrate our baseline code. So to answer your question, yes, we are currently working on improving our enforcement. We're refining how we do work with the, frankly, airbnb and vrbo on data sharing. It still continues to be a barrier we can't enforce and we can't do it well without good data. And they are sort of the gatekeepers of that. But to answer your question, we hope by the end of the year to have some additional procedural improvements that we can own administratively and hopefully in early 27, come back to you all with some code changes.
And do you have any thoughts about my idea to see if our chief equity, equity. I don't know why this is so hard for me to say. Chief equity equity officer tilghman can be part of that work and those conversations.
Great idea. We'd love to have her join and be a part of that.
And if there is a place where you're waiting for direction from council, please let me know. But I also would maybe hope, if not that at the very least, housing and permitting chair Avalos is included in that. So we can make sure that we're getting those updates in our housing and permitting committee. Thank you, all of you, for the important work that you do.
Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you. Councilor Koyama Lane go to councilor Clark, followed by council president Dunphy.
Jamie Dunphy: Thank you, mr. Chair. Thank you, auditor rede and team. I really appreciate your work. I reference it all the time and in neighborhood meetings and about town. I think it's super important. I would just echo some of councilor Koyama Lane comments. And actually, one of my questions was around how we track city responses to your work. And actually the councilor Koyama Lane brought up the short term rentals. Progress is being made. We're doing things. How do we know or do we get feedback from you? Or is there a reporting like, oh yes, the city responded, you know, in in regards to the parks piece as well as the arts attacks on the parks piece, I believe the the levy actually had a requirement in it that we come back with a fiscal sustainability report, something like that. And I don't think that was in reaction to your audit necessarily, because, well, maybe it was, I'm not sure. But how do we track the response and the progress to some of these things? Because there is action. I think we are taking action on on your audits. And it's the same for the arts tax, I believe. I'm just curious about that. I'll just let that hang there for a second and you can respond if you like. But also on the June the 18th, the unveiling is this super top secret. We don't get to know.
We're trying to strategically build suspense for releasing it tomorrow.
It's working.
It's working. As director jones showed on the slide, there's many underway and only a few new topics, so hopefully those will stand out to you.
Okay, well, I'm anxiously awaiting for June the 18th then. And one other question and you can come back and and if you want to address the kind of responsive stuff have you. I'm sorry I could look on the web, but have you done an audit or financial audit of PBOT or other audits of PBOT?
Our most recent PBOT audit is our vision zero audit from from a couple of years ago. And then I think we had a street improvement audit prior to that. That's maybe falling out of our follow up window, which is five years each year. We go back for every audit issued in the last five years. We compile those results into the dashboard. So for individual recommendations those are all in there. We have introduced a response template in the last two years for bureaus. So you know, we had been getting a lot of letters back from bureaus as an official response that maybe didn't specify planned actions and those sorts of things. So we turned that into into a template, typically a bureau leader or city administrator kind of handles the cover letter sort of portion of it. And then folks, we've been working with more directly on the audit, typically fill out the, the template, responding to each recommendation with a plan for or expressing whether they agree or disagree, a plan for implementing, and then a timeline for that plan. And I know on asset management, that was one of the things that actually council action like kind of spurred along and moved up. So we use that as kind of our first. First like thing that we're, we're checking back in with them in that first year. Hey, are these things underway? How are they going? And then in that follow up, we are asking them, hey, what's getting in your way of implementing that? So those are the things that we try to use to summarize, like major challenges and that sort of thing in that audit impact report. No surprise that last year, prioritization. So like prioritizing implementing our recommendations over things that may be more pressing or that they may not have capacity or budget to do. What was the biggest challenge? And we want to make sure that both like that kind of high level summary of like, hey, these are the things that are getting in the way, especially as we moved from the old form of government to the new form, like, hey, are there collaboration challenges or authority issues, those sorts of things that are getting in folks way? And then also have the dashboard, which lets folks kind of drill down to, hey, I'm interested in this specific bureau and how they're doing and that sort of thing.
Okay. So I'm glad to know it's really a dynamic process. They're not just put on the shelf and forgotten about and that you have a dashboard that's incumbent on us then to go back and to look at what's going on.
Yes. And if you have questions, we're happy to kind of dig, dig through that and guide you through it. We also have all the documentation of what they've sent back to us. We don't just kind of take the form back and say, sounds good. You said it was implemented. We believe you. We we asked for kind of supporting documentation along the way. So if there's, if there's things through that process, honestly, sometimes it is we presented this to council. So you may have already heard the thing that they're saying, help them implement it. But yeah, we're happy to help guide through that stuff.
Thank you so much, casey. Thank you chair.
Thank you, council vice president Clark. We'll go to council president Dunphy, followed by councilor Novick. Thank you. Chair Novick or Kanal. I just want to thank you all for the work.
That you have been doing.
Because I have.
Been developing a habit in my office of trying to tackle some of the least sexy policies that the city has. And generally, you all have been providing me a guide, a guide path, including yesterday, our conversation about the single permitting authorities within the permitting bureau's dating all the way back to 1997. So to that end, you know, I really I really appreciate the, the, the help and also the fact recognizing the fact that we are in a new form of government where some of your decades of recommendations can actually be implemented for the first time. So my question is largely sort of building off what president Clark was saying. You know, I hear that when you say the parks department isn't delivering x, y, and z, and then you go back to them and say, how are you going to fix that? But do you do the same thing from a policy perspective? And how far back would you look back? I mean, if we successfully get, for example, this permitting authority change, would you go back to your 1997 audit of the permitting bureau and say, hey, by the way, in 2026, they fixed it.
I mean, we could the I think for us, the. The reliance on kind of past like, oh, this was done in accordance with yellow book standards. We, we understand how that recommendation was made, even if, you know, some of us were in high school when it was made kind of gives us that confidence that this is, is something that that may or could still be relevant. Honestly, doing some of the work for the performance audit anniversary project led me to kind of go back through a lot of stuff. I think if we if we wanted to do that, we would have to look at ways of kind of taking it on as a maybe non yellow book project of its own. I know there are some offices and some functions of gao that do these like, hey, this is a specific risk area or that sort of thing where you can kind of highlight that, that historical stuff. But sometimes there are members of the public who write to us saying, hey, how are they doing on that thing that you recommended in 1997? But sometimes it's hard for us to piece together, but we usually have more recent coverage in that area that we can kind of point to and say, hey, this is where they were then. And these are the biggest things that we saw as as relevant at that point. So we're, we're trying to, to follow up with new work to kind of keep, keep tabs on things. Unfortunately, some of the challenges are so deeply rooted that some of the new work may look similar to some of the old work.
Absolutely. And I don't want to create a new body of work for you all to go. Have to dig through the archives to try and update things from the last 50 years, but I do think it is noteworthy to some degree to demonstrate to the public, like, yes, we heard you, the arts tax was not functioning. And in response, the city council made those changes. And I know that when in the future and, you know, ten years when another arts tax audit comes out, you will be able to go back and say, this is what we said back then. This is the action that was taken. These are the new problems that have developed since then. But I do I do think it is important that the auditor's office isn't viewed as simply a a tattletale. That just sort of points out problems, but also recognizes when the solutions have actually been met. And genuinely, some of these improvements are because of the work that your teams have done. And so I want to thank you for the hard work that you all put in ahead of time to give us a path. So that's the end of my questions. Thank you, chair.
Thank you, president Dunphy. We'll move on to councilor. Novick. Followed by councilor Pirtle-guiney.
Elana Pirtle-Guiney: Thank you, mr. Chair. My question is are all for jennifer. The first one is it was striking that the number of complaints you've heard has more than doubled in just a few years. And I was just wondering if you have any thoughts about why that might be. Have you been like advertising on bus benches? Do you think people are just grumpier? Has the city been behaving more badly? What do you think?
I think it's it's difficult to say. I would like to think that it is at least partly due to the office becoming better known as a result of outreach efforts, I think, particularly among people living on the street. Our number also gets passed around a lot, which which is great. And that's a a way that a lot of people hear about us is just through word of mouth. And I think, yeah, we also have been obviously trying to, to do outreach. I think whenever we have a report in the media that tends to generate more public awareness, we start hearing from more people. We we hear from people who've contacted us before. So there's also maybe that element of repeat customers and. Yeah, hard to maybe pin down the exact reason. I think we wouldn't necessarily conclude that it's because there are more problems. But but maybe people are becoming more engaged. That may be a broader trend, but yeah, there's probably not, not one reason, but definitely it's a trend that we've noticed. On one hand, I think we welcome it because it shows more people are advocating for themselves and looking for assistance with resolving their issues.
Thank you. Of the complaints you get about the police. Do you have any ideas like what the breakdown is between complaints about too slow response to 9111 calls or police showed up and there was a crime, they didn't investigate it versus like the police beat somebody up some sort of police misconduct.
Well, I think yeah, all of those I think do can be complaints that come types of complaints that come to us about police generally with complaints of police misconduct. We would direct those to the independent police review, since that's really what they're set up to do. We yeah, that's not something we have really analyzed within police complaints exactly what they are about. So I don't really have that kind of breakdown handy. But yeah, it is indeed, as you said, a range of things from response to, you know, an officer was rude or the police are not giving me back my property. So sort of all over the place.
And you probably have the same answer to this. And it's a small sample size, but I was just curious of the 20, you said it was 4% complaints about revenue, which I imagine would be like a couple dozen complaints. And I was curious how many of those were about the arts tax.
We actually did look at how many complaints there had been about the arts tax in response to a media request. And I. So we have that number and can can share that with you if you're interested, but I don't have it off the top of my head. I would say it has been a fairly, you know, regular area of complaints, both with people who just dislike the the tax and what it is people who think they're being charged when they don't owe the tax, people who have paid and are still getting billed those more technical issues. So a range of concerns about the arts tax. But yeah, we also get complaints about business tax and other revenue issues. And yeah, don't necessarily kind of break them down. Have our own we can do that analysis if we need to, but don't produce that on a regular basis. That kind of breakdown.
Thank you.
Thank you. Councilor. Novick. Councilor. Pirtle-guiney will be followed by councilor Green.
