The record · Transcript

Council session — 2026-06-02

Transcript from the session's official auto-captions (26,043 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.

watch the recording

Good morning. I call the meeting of the community and public safety committee to order. It is Tuesday, June 2nd at 9:30 a.m. And I'm reliably informed that June is bustin out all over. The clerk. Please call the roll.

Good morning everyone.

Kanal here.

Morillo absent. Zimmermann.

Here.

Smith absent.

Novick here. Christopher, could you please read the statement of conduct?

Welcome to the meeting of the community and public safety committee. To testify before this committee in person or virtually. You must sign up in advance the committee agenda at www.Portland.gov/council/agendae 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 some 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 when 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 results in ejection from the meeting. Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for. 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 your lobbyist. Identify the organization you represent and virtual testifier should unmute themselves when the clerk calls your name. Thank you.

Thank you. Christopher. This morning we're going to have a proclamation for gun violence awareness month and a discussion of gun violence with our efforts to reduce gun violence with Portland ceasefire and the office of violence prevention. Then we'll have a presentation and discussion of the public safety call allocation study, and then we'll discuss an ordinance to add psychedelic health and safety code and create the Portland psychedelics advisory commission. Councilor. So I will begin by reading the mayor's gun violence awareness proclamation.

Can I read it into the record first?

Oh, sure.

Thank you. Item number one. Document number 2026-18 for proclamation for gun violence awareness month and Portland ceasefire program discussion.

Thank you. Sorry about that. Whereas gun violence continues to affect communities across the united states and here in Portland, impacting the safety, health and well-being of individuals, families and neighborhoods. And whereas, the city of Portland believes every community member deserves to live, learn, work, and gather in safe and supportive environments free from violence. And whereas, wear orange is a national movement observed annually during the first weekend of June to honor the lives of those impacted by gun violence, uplift survivors and raise awareness about the importance of community safety and violence prevention. And whereas, the movement began in memory of hadiya pendleton, a 15 year old chicago student whose friends chose to wear orange to honor her life after she was tragically killed by gun violence in 2013. And whereas orange has become a nationally recognized symbol of remembrance, visibility, healing and hope for communities working together to prevent gun violence. And whereas, the city of Portland recognizes the efforts of community organizations, educators, advocates, health care professionals, outreach workers, violence prevention practitioners, youth leaders, faith communities, and residents who work every day to support safer and healthier communities. And whereas, Portland community members and organizations observe wear orange weekend each year through educational events, community gatherings, wellness activities, memorial opportunities, and public awareness efforts centered on healing, connection, and collective action. And whereas wear orange week serves as an opportunity for portlanders to come together in solidarity, support those impacted by violence, and reaffirm a shared commitment to community care and public safety. Now, therefore, keith wilson, mayor of the city of Portland, the city of roses hereby proclaims the first weekend of June each year to be wear orange weekend in Portland and encourages all portlanders to wear orange, participate in community events, and support efforts to promote healing, awareness and the prevention of gun violence. Thank you. And now we'll move on to our presentation.

Councilor aye, Morillo bree brown, for the record, before moving into a presentation from our cease fire program, we would like a couple of comments from our ovp team. Thank you.

Thank you, counselors, and thank you, councilor Novick for reading the proclamation. My name is rachel fetters, and I'm joined by my colleague rita walter on behalf of the city's office of violence prevention. The office of violence prevention addresses the root causes of violence, especially gun violence, through sustained community engagement, violence prevention grants, placemaking initiatives, and personal safety training. Today, we are here to speak to you about national gun violence awareness day, which is Friday, June 5th. Cities across the nation will wear orange this weekend to honor survivors of gun violence. Remember lives lost and uplift communities working towards peace and safety.

This year's Portland event will be a community block party that brings together families, youth, community organizations and local partners for an afternoon of wellness activities, resources, music, arts and crafts, youth activities, food vendors and opportunities for community healing and remembrance. This will be held on Sunday, June 7th at southeast mill street in front of lincoln park from 12 to 3 p.m. We'd love to see you all at the block party and encourage you to wear orange at any other public events throughout the weekend. Thank you.

Thank you, thank you.

Good morning councilors. My name is stephanie howard. She her pronouns for the record, and I'm the director of community safety programs. I'm here today with our team from Portland ceasefire, as well as our partners at the Portland police bureau. And I did just want to acknowledge our ovp team members who have to leave and who can't be part of our actual presentation today regarding our gun violence strategy. But I'll do my best to fill in the gaps for them. And with that, I'll hand it over to cierra ellis.

Good morning, council members. Thank you for having us here today. For the record, my name is sarah ellis and I am the ceasefire program manager. I'm here today with my colleague frans shining, and I'll give him a moment to introduce himself.