Mitch Green: Thank you, chair, and thank you all for being here today and for the work that you do. I've just a couple of questions. The first is you mentioned an increase in complaints specifically from the homeless community. And I know that we've heard from the administration that there's been a concerted effort to post information about your number and the services available in some of our shelters. Did that increase in complaints correlate to when those numbers were posted? And we should assume that that is maybe the cause or had that increase started previously, and we should think about it as perhaps a more organic increase in concerns.
So I think we started getting more of those kinds of complaints in 2024, but definitely with a big, much bigger starting to get a much bigger volume last year. Well, probably they started more in 2023, but then have continued to grow in 2024 and 2025. We also did some outreach visits to the the safe rest village type shelters. So I think that helped to also get the word out, both to shelter guests and staff at those sites. And I think having our posters up, leaving fliers around probably also contributed. We haven't tracked necessarily that there were, you know, that there was an exact correlation to. Because we don't always know exactly when the posters were were put up. I think, again, word of mouth has a lot to do with it because that definitely, you know, we do hear from people when we ask how they found out about us. Sometimes people have said specifically from the posters, but often it's hearing from someone they know at the shelter who's been in touch with our office.
Okay.
Thank you.
Madam auditor. As we think about the important work of your office and kind of the ebb and flow of the budget in the city on a theory level, do you think that the amount of work that your teams need to be able to perform is related to the size of our government, to the complexity of our programs, or is there a baseline of audits and capacity for complaints that you need to be able to take that's unrelated to the size or scope of the rest of the work of the city?
I would say that there is a relationship there. And of course, I'd like to see things trending in the same direction. So as the city's budget grows, as its responsibilities expand or becomes more complex, I think my office should should follow. We've historically been categorized as a large audit shop, and that's part of our reputation nationally as being a leader in the audit community. With the loss of one auditor, we're now a medium shop, and we'll see what that feels like to be compared to our peers in that category. Other auditors look at population size as a way to assess what is sufficient funding for their offices. So I think there's there's not one way to get to what is the appropriate level of funding, but certainly trends that we'd like to see and a relationship that you identify.
Great. Thank you. That understanding that the trend line up and down should be related is helpful. And I know that as everybody faced budget cuts, that auditor was one of the things that you had said. If we have to make a cut, this is one we can make. I'm glad that that puts us in the middle of the pack and not on the low end of our audit capacity. That's actually really heartening to hear. So thank you for for offering that. I, I want to note that I was glad to see earlier this year the climate justice audit come out. And we're going to be looking at some of the city's climate work in the city life committee, and will certainly be using that, as many of my colleagues have talked about, using your work as guides for what they do, using that as one of the things we look to as we think about what work the city has left to do. So thank you for putting that out, and I will look forward to seeing the new topics tomorrow. Thank you chair.
Thank you, councilor Pirtle-guiney. We'll move to councilor Green, who will be followed by councilor Ryan.
Dan Ryan: Thank you, chair Kanal. Madam auditor, I just want to thank you for the focus on the street books, archival projects. I think that really spoke to me, particularly because today there was a there's a really good article in the op today that talks about a person who lost their life in old town recently, who was a cherished member of a community served by street books. And I think I'm gonna try to do this without getting too emotional, but. I think what's important about your project and the project of the street books archival work is it it captures the lived experience and the life that these people live, which is unique. It's important. And they're not just like numbers of, you know, we talk a lot about the homeless people, but having homeless people talk about their own lives is extremely important, especially since it's such a big programmatic and budgetary focus of the city of Portland. And so I just want to say thank you. I know it comes at the expense of other things that the broader you always have to make trade offs with the scarce budget, right. But the decision to, to prioritize that as a moment of, of, of important Portland history is noted. And I think it really dovetail dovetails nicely with the project that opb is trying to pursue on that as well. So I needed to uplift that. It's a constituent of mine that's not here anymore. Okay. I have some questions about the. So thanks for director jones. Thanks for the, the kind of overview on the, the, the audit schedule. I guess I do have sort of a, a general question about, I know that you get a lot of requests for audits. I know that you get some requests from audits from councilors, and then you make sort of internal determinations on what what the priorities should be. Roughly speaking, how many of those can you do as a share of, of the, would you like to do kind of volume of projects?
Yeah. So in the, we, we can add one less thing to the schedule. I think it's important. We usually have about 10 or 11 topics on the schedule. Like I said, we try to kind of make sure those are spread across service areas so that we're we're maintaining some coverage. We can kind of on the larger or the more quantity side, if some of those are like maybe a little smaller, but we do try to tackle some of the city's kind of bigger challenges. And sometimes those topics start as something very broad. So Portland solutions, emergency management, some of these things where we are starting with getting the lay of the land, we may have or it may have kind of risen to our risk level because we've heard a host of different issues, and we're trying to figure out which of those we can, we can focus on and maybe add the most value. So I know with the topics that we're adding this year, they were as a result of us kind of paying attention to things. The public told us they were interested in things that we have been following for years, topics that are getting discussed in front of city council, the the place where we try to. Kind of dedicate our time is how how can we add the most value? Maybe do make this an audit and not just a policy kind of like consideration, you know, weighing 3 or 4 different options or if it is something that the council and the administration are already working out, especially in a public forum, that may not be the area where we're we're adding more, but a deeper dive, something that where greater accountability, transparency may be required. Those are the sorts of things that may tip it for us, especially if it's if it's something that has historically gone, gone unaddressed or is a persistent problem. Some of the, the challenges that we highlighted or kind of continue to highlight through transition around collaboration, cooperation, making sure bureaus are working more efficiently and better together. Those are the sorts of things where I think an audit is the best tool for that, because we're going to recommend how where they should be, you know, aligning or, or focusing on common things.
Thank you. You know, as we've been having this conversation and a couple of my colleagues have have raised sort of, I think, almost a question of, you know, we're in this change of government, and we had this government for a really long period of time. And so the auditor's function has been really important through every step of the way. I think my instinct is that because we are so new in this work, city councilors, the mayor, the city administrator, this is these are all new functions in a sense. And so we're probably going to try some things that. And if we pass policies, they may not be a good idea. Or we might try. Some things that we find out have unintended consequences as we kind of work through this, or we hear from the public that, you know, you're either on the right track or you're on the right track, wrong track. And so I imagine that the work and the volume and the importance of the auditor function will need to probably be more resourced and probably have to pick up, because it's one thing to have a sort of, okay, we know what our kind of baseline level of, of pace and work kind of looks like, but that's a, that's a normal conditions. And then, and then boom, you hit a reset, there's a charter reform and now you're in extraordinary, extraordinary conditions, for lack of a better set of terms here. And, you know, as this council finds its oversight footing, there will be some of these questions of transparency that are raised that are probably more appropriate for the auditor's office. And so, I mean, we and I think we all received an email sort of in the middle of the budget from from the auditor about sort of at the end of the day, it's council's decision on how, how to resource the auditor's function. And so I just, I guess that's really for my colleagues is for us to think about as we go into the next budget. City administrator lee is going to the next budget, keeping in mind that we need to be forward looking on what we need to sort of prioritize for our city budget to to have the capability that I think portlanders are going to expect from the auditor's office, because you can only do so much with the resources you have. And we've, you know, we've cut one position here, which comes at a cost. And so and I think, you know, when I go out into the community, I have town halls, I hear a lot of questions about, you know, how what are you doing to make sure that we have faith in government and good stewardship of taxpayer dollars? It's at the end of the day, it's making sure that we resource the auditor's function correctly. I wanted to raise that up. And then I think there's the connection. Well, I don't know if there's a connection in your minds, but for me, I see a connection between the work that the ombudsman has done recently around the urban alchemy question. And there's some the report and then as well as kind of being the recipient of a volume of complaints that I do think is a structural uptick, probably has a set of reasons. And then I wonder if that was a germane reason why Portland solutions was identified as a priority audit, or was that sort of independent of that.
The that pride would have predated, I think, some of the urban alchemy work, but we had certainly heard about concerns about the kind of various programs that fall under that Portland solutions umbrella for us. And since since we do have two projects kind of going on in the same space, our teams are coordinating with each other. For us, we're kind of recognizing that these things come from different places. These are individual people having having trouble, and they're contacting the ombudsman to get those situations resolved. We're we're starting with like, this is basically a new city function that was created out of a mix of things that preexisted and some existed in the mayor's office and that sort of thing. So, you know, we're, we're able to look at it as a strategic management sort of thing with a start, and then figure out which area we can focus on deeper with an objective. So we're, we're taking a look at the same thing, maybe from two different directions and making sure we share information along the way. And audit services, I think we know from working in the homelessness space on our audit of the joint office shelter program. The county was doing audit at the same time we coordinated. I mean, you don't want to retraumatize folks. Having them kind of have to reshare their experiences. You do not want to burden service providers by asking the same question, you know, over and over again. So we, we're kind of seeking logical efficiencies there to, to lessen the burden on people who, who are just trying to get help.
Thank you. I think that my, my intuition was that probably because it is such a new function that sort of got cobbled together in an ad hoc fashion over the last few years, it makes sense to do an audit of this function. Yeah, especially since we've been funding it at a non-trivial level for a number of years. You know, just wanted to draw that connection there.
Yeah.
And the extent it's relevant.
Back to your first question, that that's an area where, you know, we are thinking like, hey, what are the elements of this that make it good for an audit? And like, hey, a new function that is a mix of things that maybe existed that maybe doesn't like, do they have a common goal yet? Those sorts of things. So yeah.
Thank you. I, you know, this, this body has to do oversight on, on urban alchemy question just from a budgetary standpoint, it's a $90 million contract that's largely exhausted. And so that's our responsibility. But just just knowing that you're looking at the kind of structural side of the Portland solutions pieces is comforting to know. And I think that's all I have, councilor.
Thank you, councilor Green. I'll go to councilor Ryan and then I'm next in the queue chair.