Good morning, chair Novick and the rest of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to be here. For the record, my name is frans shining. I am the assistant chief of the investigation investigations branch for the police bureau. The investigations branch covers both the detective division and the specialized resources division. Between those two divisions, we handle all fatal and non-fatal injury shooting incidents and investigations in the city of Portland.

First, I want to thank you again for inviting us here today and giving us the opportunity to dive deeper into our work. I think it's incredibly important that you not only hear about the strategy itself, but about the meaningful work happening every day across our city to reduce gun violence and support those who are most impacted. Our goal today is to provide you with a better understanding of what ceasefire is, how the strategy operates, and how our partners work together every day to to reduce gun violence. Through this presentation, we will walk through the full scope of ceasefire, including the role of law enforcement, community violence intervention and the coordination happening to make sure we have time, we anticipate questions at the end of the presentation, but before we talk about where we are today, it's important to understand how we got here and the conditions that led to implement ceasefire and why and why coordinated, focused strategy was needed. Do we have the slide up? Okay, there it is. Okay, so what is ceasefire? So ceasefire is a gun violence reduction strategy. And our sole purpose is to reduce shooting injuries and firearm homicides by focusing resources on a small number of individuals and conflicts, driving the majority of shootings and gun violence. A core principle of this work is that not everyone is equally at risk. Ceasefire uses data, investigative information, community relationships to identify those at the highest risk to intervene before additional violence occurs. This approach is guided by a problem analysis, which is a comprehensive assessment that identifies the underlying factors contributing to shootings in the community, including the people, places, conflicts and circumstances connected to violence. The problem analysis serves as the foundation for ceasefire by creating a shared understanding of the gun violence problem in Portland. Again, the problem analysis also produces our risk factors and helps us identify and define what high risk means. For Portland. The risk factors are identified based on behaviors and connections to violence, and those factors include males 18 to 44 years old, prior involvement in firearm violence or criminal justice system, connections to active group conflicts, previous shooting victimization, and social connected to recent shootings or firearm homicides. By understanding these factors, we can focus resources where they're needed and intervene early to prevent future shootings.

I think it's important to recognize that ceasefire is both a gun violence reduction strategy that's been used across the country and by different cities. It's also a program within the city of Portland. I think sometimes in that conversation, it gets conflated. There's a sense that investing in the program that's housed under ceasefire is the same as addressing the ceasefire strategy, which it's not. It's more complex than that. Chief day talked about the complexity of the systems and the connectedness between systems. And so as we talk through this presentation, I would encourage you to reflect back on that. You know, like manager ellis talked about, we started this with a gun violence problem analysis. We brought in an outside body to kind of look at the shootings within the city of Portland. And that started with meetings with the investigators to investigate those shootings. So recognizing the police component, recognizing there's a services component. And really what Sameer does is coordinate all those different pieces around this gun violence reduction strategy.

Thank you.

So as you know or may or may not know, ceasefire was started in July of 2023 during a time when Portland was experiencing extreme violence and our historic levels of gun violence. And one of the most important things to understand is that, as frans mentioned, it's not just one person, one bureau, one office or organization. It's a coordinated strategy that brings multiple partners together around one shared goal. Can we change this? Our goal is, again, to reduce shootings, prevent retaliation and increase public safety. And then, as frans mentioned, my role as cease fire manager is to coordinate the strategy, ensure partners are aligned on the goal, and reducing gun violence cannot happen in silos. And so law enforcement, community organizations, service providers, and system partners all bring different tools. But we have to be working together to make this work. We coordinate closely with partners across the system, including the district attorney's office, department of community justice, Oregon youth authority, our hospitals, community organizations and regional partners. And a critical piece of this model is legitimacy. This strategy is intentional, and it's designed around collaboration, accountability, transparency, and focus intervention. The goal is to focus on violence and not communities. It's to focus on people who are driving the violence so we can reduce the violence in our city. Next slide. So this strategy. Relies on five core components to make it work and to make it effective. The first is data driven identification, and that is understanding who is at the highest risk and where intervention is needed. The second is direct communication, delivering a clear message that violence must stop while making sure individuals know support and opportunities are available. The third is community violence intervention, providing intensive services, outreach, mediation and support. And the fourth is focus enforcement and supervision. Ensuring accountability is focused on those driving violence. And then finally, performance management, continuing continuously reviewing outcomes, adjusting our approach and maintaining accountability and building public trust. And we do that through various measures. I have a data analyst who does a annual report, our monthly report and quarterly rapid analysis. So we make sure that we're addressing gun violence and staying ahead of the trends that we're seeing. So together, these components create the framework of how ceasefire operates. Next slide. Moving the strategy into action is crucial. And we start with the shooting review. And so I'm going to pass this off to you, frans to explain a little bit more about the shooting review.