Good afternoon, madam auditor and team. It's great to have you here. Kind of following up on councilor Green started going into the same area. I think we're all kind of scratching around the prioritization, prioritization, prioritization. I'm adding one syllable. Sorry, it's been clunky in my experience at times to figure out how those are selected. And you're the auditor's office. You're independent, I respect that. So you fundamentally get to make those calls. But I do think when you look at the data that we're presented with today, and now that we have an ombudsman, there is a more sophisticated complaint system. And so I'm trying to connect the dots between that. And when we choose to make when we choose to do an audit. So when you mentioned, for example, PBOT, that was a good example. In the most recent one you did was with vision zero. Correct. So I bet a lot of the calls on complaints that you see under transportation, which is the highest, they're probably maybe some of them are definitely about pedestrian safety. I mean, you hear it every time you go out to the community about the need for more crosswalks and such. And then there's the big, you know, doesn't matter what city you live in, potholes, local government equals potholes. So when's the last time there was a study on even though PBOT increased the number of employees quite a bit over the last decade, why is it that everyone's experiencing less services when it comes to potholes being filled? You don't have to answer that. Like you just did an audit. I'm just saying, I'm trying to do the dot connection between what you're seeing here, what you're experiencing with the building of the ombudsman office, and then how you make these decisions.
Yeah. Thank you for the question, vice chair. I wanted to give ombudsman croft an opportunity to speak to why the transportation bureau tops the list of complaints, the kind of things that you see.
Yeah. Again, I think it covers the gamut of issues that PBOT works on, including potholes, street conditions, lighting, I think, and a lot of those types of issues. We will basically just direct people to where, for example, they can report a pothole or file a claim if they've experienced damage due to a pothole. Towing of vehicles has has consistently been a high area with a lot of complaints to our office, but also including lived in vehicles. So we we do work on
Quite a few of those types of cases, more in terms of a more. We've looked also more systemically at a couple issues with PBOT. One was a report we published, which I mentioned when I presented here last fall, which was looking at private request toes, which the police can order, but they're covered under the or not covered, sorry, under under PBOT contract. So toe companies basically, although most follow the contract prices, we found that one company didn't. And so some people who had experienced a collision or breakdown, which are usually the circumstances when police order that type of toe, they had the bad luck to get this company that wasn't following the contract prices. So in that case, we, we recommended that some solution be found to that issue so that people were not. Yeah, some people would not be charged much more just because of toe company happened to be called. So that, I guess is an example where we looked at a a broader PBOT issue. In that case, both PBOT and police also, we're planning to follow up soon a report we had done about how PBOT enforces safety regulations for tour busses, where we found some issues with how those regulations were or not necessarily being adequately enforced. So we'll be doing a follow up in the next couple of months about what's happened with our recommendations on that topic.
Okay. So do you take the data then from the complaints and then you two talk to each other?
Yeah. So we as we're developing the audit schedule interface with all of our kind of external facing. So ombudsman elections and lobbying takes complaints. And then we take tips through the fraud hotline. So those are elements where we would incorporate that feedback into that that risk analysis. We are also putting those topics out to the public to say, hey, what's what's most important to you out of this in that broad, you know, with that broad question, recognizing that people are coming to the ombudsman, maybe with a specific issue and lobbying and elections with a specific issue and not getting asked more broadly what's important to you.
And there's also two more since I've been here. The three one one's really grown. Yes. And I, I know that people that utilize that service tend to call it when they have more nuanced complaints. You also have obviously a different form of government. So in this form of government, we should be more of an asset to all of you because we are geographically aligned and we're out more in the community than the other form of government, because you have the capacity to do that. If we're not in here meeting all the time. And so you get more readily information. So I hope that I know in the form of government, it was like, okay, I have I need to understand every permit, every permit audit that you've done. And council president was right. There was one done in 19, whatever that was, but there was also one done in 2021. Right. And the reason I asked for the ones prior to that, because I was noticing that nothing happened with all of those audits prior to 2021, I'm proud to say that this commissioner Took the 21 audit and did something with it. We built the task force. We definitely got to the place where we brought them together, and now we're still dealing with growing pains. But we took action based on the problem that was stated in the 2021 audit. And I think that's what council president is getting at, is for our own accountability to look at those audits. And when you're a commissioner Overseeing a bureau, you asked for those audits. Now we're dealing with all of the bureaus as more of an advocate. So it's a different stance, and I hope that we can figure out how to bring that into fruition. I do want to give you one idea. I haven't seen anything on here about. And the startling information that everyone's talking about is the vacancy rate. And our public housing is definitely an issue that's burning right now. And so I hope that that you're all taking that in, because we're definitely going to be on the hook on a lot of different levels with that, with these high vacancy rates, with our public housing. Thanks.
Thank you, councilor Ryan, I am last in the queue, so I first, I wanted to say thanks for the information about archives. I thought the the oral history project and the digital timeline were both really interesting. And I intend to follow up on similar methodologically to what councilor Koyama Lane was talking about in terms of asking for some support there. It actually very similar context for a different community than the one the example you gave. In doing the sort of back of envelope math, the increase in the number of complaints from people that are houseless from last year to this year is the increase in number of complaints total, like 150 ish, more of both. And so I just wanted to, to contextualize that if you looked, but in terms of the just doing the percentages to the totals here. That's really fascinating. And it, it opens up a lot of questions. Can you speak to do you disaggregate where those folks are, where, whether they're houseless and unsheltered, whether they're in a sheltering system? Do you disaggregate that?
Yeah. Well, one thing I would say is that that percentage of people whose housing status was houseless, basically, we have that. We don't have that information for all complainants. We only were able to collect demographic information on about, I think, a little less than half of complainants last year. So so that wouldn't necessarily that 36 I think it was 36% I mentioned isn't necessarily 36% of the total. It's out of people who. We had some information about their housing status. But yes, I think definitely that's correct that, you know, part of that 32% increase we had last year was due to this high volume of complaints from shelter guests that breakdown as to whether people are, you know, completely unsheltered or in a vehicle or at a shelter isn't something we track separately, but it would be it would be captured in the complaint record. You know, I think it would be something we would be able to see in the substance of the complaint. But we in terms of what's what we're tracking and then can, you know, analyze at the end of the year, that's just, you know, whether someone owns or rents or is in temporary housing or is houseless or prefers not to provide that information.
Okay. That's helpful. And I, at the risk of asking for more, I think it might be really helpful for us to know of that percentage. Are we getting more complaints per capita or even just on an aggregate level from folks who are in a shelter operated by a specific provider or multiple specific providers? We contract with several. And I think if that that's a data point that I think would be helpful to know. And it opens up a different question that I. I'm not sure who is the best person to ask, which is, you know, we and this kind of builds on something councilor Green was talking about. We hold oversight hearings here. We're going to have one on on our shelter providers, at least one of them. That's that's inevitable. At some point, we'll probably have one on, on home forward or something like that in the future. How would you like it? How would you like us to incorporate into the sort of starting point level setting information that we provide to the public and to each other, the work of the auditor's office? How would you like those oversight hearings to inform? Because I'm hearing, casey, you mentioned if it's something that the council and the administration are already working out, that may not be the area where we're adding more. And I think that may be the case. But sometimes it's actually you're a force multiplier for it. And so I would love to figure out how we make that work, be together as we go forward on these oversight processes.
I can I can respond to that. Chair. I was I was going to say that, you know, number one, we want you to use the work that we have published that's, you know, rigorous work that has, you know, undergone rigorous quality control. I think we're interested in our continuous risk assessment to understand what changes are affecting programs that we might look into in the future. So understanding, like watching those hearings and understanding what the outcomes are can help us figure out which Lane or where we can be to provide value.
Yeah, I was going to agree with your point. It may not knowing that it's something that's that's maybe already being worked on is not something that necessarily preclude us from doing it, but may shift our focus to some of those more structural elements, like I was talking about with councilor Green or, you know, strategic elements, kind of higher level things.
Thanks. Yeah, my, my big broader point here is please don't let us discussing it be an inhibiting factor in even subconscious way. I think it's actually sometimes really beneficial. And I think we can probably figure that out case by case. More than that. Councilor. Novick question on sorry. Councilor. Novick question on slide 12, the. Which has the bars for different parts of it. Just for context here, your question about the police complaints, it doesn't take into account this number doesn't include complaints that only go to ipr and crc and internal affairs and all that, right? Like this is just the ones that come in the front door here does include the ones that you refer on to them and take no further action on.
It would. Yeah, yeah. This would be anything that comes in our door that is about the police, including complaints that we refer to ipr. Or if people have it could include people have been to ipr and not satisfied with the outcome and then come to us. So this is everything that's come in to us, but not something that has come into ipr and not come to us.
Great. That that second piece would be very good to know. I might ask for disaggregation on that too. Just as we pivot into the new system. On the. Do you have the information? Switching gears to the two slides later on the short term accessory rentals. Two questions on that. One is for you. One will be for chair Avalos, I think, or perhaps others. But when do you have a comparison? You compare the first time violator maximum. Fine. Do you have comparisons that are on the median fine actually levied or any of those types of information? Or is it just that. Is it that our range is just giant, or is it that we're actually levying at that high end? The fines?
Well, yeah, this my colleague who did the investigation really sort of got more into looking at the at other cities types of types of fines. So maybe would be better placed to answer the specific question. But I think part of it is that in under the rules in Portland, there are multiple types of violations. So you can be fined for not having a permit. You can be fined for advertising more rooms or or for more guests than your permit allows. You can be fined for actually, you know, renting out to too many people. So that's how the fines add up is and people can be fined. I think it's basically five separate times. But as a first, for the first time that they're fine basically. So the individual amounts for the individual violation are, you know, several thousand, but then it adds up. And that's why it becomes the 27.
Right. But is that actually happening or is this a theoretical exercise of if if hypothetically, all five were found and all five were levied at the max amount, it would add up to this.
No people have been fined that maximum amount and not received prior warning that they were in violation.