So like cierra said, I mean at the heart of this is coordination and collaboration. And you can't do that without sharing information across all the different stakeholders around the gun violence problem. Obviously, some of that information is sensitive. It's law enforcement sensitive. It involves investigations that are open and ongoing. So there's a limited amount of information we can share within that space around these events. But what we did was bring in sierra staff, get them background cleared so they could sit in those meetings with law enforcement to talk about sensitive, open investigations, to make sure there's a conduit to pass that information and refer folks for services during that meeting. So the shooting review is a biweekly meeting. We bring in law enforcement agencies from all around the region, our prosecutors, our community justice partners who are managing parole and probation with community corrections, ceasefire staff and others. And we literally discuss every single shooting incident that happened in the city of Portland for the prior two weeks, whether it involved property damage, injuries or homicides. Every incident is discussed. We talk about the people involved in those incidents, both the suspects and the victims, the impacted folks. We talk about what drove those shooting incidents. If we can figure out what that is, what factors there are, if there are risk factors that have kind of tied back to the problem analysis and start identifying when we can start pulling levers and intervene beyond just the investigation and the accountability piece, when we can start referring people over for services through ceasefire to the community based organizations as well, we share information between investigators and agencies to see if there's, you know, one shooting is connected to another. We talk about every case where somebody was arrested with a firearm in the city of Portland for that prior two weeks to see if there's, again, ways we can intervene. We know people are carrying guns. They may be involved in shootings later on. So again, how do we get ahead of that and address those folks? We also talk about data around the nibin system or national integrated ballistic information network system, where each firearm is discharged in the city of Portland. For the most part, they discharge spent casings. Those have unique markings. We can start to enter those into the system and connect different shooting scenes and different guns to different people or connect incidents. And so again, taking all that information, figuring out how we can move investigations along, and then again, how we can refer high risk individuals to sierra's staff for further, further services.

Thanks.

So on your presentation, you can see that on respond. There's two different ways, as frans mentioned. So law enforcement is accountability. And then community violence intervention services, also accountability on that side. And so we are not just looking at individual incidents in these reviews and coordination meetings. We're looking at relationships. We're looking at retaliation risk. And we're also trying to get ahead of the conflicts that continue to that continue the cycle of violence. So once those conflicts are identified, we coordinate a response. And these are the two ways we do that through community violence intervention response, and then through pbb and law enforcement response. And both are happening at the same time most likely, but they obviously have different roles, but with the same goals to reduce shootings and prevent retaliation. And so I'm going to start by walking through the community violence intervention side of the strategy. And then frans will cover the law enforcement side later on.

The coordination meeting.

Oh, yes. So also within this slide, when we analyze the information that comes from the shooting review, the coordination meeting is a more broad meeting with. We have two coordination meetings with our service providers and with folks from the county d c, j which is the department of community justice, and others to make sure that we get individualized plans for each person who is referred from the shooting review. So that's extremely important because, you know, everyone is different. The circumstances around the shootings are different. So we want to make sure that they're they're the approach to them is tailored specifically to them. That's why it's important to have multiple community based organizations who are able to. Connect with that person. So once we develop that plan, refer them out. Community based organizations have a certain amount of time. And when they can connect with them, there's a term we use is the relentless pursuit model. And that could take anywhere from 3 to 6 months to get someone actually on a caseload. And so that is a lot of where the time and the most important time to like, get that person to help change their lives. A lot of people say no, but some people say yes, and those are the ones we want to say yes, because those are the people who are driving violence in our city. Those are the people who are meeting all of those risk factors that the problem analysis has identified. Who are your small portion of people doing most of the gun violence in our city? So community violence focuses on providing intensive services and supports and opportunities to individuals who are at the highest risk. As I mentioned, when appropriate, we we start with direct and respectful communication through custom notifications and call ins, custom notifications are direct communication to the person. I will go to meet someone at a safe spot and have that conversation around their behavior. I will meet with their probation or probation officer and meet with them to talk them through what we know about their behavior, and we would like it to change. Otherwise, there's also accountability to that piece. And then collins are a group of folks driving violence. And so we want to have a shared message to them that is respectful, but also very clear around their behavior. And that we would it's it's not tolerated. And there's also services and supports for you, but we would, you know, continued continued behavior like that is either, you know, going to have a consequence with law enforcement. And then you also have the opportunity to change your life with services. I want to mention that a critical part of this work is relationship based. It's not simply providing a referral. It requires trusted messengers who consistently engage with people, build trust, and help them remove the barriers that they're facing that might be causing that might be the root cause of the violence from their. Individuals are connected to our intensive case management services, which include mentorship, goal planning, connection to resources and services, and long term support. Our intensive case managers are able to open doors that traditional systems often cannot, because they have built relationships with individuals who are most impacted by violence. They meet people where they are. They help navigate the barriers, as I mentioned, and build consistent support to create pathways from violence towards stability. Our community partners connect individuals to services while playing a critical role in conflict mediation, and later on, we'll have some of our service providers come up and talk directly about that so you can get a better sense of what they do day to day. Again, the community violence intervention is just one side of the strategy. There's another critical component, which is law enforcement. And franz and huber will talk about that right now.