And there's there's and this is the I would love to know if there's data on what the actual the median is, let's say, because it sounds like there's some possibility that it could be a lesser amount than this on a first time violator, and probably the same for these other four cities as well, is kind of what I'm getting at there in terms of the two parts that the administration referred on to council. And this is the question that might be better for my colleagues. Is there a timeline for when those are coming to councilor to committee? Does anyone know? The the specific comment was that the administration referred to council, the changing of the rules and the reduction of fines, but took on the warning process directly. And so for those two pieces that were referred on to council, are those penciled in anywhere for I don't know if they're at. Okay. Council president has been assigned to a committee.
Nothing has been filed yet, so I haven't seen anything yet.
Got it. Okay. Good to good to know. Thanks. I'll skip ahead. I am super interested in your last slide in learning about the 911 emergency communications audit, that gun violence reduction audit, the citywide equity audit, the Portland solutions audit. We talked about these. I know in the past, I'd love to see some information on. As you do the citywide equity. That's the first of this type of of part of the administration. I'd love to know how that informs looking at engagement in particular in the future. Our core values broadly, I imagine there will be a lot of recommendations in all of these. You mentioned that there's been no, you've not reduced the number of audits that are underway as a result of budget cuts. Have there been any reductions in the resources devoted to any of these six audits as a result of the budget, or will there be when this budget takes effect, if approved, as is.
Not as the result of. The budget? We had a reassignment within this, but it is just been somebody cycling off of one project onto another. And like I said, like it's typically easier for us to just add one fewer thing to the schedule. Folks usually work in teams of 1 or 2 people, so it. Just means we would commit to one fewer thing in the next fiscal year.
Okay, that's, that's good to know because I think these are particularly important. Yeah. All right. That's concludes my questions colleagues. We we do have this as a report. And so the the action under consideration would be whether or not to refer it. So I'd request a motion to refer to council with a recommendation to accept. Second move by councilor Ryan, seconded by councilor Clark. Is there any discussion further on that motion? Seeing none. Rebecca, will you please call the roll.
Chair? Did you speak to this? I believe there was no action.
Yeah, well, I'm looking at the the way this appears on the committee agenda. It is a report in name, but it is truly just a presentation and a chair. So you don't have to take any action on this.
Okay. That will save the full council some time then. Thank you to councilors Ryan and Clark. Anyway, so we're.
I'll just clarify the item will be placed on file.
Great. Well, thank you so much for being here. Appreciate it. And I think that concludes this item then. Right? Yeah. Okay. It does not. All right. Well thank you. Thank you. All three we do have one item further on the agenda, but we are going to take a short break first. We'll come back in ten minutes. So see you back at 345. Thank you.
Thanks.
A gordon lightfoot song I didn't know. All right.
It is. Thank you for the extra few minutes that that were taken in this. We're now back in session as our. Rebecca, would you please call the third item?
Item three. Appoint members to the Portland clean energy community benefits fund committee. Document number 2026-2083.
And I believe we have presenters sam barrasso, PCEF program manager, and rafael tomassi, who's our PCEF external affairs manager, as they're coming up. I just want to thank you for your patience. Normally, we would put something involving volunteer appointments first on the agenda. We wanted to be respectful of our independently elected colleague, the auditor as well, so we put her first today. I appreciate you all being here and please feel free to take it away whenever you're ready.
Okay. Good afternoon, council members. My name for the record. My name is sam brosseau, program manager for the Portland clean energy community benefits fund at the bureau of planning and sustainability. And we're here to talk to you today about the subcommittee, specifically about some of the newest members recommended here for appointments to the committee as well as reappointment. So today's presentation here will be brief, but but plentiful here. We'll give you an overview on the committee's role. Then we'll talk about the recruitment process. And then last we'll talk about the recommended appointees as well as re appointees for your confirmation. And we've got daniel walker here with us, one of the candidates. And then we've got a few of our folks that'll be joining online as they are traveling today. And so with that, I'm going to go ahead and turn over to my colleague rafael tamaki to take us from there.
Thank you, sam, for the record, my name is rafael tamaki.
I use he him pronouns. I'm the external affairs manager for sff. I want to thank you all for the opportunity to present today regarding appointments and reappointments to the PCEF committee. So before discussing appointments, I just want to briefly ground the piece of committee's purpose and role. Go to the next slide. Please. Forgive me if this is perfunctory or if this is information that you already know. But pccep began as a community led ballot initiative approved by 65% of Portland voters in 2018. The measure established a dedicated funding source for climate action, funded through a surcharge on large retailers, those who make $1 billion nationwide and half a million locally, while exempting essential goods such as groceries, medicine and utilities. Following voter approval, city council codified p seven to chapter 7.07 of city code, simultaneously establishing both the fund and the PCEF committee. So the committee exists because voters and council establish it as a part of sps accountability and governance structure. Next slide please. So under city code, the sub committee is a nine member advisory body appointed by the mayor and confirmed by city council members serve staggered four year terms which, bless you, provides continuity and institutional knowledge over time. Bless you. The committee recommends and advises on the climate investment plan, which is the five year blueprint for the allocation of resources from the fund, and the committee also evaluates implementation and program effectiveness through the annual cip amendment process to help ensure investments align with program goals and community priorities. Importantly, I think the committee brings a diversity of perspectives, lived experience, and technical expertise related to climate, workforce, energy and community development. Next slide please. So just drilling down a little bit further, the committee's responsibilities include reviewing and helping establish methodologies to evaluate pcf's effectiveness, adopting workforce and contractor equity plans for funded projects, and making recommendations to council regarding the climate investment plan amendments and potential code changes. So while PCEF committee has an important advisory function, any major funding policy or climate investment plan decisions ultimately come before the city council. Committee members bring a wide range of expertise and experience. This is a list of the areas of expertise, both residential and commercial, renewable energy and energy efficiency, transportation, decarbonization, workforce development, minority owned and women owned business support, regenerative agriculture and Green infrastructure, Green financing and experience with native American communities and tribal relations. So the goal is not uniformity, but a balanced committee capable of bringing multiple perspectives to the complex decisions we often find in front of us. And this is the current roster for the PCEF committee, including their terms and areas of expertise. We had two members term off last summer and another resigned during that same time, and those three committee members brought subject area expertise in residential energy efficiency, workforce development and general climate knowledge. And so this recruitment sought to fill those gaps. With that, I would like to walk us through the recruitment and selection process that we use to identify candidates. And here's the recruitment process timeline. It was a competitive and structured recruitment process. It was open for about six months. We received 67 applications for the three open positions. And that I think, reflects strong community interest in serving on this particular committee. Our applications were then reviewed by staff and PCEF committees recruitment subcommittee, which then assessed candidates based on a series of categories including interest and motivation, commitment to collaboration, civic commitments and community involvement, relevant subject area expertise and their goals for service. The pool was then narrowed to 18 candidates, followed by interviews with six finalists. The subcommittee brought the recommendations to the whole piece of committee for a vote, which passed, and now we're bringing these appointments to council for confirmation. And with that, I'd like to introduce the recommended appointees and reappointment. I am very happy with this group. We've gotten to know each other through this relatively long process, and the recommended candidates, I think, bring a combination of energy efficiency, expertise, workforce and labor experience, program implementation and evaluation, community connection and economic development perspective. So I'll move one by one and begin with tamara kennedy, who's currently the executive director at northwest energy coalition. She brings significant experience in regional clean energy policy and equitable economic growth. She leads a regional alliance of around 100 organizations advancing clean, affordable and equitable energy policies across the pacific northwest. And she's formerly the director of economic development at the port of Portland, where she led investment attraction, workforce development and equitable economic growth initiatives. To my side, we also have daniel walker, principal consultant at the brightline group, nearly 20 years of energy efficiency evaluation experience across residential, commercial and industrial sectors, including roles at the energy trust of Oregon, bonneville power administration, and the department of energy. I want to say, danielle is the rare, really the rare candidate with local, regional, federal and utility experience in energy efficiency evaluation and program design, with expertise in navigating really complex implementation environments and managing program costs. We also have randall friesen, the executive secretary treasurer of the columbia pacific building trades and construction council. Randall provides deep expertise in construction trades, apprenticeship pathways and workforce development, all critical to the climate implementation at scale that we're looking for. He's a graduate of a state registered five year, 8000 hour apprenticeship through plumbers and pipefitters local to 90. He represents a coalition of 22 local unions comprised of more than 16,000 construction workers in the Portland region, coordinating project labor agreements and partnerships with labor and community organizations. And finally, our reappointment. D'angelo monning is currently the workforce outreach manager at espousal strategies. He's also currently the co-chair. He brings continuity to that group and deep historic albina community ties and expertise connecting public investments to workforce, small business opportunities and minority contractors. He leads workforce outreach and community engagement for major regional infrastructure projects at espousal, and he's experienced in creating pathways to employment for youth, formerly incarcerated individuals and other underserved populations. So together, these appointments strengthen the committee's ability to, I think, support implementation during this this period of significant growth. So counselors, today, the requested action is confirmation of these three new appointments and one reappointment to the PCEF committee. We believe that they're well positioned to support the committee's advisory role as PCEF continues implementation. We have the appointees and reappointed today. So you can they can offer comment or open for questions. I just want to thank you for your consideration.
Thank you. Is it your intention that we just have the in response, or would you like them to all speak for a moment? First, we.
I think it'd be I mean, we serve at your pleasure, of course, but I think it would be a nice opportunity to give them each an opportunity to just talk about their statement of interest, if that's all right.
I would love that. Yeah. Thank you.
Okay, great. I'm going to begin with tamara. And we'll go in the order that we had them on the slides. Tamara, are you there?
I am, I'm here. Can everyone hear me okay?
Yep.
Great. Thank you. It's a true honor to be presented, to be part of this committee that I have been following the great work of the sff committee for a number of years, and I'm excited that it's at this position that can continue to create strong opportunities for Green workforce development in the Portland area and continue to support the city charter. So, again, very excited to be able to now that I'm in a regional role, to be able to ensure that I'm providing some context, but also to support the strategic direction of PCEF open. Happy to answer any questions after the rest of the members introduce themselves. Thank you.
Hi. Good afternoon, danielle walker. So I think my interest really stems from just dedication and into this field. For the past 20 years, my entire professional career, when a program like this gets passed, it's it's as big as it gets for our industry, the clean energy industry, especially in the utility space and state and federal space that I've been in. So I just wanted to be able to contribute my, my lived experience as best I could. I would, I would like to focus my area in ensuring that these programs are reliable, measurable, a prudent use of taxpayer dollars, and that we're able to really share the stories and successes of what these programs are able to accomplish. So thank you.
Good afternoon everybody. I'm randall friesen with the columbia pacific building trades council. I'd like to echo kind of what danielle had to say as far as making sure that our dollars are used responsibly and that they're also that they're a benefit to the community. So I, I strongly believe that all, all public dollars should benefit the communities that they're in. And, and especially to make sure that that we are prudent with those dollars and that that they benefit everyone. So thank you very much. Happy to answer any questions.
And I'll round us out. Good afternoon, city council, those of you in the council chambers. For the record, my name is d'angelo moning. I want to jump in real quick and apologize for not being there in person today. As some of you may know, I work on the interstate bridge replacement program and I needed to be in office. So we've been having some network issues, but I hope it doesn't drop off. Just a quick background about myself, I've been a member of PCEF since my appointment in July 2023, and have been reappointed as co-chair since August of 2025. I've had the privilege of engaging in sex work, multiple rounds of community grants allocations, collaborative discussions with city council, the cip amendment process, engagement with frontline and priority populations, and most recently, the selection process for new committee members. So while I understand that I'm also up for reappointment, I actually wanted to take my time to really focus on the nominees, since I'm familiar with most, if not all of council, but as a representative of the subcommittee as well as co-chair of the PCEF committee as a whole, we all fully agree that, you know, danielle's extensive background with bonneville power, the current local bright line group, tamara strategic management and vision with the port of Portland and the northwest energy coalition and the incredible work randall has done with the columbia pacific building trades, supporting two dozen trades unions and over 20,000 trades workers. These things are all a testament to show that these nominees have the ability to lead at the highest level. I firmly believe that they bring an incredible wealth of experience, expertise and critical piece of categories and the commitment required to advance the mission, vision and values of pcf and the climate and equity framework that guides our work. They're very well positioned to help guide the investments that reduce climate impacts, expand opportunity, and ensure accountability, and how these funds are used to support communities that have historically been underserved, especially as we transition into this environmental, environmental infrastructure. So myself, my committee, our representatives, we fully support these appointments. I look forward to working alongside them. The city administration, city council as we continue advancing this work to meet these challenges, seize opportunities and celebrate our collective wins, and build on the progress that comes ahead of where we stand today. So thank you for allowing me the time to share these words with you.
Thank you. So we do have one testifier signed up. Are there any technical questions related to this process? Before we get into the discussion, I'll just run through the queue to to ask that question from each of you. Councilor Green. Okay. Councilor Dunphy, councilor Smith, is it technical or is it for discussion? Okay. Councilor. Novick. Councilor Morillo. Okay, mine is technical. It's June 2026. I noticed that d'angelo's appointment is backdated. Can you speak to what happened there and just how he wasn't already reappointed?
This is this is always the challenge of managing our timelines and our recruitments. And just to be blunt, about the time it takes to get through the processes. And so we had always originally planned to batch our recruitments together. We didn't expect it would take this long to get here. We expected we'd be here in a perfect universe, closer to February, so that the lag wouldn't have taken as long. It's something we're now taking into account and accounting for, as we sort of walk back and understand the timelines we now have to work with. We, for instance, have two more folks that will be rolling off in September. We'll be beginning those recruitments shortly. So this is just a function of the timeline and our desire to batch them together. And and yet they spread apart when this recruitment took longer and so had we look back, we would have just gone in separately, brought the reappointment and come back and done the others. But at that time we thought we could batch them together.
Okay.
Thank you. And then if if these appointments are approved by council, will the committee be full up until that September?
Correct. You will have a full nine person committee at that point.
Right.
All right. I guess, rebecca, if you could please call the testifier.
We do have one person signed up, babs finelli. Babs is online. You can unmute and go ahead.
Hi, everyone. Can you hear me? Okay.
We can.
Thank you. So, hello. I've had the great honor and privilege of meeting all of you at various points over the last few years. I soon to be 78 lifelong portlander currently in district two. I am extremely grateful that I tuned in today. I normally would watch the marathon session scheduled for tonight, but I have tickets for the Portland fire game. Got your back, Dan? So I followed PCEF since early 2020. And. And continually impressed with the work that they do. My main concern and also applaud the four candidates that have already spoken. The other part of what I want to say is that I am one of thousands of portlanders who have been pretty vocal about making certain that pcf funds, including all that interest, be used specifically for activities that. Carry out the goals and the missions of pcf. So I implore you all to maintain that over these next several years. Thank you. A one slight caveat is normally I would watch the marathon session tonight. I will view it after the fact, and I implore and beg all of you to pass a budget. I know you all love our city of roses and please demonstrate that to us by giving us a budget. Thank you all by.
That concludes testimony.
Thank you. Colleagues will go through the. The. Q now, feel free to ask questions of the candidates or discuss. When screenshare ends, the order gets redone, so go in the order. I called everyone's name earlier, which means councilor Green first, followed by council president Dunphy.
Jamie Dunphy: Thank you, chair Kanal, and thanks for bringing forward these appointments today. I have I think I've got questions for all the new appointees and my appreciation to d'angelo for stepping up again. Is it is it tomorrow or. Tamara. Tamara. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for applying for this. And I'm, you know, I'm, I'm a veteran of the industry as well. And so I, I clocked that you're the executive director of the northwest energy coalition, which has been sort of on the forefront of really trying to make sure we're we're putting renewables on the grid and we're, we're greening our grid and in, in every opportunity. Right. And so I've sometimes thought about, can PCEF be a way to help finance independent power production, maybe, maybe help like the city of Portland, maybe get into the generation supply business itself, things of that nature. And I just, I wonder if you have any ideas from your current position, how, how you might enter into the committee work, understanding that a lot of the folks that you spoke to is, is workforce development. But I see potentially two sides of the same coin on that.
Thank you for the question. I will just put one little caveat is, so the northwest energy coalition, we are a nonprofit. We focus on we operate in Oregon, Washington, montana and idaho. And really, we are an advocate for ratepayers and just focus on equity and transparency and for moving from policy to implementation. So we don't actually get involved in direct physical projects. But many organizations like renewable northwest have spun out of us, and we really just try to make sure we create aligned spaces for collaborative engagement to support a really strong regional clean energy economy. So I don't know if I have specifics for your your question that you have, but my goal here, being part of the committee is a to support the overall governance structure and follow, of course, what the city charter has outlined. Ensure that we have a really strong, you know, climate investment plan that supports that and that any individual perspective is really balanced with the overall diverse perspectives that are on the overall governance committee.
Well, that's that's a great answer. And I think I would just add thanks for clarifying the kind of positions and the ratepayer advocacy that northwest energy coalition does. That's been my experience with them as being kind of on the other side of the rate case, so to speak. I think that that's going to be a top of mind. And for for taxpayers or voters in general, when they think about the Portland clean energy fund and future climate investment plan amendments, I'm looking forward to that perspective on on the board and the committee. Danielle. So, colleagues, full disclosure, I used to work with danielle at bonneville power administration for probably about five years. Very closely. Danielle was our energy efficiency lead. That was our liaison with the northwest power planning council, and I was junior to you at that time, and we worked on the resource program together. And so I just want you guys to know that. But I also know what your expertise is. And so I want to ask you a question, a lot of discussion that we've had lately, and what's been top of mind for me is when we think about candidate projects for the Portland clean energy fund. For me, it's not necessarily that that specific thing has a climate nexus, or it has an opportunity to have an efficiency saving, but it's also part of a portfolio that there may be some competing proposals and some sort of alternatives analysis, so to speak. So I wonder if, one, you're going to bring your experience into that work a little bit. But then also, if you can just maybe share a little bit with the the city council a little bit, how, how you think about kind of evaluating proposals and costs kind of works from your experience and how you might apply that to this?
Yes. Thank you. It's great to see you. And I know councilor Dunphy as well. So it's great to see you too. Okay. Yes to okay. So the the word that comes to mind for me as you talk through all of that, managing a portfolio, evaluating decision making to me is a, is a decision making framework and criteria. So you have to have outlined and agreed upon all of the criteria of what you are going to weigh and compare all of those options. And then you have to have a framework for which for how those criteria are going to get them, you know, considered and how decision will get made. And so I think it will be me understanding the framework that already exists, the criteria that already exists, what the priorities are for the various stakeholders, all involved. Everyone is coming to the table with equally important but different priorities of those criteria. And so how do you weigh those and consider those? So I yeah, I think it would be understanding the existing framework, understanding what else is needed. And, and then putting that through these, you know, these decisions and what's what's on the table.
Thank you. And just a little follow up question from your experience working with the the kind of bpa to council nexus, would you say that that was that work ever political at times?
Is it ever not political?
Yeah. Well, yeah. Just can you speak about sort of the intersection of that because that that matters for this, this question too.
Yeah. I mean, I think my background, I have a technical background. I have a master's from Portland state in economics. Yet I think I quickly realized that when I entered into federal service that you can't untie the technical from the policy and from the political. And so really, it's I think as my career has progressed, it's been. You know, finding the, the nuance of how you use the technical and how you ground yourself in analytics to support and facilitate and move forward in sensitive political policy related conversations. And, and that's essentially what we did at bonneville often either with the council or with utilities or with advocates, was taking our technical background and supporting a policy conversation. So yeah.
Well, thank you. I'm really glad to see you. Your interest in this in this board. And then I'll ask randall is great to see you up there, randall. You know, what is your vision for like decarbonization, like PCEF as a decarbonization tool with respect to labor and sort of opportunities for, for building generations of good paying jobs? When we think about moving beyond fossil fuels, fuels, do you have do you have do you have any thoughts on that?
Yeah.