Next, please. So we talked a little bit about the crime gun intelligence center or the nibin system, the national integrated ballistic information network. So we've got folks who again, take every casing that's collected from a crime scene and in that system and look and see if we can start connecting shooting incidents. And that's a national network. So we can connect them not only here within the city of Portland, but also our regional partners. We've had guns that are tied to shootings in Gresham, eugene around the state. So starting to connect those cases and develop investigative leads around those also potentially start looking at if there's patterns that we're seeing. We work with our partners at the atf around gun trafficking investigations. So if we start seeing a lot of guns coming back from the same person that are tied to shootings, we can look at that as well. So that's one piece of it, again, about kind of building investigative leads and connecting cases. The enhanced community safety team is a team of investigators. They follow up every injury, non-fatal injury, shooting. And as capacity and bandwidth allows non-injury shooting incidents as well, they respond to scenes to do the investigation, help collect evidence, and then do those investigations and put together those cases and all the way through the service of search warrants and arrests. There are key piece of this. They come to the shooting review meetings and provide information about the investigations they're conducting. Officer hubert's going to talk a little bit more about the crisis response team later on in the presentation, but those are officers that are specially trained and respond to shooting scenes to kind of de-escalate, deal with some of the heightened emotion and trauma around that, and also continuously follow through and follow up with families that are impacted post shooting. And then our focus intervention team, we've talked about it a lot. That's our proactive side of the gun violence reduction strategy for the Portland police bureau. They're uniformed officers working the afternoon shift. They're highly engaged in community. They work closely with the focus intervention team, community oversight group, the fit cog, which which oversees the procedures and training and deployment of that that body of officers, they attend community events. They build relationships with youth in the community, particularly in some of our marginalized communities that are more directly impacted by gun violence disproportionately here in the city of Portland. And they're also out there proactively doing traffic stops, following up on investigative leads. If we have a suspect vehicle description from a shooting incident and they see that vehicle driving around, they'll do a traffic stop to see if we can identify and and move that case forward. They'll also follow up on information about high risk individuals. If we know someone, a young person who's carrying a firearm, they may look for opportunities to engage them and do a stop and intervene before that person ends up getting caught up in gun violence. So again, that more proactive side of that and then outside of these bodies or these groups here, you know, we talked about the shooting review part of it. As sarah said, there's different strategies for different drivers of gun violence. Historically, a lot of our gun violence has been driven by social networks, gangs and groups in the city of Portland. But what we're seeing recently is an increase in the frequency of folks who are who are houseless or being impacted by houselessness showing up in these gun or these shooting incidents. So looking at strategies for addressing that as well. So we have the precinct's, our neighborhood response teams also engage if we've got, you know, camps that are showing up again and again tied to these shooting incidents or other problematic behavior. Look at how we can work with other homeless services providers or organizations to get that stuff cleaned up or provide people with shelter. That's another piece that's not really on the slide here. But again, we really look at this holistically across the police bureau at different different levers to pull. And then this is an infographic that kind of talks about historical trends around gun violence. You know, historically, we've we've this has been a really safe city. I'd say it is still a really safe city, but we certainly experienced a spike in gun violence post pandemic. The infographic shows 2020. We had the pandemic. We also had some budget reductions. In 2020. We ended up disbanding the gun violence reduction team, which was the police bureau's gun violence reduction strategy. And, you know, not saying correlation and causation, but definitely correlation. We saw a spike in violence post pandemic and post dismantling of g, brt. And across 2020 and 21, the peak being 2022 in that period of time, we did bring back the enhanced community safety team again, our body of investigators who do that follow up, and then in January of 2022, working closely in conjunction with mayor wheeler's office at the time and stephanie howard and the community oversight group brought back that that body of uniform, proactive officers to, again, try to intervene in that gun violence trend. And you can see, you know, some successes there into 2022 that starts coming back down. And then the formal launch of ceasefire in July of 2023. And that trend has just continued. I mean, incredibly proud of the work we're doing. It's not done. There's still we're still above where we want to see for gun violence in the city of Portland, but a very successful strategy across the board, bringing all these partners together and shown there on the infographic. And 2026 doesn't have to date, but I'd say the trend is continuing even better or even greater into 2026. Really encouraging data.