First off, thank you for allowing me to attend remote. I'm out of town for work too, obviously, so I guess my mind goes to. There's all kinds of new technologies that are coming, and there's a lot of trades that we already have. The affiliates that I represent, we already do a lot of, of different work like, like when solar panel came along, construction trades already install those. And our, our workforce is already trained in those kinds of things. So I want to make sure that we don't use funding to stand up duplicate programs or other programs that aren't state registered or try to solve for a problem that doesn't exist, especially when it comes to workforce. So my expertise of coming from the trades and going through a state registered apprenticeship program helps us link up with with crafts that already do that work and make sure that we don't, again, duplicate efforts. Right. So I'm excited about that. Does that answer your question?
Yeah. And I just think that, you know, sometimes there's a, there's might be a perception that, you know, the environmental movement and decarbonization might be at odds with the trades, but do you see it as an opportunity to work together to build a solid blue Green alliance and kind of move us into the 21st century with, with good, high quality union jobs?
Absolutely. There's, there's one project that is privately funded that is, is coming to the region and it's next clean energy, and it's solely going to be a renewable energy plant that isn't is not fossil fuels. And so that's a good example of that is carbon reduction in in. Yeah. So we're absolutely excited to take that on. And I do see it as a, a really good, good opportunity. And to support decarbonization. There's, there's other, there's other things that we do too, that, that we represent when it comes to wind farms, our crafts also work on those, you know, there's just a multitude of, of different technologies that we already perform.
Thank you so much. I don't want to monopolize the rest of the mic. So I love this topic area. So thanks so much. I plan to support all of you today. Thanks.
Thank you. Thank you.
Councilor Green. We'll go to council president dunfee followed by councilor Smith.
Loretta Smith: Thanks. I'll be real brief. But you know, panels like this of just incredible community volunteers who are willing to to spend their time. It's always humbling to me to see this happen. But also, I, I'm struggling right now about whether or not Portland is just a really small city or I am old and have been doing this work for a long time because I have a personal relationship with all four of these folks in different capacities. Tamara and I met almost a decade ago when she was with travel Portland, and we got to work together while I was working for commissioner Nick fisher's office. Danielle and I met four years ago when we served a three year term on the parkrose school board budget committee together. And so I know that she is a glutton for punishment and staring at excel spreadsheets. Randall and I've gotten to work together for the last two years over campaign time mostly. And d'angelo I, I, we met once prior to me being in this role when he was working for a spousal, but I've also just been so deeply impressed with his leadership as co-chair. And every time we've gotten to connect, I have so much confidence in his leadership. So I'm enthusiastic to support all four of these nominees. And kudos, gentlemen. Good work on the recruitment process. Thank you.
Thank you, council president. We'll go to councilor Smith followed by Novick.
Steve Novick: Thank you.
Mr. Chair. I want to thank all of you for for presenting raphael and making sure that you got good quality people. I too, know many of these folks. I have been in passing with danielle, but I think that you have picked a, a superstar group of folks who will have the level of consciousness that's needed at this time to, to do this kind of work. And yes, danielle, it will get political at times. I don't know when it's not political. Just say the word peace and everything goes crazy. But but I think it's I think you've you've picked a good group. I too, plan to support all of you and wish you well.
Thank you, councilor Smith. Councilor. Novick followed by Morillo.
Thank you, mr. Chair. First of all, I'm so impressed by the background and experience each of you have, and we're really grateful that all of you were willing to do this. I want to describe some concerns I've had and questions I have about the relationship between the cf and the PCEF committee and the council, and I'm not necessarily asking you to give your thoughts on this, because I might be asking you about things you've never thought about before. If you have some spontaneous thoughts, please share them. But we had an experience last year where in the annual amendments, the cf recommended taking money out of a pot that had gone to a transportation program, which wasn't really being spent, and putting it into a housing pot. And I was particularly concerned about I mean, about I mean, I tend to think that we spend too little on transportation. And I was concerned about taking money out of transportation and putting into housing where we spent a lot. And I suggested that we consider some various other transportation alternatives. And the response that we got from some of the housing organizations are planning to get the money is we've already been promised this money. That's unfair. And we wound up having a discussion in council and my proposals to keep the money in transportation lost 11 to 1. But I think that there were other councilors who shared my concern that there's some councilors here, I should tell you that. Think that the council has no business interfering with the with the decisions of the committee or the cf staff, the council should just be a rubber stamp. There's some of us who think that council should not be a rubber stamp, and would like to have some opportunities to weigh in and have a discussion. One thing that I would like the council to know is in advance what are programs that are underspending, and therefore might be the subject of proposals to change? I've had some exchanges in the past few months with both the financial professionals, like the cfo's office and the budget office and the city, and with cf staff who told me we don't really have a handle on what areas there are underspending in. So I'm really hoping that before the next time they. Cf recommends moving money around because there's areas of underspending there's some. An area of underspending. The council is aware of that in advance, so I mean, again, this is I mean, I'm worried about council being put in a position where they're asked to confirm a decision and told that by people who are relying on the previous decision that they think they've been promised the money, I'm worried about not knowing in advance that there's areas of underspending which might prompt a revision, and I'm hoping there can be a more collaborative relationship and exchange of information between cf and the and the committee and the councilors. So I just wanted to get that out there. If anybody has an initial reaction, I'd be happy to hear it, but I would quite understand if nobody has an initial reaction.
Mr. Chairman, before they answer a point of information. So let's clear up something. The folks that he said that he they were promised something to. They were not promised anything. They went through a peace process. So let's clear that up. First, they went through a process that cf set up and they won out that process. They were not just told they were going to get something.
Councilor Smith, just to be clear, everything you just said is perfectly valid. It's just not a point of information. Okay.
I thought it was a point of information, but I wanted to clear up my colleague before he has them answer something that they are getting political about.
Well, and councilor, I recognize that he did go through a process. The question is, is the there's the committee process.
Well said that peace have promised them. They didn't promise them. They went through a process. So don't change it around councilor.
And councilor. You know, my concern is that I think that the process that cf goes through is we know you shouldn't be the end.
Of the story. Who got the money? So let's let's.
Councilor Smith you're welcome to get back in the queue. I just I want to make sure the person in the queue is recognized. So.
So again, if anybody has a reaction to that, I'd be happy to hear it. I perfectly understand if nobody does have a reaction.
I don't.
I'd like just a quick chance to respond if that's all right.
Thank you.
Yeah. No, I one, I want to specifically appreciate councilor Novick because he has been an advocate for cf in a lot of different ways. He has made sure to inform myself and my fellow co-chair of any amendments that he may be proposing. There's been ongoing conversation about what his thoughts are. So I understand councilor Novick position. I also appreciate just I appreciate councilor Smith's response, just kind of clarifying the process. But but I also want to draw attention to how that allocation was made. Very briefly. You know, we were looking at a program that was underperforming for the time that it was at at the cip amendment process, comparing that to a program that was overperforming. And so, you know, I think there's a nuance that should be appreciated and understood that it wasn't just we are de-prioritizing transportation for housing, even background on myself, my career is primarily in transportation. You know, rose quarter project, interstate bridge. I work with TriMet. So I understand very much the woes that we have in the transportation industry. It's where I it's kind of where I live. But this was a particular situation in which we're looking at an underperforming program that happened to be transportation and look toward allocation to a program that was overperforming, in which case was housing. So just to clarify that we are not prioritizing or prioritizing one or the other. This was an allocation made based on the data that we had in serving programs that were already showing their value and could use more assistance with funds that were then made available due to that allocation. So I just want to clarify that for the sake of the conversation. But I also want to acknowledge that I do believe a more collaborative process is necessary with council. You know, I've had conversations with most, if not all of those other folks on city council. And, you know, everybody has a wealth of ideas about how these allocations are made and where they can participate. But I believe that, and I've said this openly, and I'm happy to say it again, that, you know, this is a program that was pulled together by members of the community to prioritize investments in frontline communities. So I would prefer to see a collaborative process with frontline communities, those that are the most impacted city council, the administration, and the committee to ensure that we are making these allocations in a way where they serve the people that they were designed to serve. So thank you for allowing me to make comment.
Thank you. And I do have a question that I actually would like to ask people to answer, which is that there's when pccep was put on the ballot, it said that it was for energy efficiency projects, but which I think includes transportation alternatives to gasoline cars. But that wasn't a focus of peace for a while. Since then, a small fraction of PCEF money has gone to transportation. I think that in some circles that's still controversial. So I just want to ask each of the of the nominees, do you think that investments in transportation to reduce emissions and to reduce the cost of transportation for saf priority communities by providing cheaper, greener alternatives? Do you think that that's a legitimate use of state resources or not?
Okay, I'll go first. Well, I think I would first need to immerse myself in all of the specific language within the act and within any plans to make sure that this this decision would be consistent with that. I would say in my professional experience outside of this specific program, the answer would generally be yes. But I think that that is always caveated with, you know, the specifics of the program and the rules and requirements and legal underpinnings of it. So that's my response.
Yeah. I would just add that that any decision that needs to be made would have to be in alignment with what the, what the goals of cf are. And it's also a group discussion, right? So I would definitely have to review more information and I wouldn't be able to say yes or no to that. But on, on the face value, it sounds like it would meet, it would meet those requirements, but without more information, be difficult to make an affirmative answer on it. Right. So.
And thank you. I agree with both comments stated before. I do see a role in transportation. Decarbonization is really important in general, but I would like to understand how that has fit into the priorities of the overall climate investment plan and what, how that has been structured. So I feel like I don't have enough. I would want to do a little bit more deep dive into that and also make sure that I'm in line with the overall goals of the committee. But thank you for that question.
And I'll round us out here. I think I won. I want to say that, yes, I think that there is a priority in transportation decarbonization through PCEF. I think that we have to determine a way that we can have transportation, decarbonization priorities. That also focuses on ensuring that priority populations have an equitable way to access transportation organization. I won't go into great length. I don't want to take too much time. But, you know, we often hold the idea of electric vehicles and providing those priority populations. But we don't talk enough about the infrastructure required to implement electric vehicles. We don't talk about how priority populations generally live in mixed income housing, which may only have 2 to 3 charging stations. Nor do we talk about the impact that that would have on the grid for black and brown outs, specifically in lower income priority population communities. So I, I agree that there should be a focus on transportation decarbonization that is a part of cf, but I think that we have to reimagine what that looks like in terms of equitable access in a way that doesn't cause more barriers or harm or lack of benefit to those same priorities. Again, I don't want to go into detail, but I'm happy to have this conversation when we have the space to do so.
I.
I really appreciate that answer. And this obviously is something that you've given a lot, a lot of thought to. I have to say, I'm a little worried that people that the rest of you who have been nominated for these positions and supposedly have presumably have looked into it before, aren't at all sure whether any transportation investments are appropriate subjects for cf. Cf has made some such investments, although I think it's too small a percentage, but I. To me, the fact that none of you were sure that transportation was. Even in the abstract, a possible use reflects to me the fact that other than d'angelo, we haven't had many people come to the committee who have a transportation background and have thought about the interaction of transportation and cf. So I just encourage you to give the matter further thought and talk to d'angelo about his thoughts, etc. Thank you.
Yeah, if I could if I could briefly respond, I do want to also just again reiterate that, you know, I have an experience and a background in transportation, so I don't necessarily believe that it's a failure of our committee members to engage in PCEF. I think that piece of is a broad program that has various different things. Even for me, when I first started in 2023, like I came from a minority contractor, my background was primarily in supporting small businesses and minority contractors into getting into this space. And through my tenure, I've been able to then apply what I've learned in, in, in engaging with the program to other areas so I can speak about regenerative agriculture. I may not be an expert, but I can speak about it. So I think really this is a conversation or a question that was focused on someone that has had the time to go through the cip that works in that space, that can answer that question appropriately. Whereas my colleagues, I think it was a it's a fair question, a fair response to say, we don't know how this intersects with how PCEF operates and what PCEF investments have been, because there have been substantial investments. So I would focus more on their expertise and allow them the space to then be acclimated with how we interact as a program with transportation, decarbonization. Thank you.
Thank you, councilor Novick. Thank you to the nominees for their responses. We'll go to councilor. There are four people left in the queue. We'll go Morillo, Ryan Avalos and myself. Councilor Morillo.
Angelita Morillo: Thank you. Thank you all so much for being here today. It's you are choosing to be in a position to help guide the city on an issue that I think is really difficult and scrutinized more than many of our other recommending bodies. And so I appreciate you putting yourself forward and bringing that expertise. I have one question that's for all of you. Just to kind of in line with what councilor Novick was talking about, actually, because when the climate committee existed, RFP, it was a big focus for us to discuss transportation. And we heard, or at least in district three, we definitely heard a big community outcry about the fact that transportation is being cut. That obviously happened at the state legislature, but there was sort of a push from the community for us to respond to that. And so I'm curious how, if you don't have a fully formed thought about transportation as part of PCEF, what would engagement look like through the climate investment plan with community to figure out what the best path forward is on that? And I'm not saying you need to have a determination, but sort of like, how would you engage with the community to figure that out? And anyone can answer online folks to.
Yeah, I can jump in real briefly. I will relate my answer to the regenerative agriculture space. It was a space that when I initially came on, I was not at all familiar with. I had visited, you know, black futures farms and other places or other spaces in the city that had regenerative agriculture as their primary north star, I would say. But for me, engaging with the community meant, you know, connecting with meg horst, who is an ex, she is an extraordinary advocate for regenerative agriculture, like really being able to lean on the community members that have expertise in that space, and then leveraging those relationships to then explore more into what it looks like when pccep engages with, like I said, for me, regenerative ag, I've learned so much more than I could would have ever thought I could have learned in a short amount of time just because of that proximity to somebody that has that is an expert. And I think that for committee members that may have spots that have, I wouldn't say deficiencies, but spots where they have opportunities for for more growth or for to learn more, this is probably the best place for them to be because you're around subject matter experts that can then guide you to learn more about whatever space that you may want to learn more about. So I think it starts with taking advantage of the group and then expanding beyond that to the folks that care about that, and the staff members and the community members that have those things as our north stars.
Thank you. D'angelo. Anyone else want to jump in? If not, just know that that might be a thing you will have to consider later on.
I don't have a solid good answer for that other than I. I'm a like group oriented group working person that I would absolutely reach out for advice from other folks that maybe their expertise, you know, like d'angelo is talking about, and I am an open minded person to try to try to find equitable solutions for folks. Right. And, and that's how I approach it overall. I know that's a really generic answer, and I don't have any specifics, but I would reach out to community members and listen, listen to folks that that reach out to the PCEF committee and, and just take their, their input and really think about it. Thank you.
Thank you.
I'll, I'll just add, I think stakeholder engagement happens at both a very formal level and process. And I have a lot of experience with that. And I think you can it can be subject agnostic to the to the process. I don't need to be a specialist in transportation, which I'm not to, you know, to be able to develop a process to make sure that the right people are at the table, that the right people are heard, that they have opportunities to provide, you know, written or verbal comment in a variety of ways that are accessible to them. I also, you know, and that there's a process that they understand for how their input is incorporated and plays out because it doesn't feel good to participate and then not know, you know, what happens in the end. And then it also happens informally. And I think that you've got to be functioning at both levels. You have to have those formal processes, and you also have to be listening all the time and having conversations all the time. We all we live here, we're immersed in this. And it can be, it doesn't it doesn't have to be a big formal process. So at both levels, I think you can engage.
Thank you so much, all of you, for your answers. And I think it's I appreciate the humility in saying that maybe you're not an expert in transportation, but you'll find the right people. I think that's an underrated quality in most leaders. So I appreciate that. I have one question for randall and then I will you can move on, randall, not to put you on the spot, but I think one of the big issues of our time is going to be the intersection between construction of things like data centers and the clean energy movement and what we're trying to do here. Obviously, we know that data centers are extremely harmful to communities, create noise pollution, poison a lot of communities, waterways, all of those things. And they are often pushed forward by local governments because people want revenue, they want construction jobs. They want, you know, different sort of economic benefits that they believe this will provide in the short term at the expense of our environment. In the long term, what is your position or how would you sort of address that? If there's a greenwashing movement for data centers at the local level?
That is an excellent question and it's a difficult question. We do obviously represent workers that that perform that work on those data centers. I guess the best way for me to answer that is if there's some kind of conflict of interest or something like that that I'd have to bring up, I'd still be open minded. I would talk through it and see what that looks like, right? It's still still comes down to a group decision. I really don't know how to answer that question. I have thought about those things. And you know, it's still forefront is, is making sure that everybody in our community is, is served well. And whatever the happens with that, I, you know, I would absolutely reach out for all of our groups on the, with the, the, the board and discuss that and see what it is. It's, I'm not the only one that has a vote on that board or makes recommendations, right? So it's still a group decision. And, you know, similar to you, all that you all have difficult things that you have to. That's politics. So I don't know how else to answer that. I hope that's sufficient. I don't know. Does that clear what I'm trying to say?
No.
Are you asking me directly? Would I come out against data centers or for data centers?
I mean, I just think you're you're in a very unique position, and I'm just acknowledging that. It's because. So yeah, if there's a situation where I definitely see a future where they greenwash data centers, they say like, actually this is magical for the environment and this is great for electrification or something. Let's use pcf dollars for this. I put no limit in what sort of greenwashing campaigns can do to our movements in these spaces. So would you exempt yourself from a vote in that case, if your workers were going to get construction contracts for that type of thing? Like how does that what is the line of efficacy for you?
It would be case by case, the way I would the way I would kind of compare that. There's also other projects that it's not real sexy for the for the Green movement, right? There's other, there's other work that we do that that would, would fall would also be controversial every that's where we're at and that's where we're in a democracy, right? So we still have to work through those things and try to find fair and equitable solutions for that. So I don't have anything specific in front of me to say yes or no. You know, I'm not being in the moment. I'm not working on anything with data centers in my role where I am and with our council. So I really can't answer that because there's nothing specific to answer, right? So every situation is different. I don't know, I don't know how to answer that. I think the only way that I can answer that is that it is politics. And there's times if, if I was stuck in a, in, in a conflict, then I'd have to recognize that and I would do whatever was ethical and legal and make sure that nothing shady happened. Right? So just to be as direct as I can, I don't. Is that clear?
You're doing your best, man. It's a hard question. I think I understand what you're saying, though, and I will just leave it at that. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, councilor Morillo. We'll go to councilor Ryan then.
Dan Ryan: Avalos thank you chair. Good to see everyone. Great process. I've sat through a few of these. This is an outstanding slate of candidates. Like it's been said before, I have a lot of respect for anyone that's on the park roads budget committee. Thank you for your service to the students and families in park rose. Kind of following up on some other things that have been said. I, I keep hoping that, you know, we need jobs right now. Jobs, jobs, jobs. I really don't think I just have to put on the record that piece. F is going to take over any investments in data centers. So I just want to say that. But you will perhaps have some opportunities to look at some other crossover Green industry. And I think Portland fancies itself as a center of Green industry. But I think a lot of people want to actually see the results of that. I think we might be leading the nation in regulation, but we probably aren't leading the nation in Green industry jobs. And so I do think that that is the bigger picture conversation that I hope that PCEF does take up. Councilor Kanal chair Kanal leaned over to me and said, are you going to ask that question that you always ask? And then I had to say, what's that question that I always ask? And the question I often ask is, it gets to where councilor Morillo went with the conflict of interest. So there will be times where you're in that. So maybe I look to the two of you, raphael and sam, what are some of the guidelines that you discuss when there is a conflict of interest? I'm just curious. I don't think I've ever heard the policy before the storm.