I also want to highlight this slide too, because, you know, we're just looking at numbers, but these are lives saved and people less people being victimized every day. So it's important that this data is here. But that is something that I just I want to, you know, put out there that not only are we seeing reductions, we're seeing the reduced of trauma in our community that really impacts a small amount of people in our city. And so while we're here, I also want to talk about, you know, what the work looks like in real time to get to where we are today. So next slide. I say this coordination happens through three phases planning, responding, and preventing. And I guess for intervening. So before a. A large event like cinco de mayo or good in the hood happens or other community events, we do not want to wait for something to happen. We want to be proactive. So we bring the partners together, including ppv event organizers, community violence intervention partners, and other stakeholders. So everyone is operating from the same information. We discussed the community dynamics, recent conflicts, potential retaliation concerns, staffing plans and communications protocols. This is for most of the large events that you see throughout the city of Portland. And the goal is simple partners should be aligned before anything occurs. If violence does occur, coordination continues through the shooting reviews and partner meetings that we just mentioned earlier. We look beyond the individual incident to understand what conflict exists. Is there a risk of retaliation? Who needs support and what needs resources needed to be activated following that violent incident? From there, we each partner responds within their role, and at this point, I'm sure you want to talk about your role in the amazing things that you do every day.

Good morning. Jason hubert. I'm the coordinator for the crisis response team. When a shooting occurs, the crisis response team is often one of the first connections between the Portland police bureau impacted individuals and their families. A significant part of my role is serving as that bridge, ensuring information is shared, needs are identified, and coordination occurs between ceasefire PPB and our community partners. In the immediate aftermath of a shooting, myself, most likely cierra and her ceasefire team and the cbos that are behind me. We get together and we ask these several. We ask these four questions. Basically, what does the victim family need? Are there any immediate safety concerns? A lot of times there are. Is is relocation assistance necessary and is there a risk of retaliation? We really concentrate on that last question there. Retaliation because a lot of times people who are on guns, they carry they carry guns, right? So if you carry guns, there's a reason why you carry guns. They say for protection, if you carry a gun for protection, that means if someone comes at you that you don't like in this current group environment that we have, you will be addressed. And this is how we're doing it right now. Through the relationships we have built within the community, we are able to have direct and meaningful conversations with families and individuals during some of the most difficult moments of their lives. Our support can include connecting families with resources, assisting with funeral related needs, developing safety plans, assisting them with trauma impacted counseling and coordinating services through trusted community partners. Another critical component of this work is preventing further violence through shooting reviews. Coordination across PPB units like homicide and fit, and ongoing communication with ceasefire partners, we work together to identify potential retaliation concerns and intervene before another incident occurs. Information sharing, collaboration and trust are essential to the success of this work and to supporting safer outcomes for everyone involved. Last thing I would like to say before you guys have questions later, is that this man right here and there's other several people back here in this room, I constantly talk to this guy. I talk to him at 430 this morning. We had a homicide this morning. He calls me. Can I go there for a minute? Back in the day, marvin and I didn't see eye to eye. I wore this uniform. Marvin wore another uniform. It was all about respect and how we respected each other on the streets when we contacted each other. Marvin has my personal number now. He calls me all the time. The men and women back, back here, behind me. Call me all the time. You can't. Sorry. That doesn't happen anywhere else. The compassion that I have and my unit has my crt unit has the compassion that he has for helping this community. You you can't you can't judge that. I mean, there's just nothing you can nothing you can do to see what we're doing in the community. It doesn't it goes unnoticed, I'll tell you that marv and I and the people back here in the room, we don't get a pat on the back. Hey, thank you for assisting me. Hey, thank you for moving me. Thank you for giving me, sending me food or services. That doesn't happen. We don't get a pat on the back, but we do it because we love our community. And I'll be I'll end there. I please ask me questions later. I'll I'll try to calm down. Sorry.

On that note, you know, I want to take some time and give marvin and timo and jihad some time to really talk about their work and how they how we all work together because it is, it's something special that, you know, when we travel and go to these conferences around community violence intervention, we're often asked like, wow, how do you guys work with them? We don't we do not work with our intervention specialists like that, or we do not work with our law enforcement partners like that. I think there's something like really incredibly special up here and behind me and what we've built over the last three years. And it's been hard. It's been very hard. We've came off a lot of, you know, there was disagreements. But, you know, I think something that is important is that we are all able to adjust and, you know, meet the needs of the communities when asked. And I think, you know, again, as hubert said, there was a homicide today, and it's disheartening. You know, we would love to prevent all of them. So the work we do is crucial to that. And again, we see our houseless neighbors being victimized at a high rate right now. And that is very concerning for us. And so we are trying to figure out how we can address that. That problem, because it's. It's, it's it's terrible. So, marvin, I'll pass it off to you to talk about intervention, mediation, and on scene response.

Hello, my name is marvin young. I'm the executive director of nurture outreach services. Mediation is one of the most important things in in this work. But I want to go more into the intervention side of this because mediation happens in both of these. But there is proactive intervention, and then there's reactive intervention. A lot of the reactive intervention is, is what you guys are tracking with the numbers. And it's important. It's very important to do it. I've been on scenes where we had a reactive intervention and a mediation with entire groups on one scene at the same time, while the investigation was going on, to make sure nothing followed through with that and isolated the incident. And it's yet to be anything retaliatory of that, that cost a life, right? The most unseen part of it is the proactive intervention. There's avenues, like hubert told you, I'm I formerly wore a different suit and I, I had a feeling towards the police. And then I got involved in this work. And there's things that the data that they give us, it's not always the one that comes through the office that applies to this number. Like they might know an individual just he hasn't made the the arrest. He hasn't made the, the shooting. But he, I mean, he's, he's right there. And those type of referrals, I can get a personal call to go check on this individual and get these guys in there. And that is the unseen data. Right now, my organization has 70 individuals, 25 through street level outreach and 45 that's been referred just through the back door from community PPB and friends and associates that just come through with a community referral off of our own website. Right. And the proactive part of this, this that I feel is just, it's just being overlooked because what we do with the program. So my program is a four step program. It does do offer the cease fire model when you guys heard all of that. Right. But the accountability issues and things that these individuals are served with, it's I don't want you guys to miss out on the influence. Influence is a big thing in this. And these individuals, they can be influenced in a negative way or positive way. And when we sit here with with PPB and cease fire and we do an intervention on a subject that is going right now, you guys probably don't know what's going on in the back streets or what's going on in the private things. And these are the things that is being overlooked on all of this. And these are the most important things, because if we can mediate the things that's going on that we find out that's going on in the streets. I mean, you have individuals who then came through shooting reviews and then worked with cbos and they're asking, amen, we need to mediate this. Can you get this person and this person, and I'll tell you, like individuals will call somebody. And the way my team is designed, I have a little bit of everybody from every area. So when you find out that there's a conflict brewing, you'll come, they'll call someone, I'll call them and it'll be the two sides of those guys. It might only take just relocating one guy. It might take a one on one with those guys, with us being in the middle. Or it might take us in a whole group. And I think that that's the most important part of the intervention model that needs to be looked at, not just the numbers. Every time we come into this thing I hear about the numbers. The numbers is great, but it's the reason why Portland is different from everywhere else is because the collaboration is going on. I never thought I would see it, I never trusted it in 2023. I never trusted it in 2024. But then when you start seeing what's happening and you start getting referrals for individuals that I personally know is high risk from the Portland police, instead of them booking them on something that minor just to get them into the program. I think that's the the biggest thing going here. And I think that I've been looking at this and I felt like everything as it was getting stronger, a band aid was being put over it. And I think that the band aid being put over it is going to stop everything we're doing within the city with everybody involved in this. I mean, this is going from the community safety division all the way to the participants with the participants is now sharing what is going on in the city. And they're saying to their friends and everything else, this is you can contact this person or you can contact this person. And then all we have to do like we don't have, I don't have a two face. I have one face. I mean, I can stand in at a funeral and lean into hubert's car and discuss it with him and what's going on and not be questioned by those individuals, because the trust is there, because it's it's spreading from just a person from the streets, talking to another person, from the streets to proven outcomes. We've served everyone. And that's all I have to say.

Hold on.