Thank you, council members, and thank you, councilor Ryan. What we do is one, when we on board our committee members, what we'll do is go through a pretty rigorous training in terms of all the different ways they need to think about conflict of interest. Obviously, there's the actual there's the potential, and then there's the perceived, which is something we actively manage just because of the nature of the body. It's really important we manage even those perceptions of conflict. So one, we just baseline start with the training. Every single year we do a survey of our committee members to check in and say, have any of your conflicts, at least where you stand today, changed because there's just a recognition at a front end that folks may have things that may change. And then there's the active every single meeting. Anytime there's a decision coming up, committee members know decisions, decisions, decisions may be coming up. And that's something that we work with them through the training that as decisions are coming up, it's not just what you tell us at the beginning of the year annually. It's also actively managing it as you're about to make a decision. So we've had this happen where committee members ring me up and they'll say, hey, that decision is coming up in the next meeting. Just want to tell you I've got a potential conflict. Let's talk it through. And then we we workshop it and we say, is this one that you actually need to sit out of and recuse yourself from that decision making? And so that's exactly what we do. So it's a very active process where we train folks up front, annual surveys, and then play it on a meeting by meeting where committee members are expected to reach out based on the topics that are in front of them and let us know. And then we work through how they manage and respond to it.
So, sam, you definitely have a process. Is it did it was it created because of lived experience?
Yes. Each time we learned, we're like, oh, we need to tighten that up. So that's, that's exactly right.
That's the best kind of practice.
If I may, councilor, just to sort of add on, just to broaden it a bit, everyone on the committee, just like this council, we have communities of accountability. I think we try to place a premium on transparency so people can both advocate and represent their position, the communities that they're among and the issues that they want to uplift without feeling compromised or having to really hide the ball. And so it is a tension that we hold. But by making everybody be up front, we have more productive conversations and we're able to make more complex decisions.
Yeah. And I'll just end with, of course, your job is political. It's become more political because everyone's becoming more aware that cf exists. A they understand that it's a large s it seems to be a large s amount of money to invest. And it's not just opinion pieces in the one daily newspaper kind of daily newspaper. It's it's just on the top of people's minds right now. So thank you for leaning in. You're building something with the community right now. And I think a lot of people that weren't as engaged when it was brought to the ballot are now more and more engaged. So you definitely are entering into probably one of our committees that will have the most interest. Yeah. And I won't ask you what your opinion was of the recent editorial in a local media source, because we have to start a meeting at 6:00. I think that's why this could go on for too long. Thank you for your interest. I'm supportive of all three of you.
Thank you, councilor Ryan. We'll go to council, Avalos and then myself for the last two in the queue. Take it away, councilor Avalos.
Candace Avalos: Sounds good. Thank you. First, I'll just say sff is political because energy and climate resilience is political. I mean, look at the federal government. They are literally doing everything they can to stop us from protecting against a very uncertain climate future. So it's not about sff, it's about climate, it's political. So I just needed to say that. Thank you so much to everyone who applied to serve on the committee, and congratulations to the individuals before us today. Thanks to the staff for the recruitment. Seems like you all really did a good job in getting a wide range of perspectives and expertise, and so I'm really looking forward to seeing how that benefits the pcf and definitely plan to support all of your appointments today. As we know, the committee plays a very critical role in helping Portland deliver on one of the most ambitious climate and environmental justice programs in the country. And so your work is going to help shape these investments in clean energy and workforce development and Green infrastructure, transportation, housing, all of that, and ultimately community well-being for years to come. So I just wanted to take a moment to share how I think about the relationship between this committee and the council, because as you're hearing, this continues to evolve, and we need, as a council, to provide direction to you all about our expectations. I do not believe that this committee exists for council to simply rubberstamp every recommendation. Council has an independent responsibility to exercise judgment and make difficult policy decisions. But I also do not believe that the council should just casually substitute our own preferences for a thoughtful community process without a compelling reason, and the members of this committee devote an enormous amount of time and lived experience and deliberation to these decisions. And that work matters, and it deserves respect. And when council chooses to depart from a recommendation, especially because we're in the middle of a cip, I believe that we owe the public and the committee a clear explanation that's grounded in evidence and policy and the public interest, not just in our own preferences. As we continue adapting to the new form of government, I want to make a commitment to strengthening the governance relationship between the council and the committee. That commitment feels especially important as we're heading into another climate investment plan process, where difficult trade offs and strategic decisions are going to inevitably arise. And I also want the committee to know that my office is a partner to you. I want to hear directly from members about what information, communication, or tools that you need to help make these complex decisions well. So if there are any ways that we can strengthen accountability and transparency or better support your work, I want to be part of that conversation. And finally, I just want to address a narrative that has surfaced in some of our recent debates. The idea that if one individual investment shifts from one category to another, somehow the entire mission of sff has been abandoned. I simply do not see it that way. The climate investment plan is a portfolio. It should be evaluated as a whole, not litigated line by line. Sff is already making substantial investments in transportation and transportation related climate strategies, and at the same time, it invests in building decarbonization and renewable energy workforce development and resilience for frontline communities. And so I think that sometimes the most responsible thing that we can do is recognize when a particular project category is not yet ready to deploy funding at scale and temporarily prioritize investments that are shovel ready and can deliver emissions reductions and community benefits immediately. That is not abandoning transportation. It is exercising good stewardship. I worry that when we create false binaries that suggest climate investments must compete against one another, or that supporting housing decarbonization somehow means that we're neglecting transportation. This is a false choice. We can and should do both. The question is how we sequence investments to maximize their impact, while remaining faithful to the vision of Portland voters. So to me, that vision has always been bigger than any single line item. It's about building a healthier, more resilient city. It's about reducing climate pollution, and it's about investing in the communities that have historically borne the greatest environmental burdens and ensuring that the benefits of the clean energy transition are shared broadly. And so I'm really grateful to the incoming community members for stepping up to lead that work, and I'm eagerly looking forward to partnering with you as we continue to strengthen PCEF and deliver on that promise for portlanders. So thank you again for your service.
Thank you, councilor Avalos. I thought that councilor Smith's hand was a legacy hand, so I apologize for that. I'm happy to go to you. I we do have a hard stop, so I'd ask if you could keep it brief, but thank you.
No, I just want to say I thank you all for even stepping up to this. And I just want you all to know that you are enough. You are enough in yourself, in your history and what you know. Because as you see, we have 12 people. We all didn't have political experience here. And some of this stuff we have to learn along the way, but we wanted to do it and we were up for the challenge. And I think you all are up for the challenge, so just know that you're enough. Thank you.
Thank you, councilor Smith. I I'm next and last in the queue. And I just a couple quick process notes. I would love it if in future we can see the full list of who all is being appointed in these reports, as well as who's continuing on with start and end dates. I'm interested in seeing if it's possible to align the term end dates so we don't have to do this again where there's a lag. I think it would be great if d'angelo could serve until, what is it, July 23rd of of 2030 as well, for example. And just wanted to get that out there. I also wanted to praise you for the high number of applicants. That ratio is really great of the number of applicants, the number of vacancies, and I think a testament to the work that you do. And I think this is more in raphael's shop within your staff, director barroso, but so pray specifically there, rafael. But yeah, just wanted to get that on the record. I also wanted to specifically praise the applicants. I the backgrounds that are very relevant to this, I think have been said, but I wanted to highlight a couple things that maybe weren't, aren't directly related in an obvious sense, but I think will be very beneficial. Tamara, as a co-founder of my people's market, something that I thought was really great to bring up. Council president already mentioned the parkrose budget committee for you, danielle and I, in addition to being glutton for punishment, I think that's also really valuable from the perspective that that is functionally a lot of what this is, this particular work. I wanted to thank randall for, for the specific responses that related to your back from background, but also the metropolitan alliance for workforce equity, which you've talked about in other contexts on this dais, is something that I think is a very relevant experience as well. As for d'angelo, I think I could just rattle off all the whole background so I won't, but I will say that the the way in which we determine that public investments yield back benefits for not only the community, but specific communities, I think is a really relevant thing. And I'm appreciative of that. I also should disclose I have met d'angelo a couple times. We I feel like everybody here has met randall several times in his other capacity as well. I intend to be supportive as well when we get to this at the full council as well as here. But at this moment, I did want to just just opine on one thing about PCEF, which is I think there's a really interesting conversation here that you're going to be at the forefront of. And from the process perspective, setting aside the content, I am really interested in the conversation around better and more frequent communication with council that that councilor Novick brought up, not not specifically to, to achieve any particular goal, but because I do think there are when council is not directly engaged on a regular basis, then we get to those high stakes moments where there's a desire to make a more blunt change that is usually more adversarial than it needs to be, or where other branches of government. I think there was an example, the mayor putting something in to the amendments this year that did not come out of the the same process. So I definitely think that these are things that we need to communicate on because the final vote is ours. And so if we're able to talk ahead of time, we can say, hey, look, if this if these amendments have this in it or don't have this in it, that affects my vote. So, you know, in advance, it's not a surprise. It's not a feeling of betrayal or anything like that. It's a maybe we don't need councilor Kanal on this one, you know, but we can at least talk it out. And I think that that regular communication structure is really vital in that particular in that particular process of the cip amendments. So with that, the queue is exhausted. We do need a motion to refer this report on to council with the recommendation.
So moved.
Second.
I'm going to give that one to councilor Novick. So councilor Clark made the motion, and I assume councilor Clark with a recommendation that it be accepted. Okay. Is there any further discussion on the motion seeing.
So for clarity, this will go to full council and then it will be discussed and voted on there to officially give the positions.
That is correct. And if it is referred out from the committee of the whole with a recommendation that it be accepted, council president generally puts it on the consent agenda. It obviously could be removed from that. But yeah.
Great.
Thank you.
Thanks. Any further discussion? Rebecca, will you please call the roll.
On the motion moved by Clark, seconded by Novick pirtle-guiney.
Thank you all for stepping up to serve.
I Ryan. I Koyama Lane.
Thank you all.
I Morillo I Novick.
Really impressed by your backgrounds.
Aye, Morillo Clark. I Green. I Avalos. I Dunphy. I Smith. I Kanal.
Thanks for stepping up I.
And the motion is approved with 11 I one absent. The item will be referred to full council with the recommend due pass recommendation.
Thank you. Thank you everybody. Just before wrapping up you can see the full agenda as planned in the committee of the whole chair update. But next week's meeting, which will be back on Thursday, is a budget process recap. Please come. Not grievance oriented, but with specific ideas and feedback, as well as a follow up on the budget note Morillo 11 from last year, which related to communication between the branches of government. Thanks so much. See you all at six. This meeting is adjourned.