Greetings, council jihad hudson, executive director for help inc, which stands for healing, enrichment and learning purpose. I generally work with population of youth ages roughly 13 to 19, and I just want to touch on a couple of things. One is youth engagement and how we engage youth. We use a number of programs to engage youth. That's referred from ceasefire. I will speak on one of the programs that's coming up this summer, which is our summer program. We're going to have a cohort of 15 youth, some referred through ceasefire and some that we know that are involved or on the fence of possibly being a perpetrator of victim of gun violence within the the next 6 to 9 months. And so how are engaging these youth is we're providing jobs, we're providing cognitive behavior therapy, we're providing and conflict resolution. We're also providing life skills and financial literacy. And so how that program is going to operate this summer is that starting last week of June, they will have they will start at nine. And from either not from 9 to 10, 1030, they are participate in one of the four focuses. All right. So week one be cognitive behavior therapy. Then week t will be financial literacy. Then week three will be life skills. Week four, so so forth and so on. And to all skills are covered. Right. And and then from. Into the microphone, I try to see this stage 6 to 8in away from the microphone. I try to gauge that, you know, but and so and then from 1030 to 3, they'd be out working. So they'd be doing graffiti removal, landscaping and working at a farm. One of our local farms supporting that. We're also be doing work at alberta senior center and other community or other agencies in the neighborhood with volunteer work. So those are just some of the ways we engage youth. We also use athletics as a vehicle to get them to engage. So we have also youth basketball team that will be having this summer where they will participate in this on this team. But there also be other things that have to follow in order to be on this team and be able to play in games and stuff like that, and these type of things foster change to get them around. Positive men, positive women. That can kind of change the trajectory of life. And when I think about the things that I needed when I was growing up to help me change was these type of things. It was the pick program that my first job, it was my basketball coaches, my football coaches that were involved that continued to encourage positivity. When I had so much negativity around me, in my home, in my community, and so there's just different ways that we engage our youth and then wraparound services, you know, if you ever have broken a bone, especially in your hand, they don't just wrap that individual part up, right? They wrap it in, they cast it with another finger. Your wrist is usually involved. And that's what wraparound services looks like. Like it needs to be supported. And so with wraparound services, we're supporting the family. We're connecting them to mental health services. We're connecting them to energy assistance, providing energy assistance, rental assistance, anything to deter things that may get in the way of them focusing on change. When you have so many social determinants in place, you have so many people trying to operate and trying to figure out. And when those things are in place, they can't focus on the positive things and doing things the right way. And, and when a lot of when resources are not available and they still want to be a part of, they still want to have, they're going to do things more likely that's going to get them in trouble. That's going to have them in situations where they can be impacted by gun and gang violence. And so, so those are just some of the things that that does. With our in partnership with ceasefire, I want to see cbo a ceasefire.

Thank you. I just want to say that we want to I think we might go a little past 1035. We're going to want to have some time for councilor Questions and discussion. So I think we have one more organization to hear from.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

Good morning. Buenos dias. My name is tim alvarado. I'm the founder of gea and we are country specific outreach. We provide culturally specific outreach, mentorship, violence prevention to some of our latino communities, especially our youth, that are really high risk. We try to help them navigate through situations. We try to de-escalate situations. When it comes to gun violence, gang violence in our communities through trusted relationships, credible messengers, culturally responsive support. We connect high risk youth to families and resources, providing positive opportunities, interventions to try to reduce the gun violence in our community. So we have a motto. We say we don't just believe in change, we guide it. And through, you know, our partners here, ceasefire, we've seen that, you know, we've made national national recognition about, you know, reducing gun violence in the community. So we try to make sure that we keep our youth engaged in positive pro-social activities throughout the week, especially youth that are involved in gang violence or that we know that are associated with, you know, unsafe acts in our community. And I'm gonna keep it short. I mean, we're just grateful for this opportunity to be here in front of everybody. We thank ceasefire and our team, our community partners, hubert, for the great work that we're doing in the community. So thank you for the time.

Thank you so much.

Thank you. Thanks, john.

Any questions for any of our panelists? Sorry. Councilor Zimmerman.

Eric Zimmerman: Thank you. Particularly to those three community organizations. I appreciate you stepping up. Thank you for that. And thanks for sharing kind of how your how you work your piece of the pie. And I think that that's an important approach in terms of different, different strategies for different folks. So, and then just for everybody that's involved, I, every now and then you can hear through the way someone describes their work when their family is taking on a burden. So a phone call at 4:30 a.m. Means there's a family member who's irritated with you that you had to take a call. And so I just want to say thank you to those family members or any of you who are having to explain to your family why you have to take a phone call at 4:30 a.m. That is a that is a sacrifice as well. I was interested in some of the prior event work that you discussed in terms of. Understanding the dynamics, and you mentioned cinco de mayo and other events that happened in the in the area. So along with that and other things, if we take an event. How often does a suspect or a victim, how often are they already known to the city of Portland in your work?

Depends on who you're asking.

Well, I'm going to say collectively, like, because you talked a lot about your interventions. You talk about how you get somebody nominated on the list. You talk about how you decide like, hey, we got to throw some services around. So for the lay public, this is an area where we know very little. And I'm curious, just based on your own physical reactions, when I asked that question, it seems like it's a, you know, a lot, but definitely not everybody. But how do you react to that question?

I mean, it's a tough question to answer. Councilor. I think generally speaking, our shooters, we've probably know about, they've had some interaction with both police and community intervention folks. They they're they're high risk individuals or higher risk individuals, victims. It's less, you know, certain because sometimes it's uninvolved parties that are unintended bystanders or impacted by gun violence. So less clarity on that portion. But in all of it, it's not like there's a math equation where you hit a certain number of points, and then we know you're going to shoot somebody, right? It's, we just know you're, you're engaged in activities or behaviors that are higher risk. And we start looking at intervention strategies that are proportionate, that fit your needs and address those risk factors you're demonstrating. But I would say largely my experience has been when by the time someone fires a gun and hits somebody else, they've been on our radar in some fashion for lower level offenses prior.

That's so interesting. And often when we talk about programs like this, right, there's an aspect in syria. You mentioned a small portion of people doing the most violence in our community. That was your quote. And so we sometimes get the question of like, why do we put resources at a small number, right? Who's choosing to engage in a thing? But I can't think of another crime. And as you were testifying, I was trying to think of any other crime that has a larger ripple effect through the community. Right. You may not know the victim. You may not understand the victim, but understanding that, right in my own district that three bystanders are hit at a, at a, at a bar because of a drive by that has a ripple effect on on the whole district. It has a ripple effect on how we all, in fact, how we choose to then engage. So I think that that's a point well taken and something that I think is worth talking about and that we can we can reduce the number of ripple number of instigating ripple moments if we if we are targeted. And then my last question. So in the slide that kind of showed the shooting review and kind of the steps that went down, one thing that that popped into my mind. So the male model of violence is that males are generally quite reactive. And that's a lot of what ceasefire is about is like we, we intervene in order to prevent the reaction. And your primary focus that you mentioned were 18 to 44 year old males, right. There's a reason we're talking about men, right? We are the guilty party here. So what I found interesting though, is the every two weeks part, because there's another aspect where you're, you're sending somebody to the hospital, right? You're intervening in the immediacy with a family member or other other folks around. So how do those two things? Because a two week review period. And that's what you I think you mentioned we review every shooting in the last two weeks. And sometimes from there, we identify names that we want to reach out to and spend some more time with. But also there's the intervention piece. Yeah. How do those two balance together?

Yeah.

That's a great question.

I'm sorry, but I have to ask so that we can get through some other questions. Sarah, could you give a rapid fire response?

Yes, I.

Can scheduled you for 30 minutes. So I don't know why, but here we are at an hour. But it's a really good topic, so thank you. Keep going.

Yeah, that's a great question. I think what's most important to know about the shooting review is like it was every week. But as violence went down, we saw that we didn't need a shooting review every week. But I will tell you like we are talking every day. So the shooting today, our teams are talking. So it's just a formalized review. But we're looking at our data analysts is looking at connections from the victim from the shooting. Right. Like so it's like an everyday thing that we're working on to make sure we get ahead of the retaliation. So even if a shooting happens when we don't have a review, we're still working on that shooting in that individual incident to make sure that like we are providing resources, we are reaching out to the family. We are making sure that our trauma, violence, impact, not trauma. Who is going to the hospital to meet them. So all those things are it's real time work. It doesn't wait for a meeting, I guess.

Great. Thank you. I appreciate you all spending time today. I know that in a world of cuts budget, I know that the police chief said I need this program still funded. And there are other things that they gave up in order to secure that. And I appreciate that. So there's more conversation, and I do appreciate everybody showing up today. Thank you.

Councilor Smith.

Loretta Smith: Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you all for coming and giving us this presentation. I have a question for jihad. Could you come up to the front, please?

Hello.

Thank you for the work that you do with our young people. I always tell my youth that I work with with the summer jobs program. I've never seen a kid doing a drive by on their way to work. That being said, are there any other opportunity gaps that we can address that is not being addressed in, in, in these public safety programs that are sponsored by the city that you would like to see more of.

Resources in the like I've mentioned, you know, families like they're there with us, you know, roughly two, three hours out the day in, in the summer. But, you know, during the school year is less right. And they're in their environment at home with family, friends, or whatever the case is. And those influences more than they are with us. And so there's a lot of things that they need in the home in order to function in.

Wraparound supports.

Yeah. Okay. And so, and this, this, this, more resources around that because things are being cut and, and some things are not being addressed. Okay.

So, so you're saying that the reduction of wraparound supports is, is also something that is causing you all to not be as successful in certain spaces the way that you would like to be.

Correct.

Okay. That's, that's what I needed to hear. Thank you so much. Thank you, mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Councilor. Councilor Kanal.

Sameer Kanal: Thank you, chair. Novick. Thanks, everybody for being here. I appreciate the conversation. I did a ride along with with hubert last year. On the flip side, I hope to do one with with x t this summer. And I really wanted to also join everyone in appreciating the three marvin jihad, timo for everything that you do and your organizations as well. I wanted to to go back a little bit to the slide with the graphic on it, the the chart and slide eight and just kind of kind of run through it. This is this is both injury and fatal shootings together and it's a monthly average, right. And we've seen the fatal shootings perhaps even have a more stark decline. It was a little steeper, if I recall correctly. And I just wanted to to note how each part of this sort of built on itself here. I appreciate that you noted the establishment, the fits establishment, and then the ceasefire's establishment. You see, when the corners kind of get turned a little bit and just wanted to, to take the opportunity to highlight that again. I think it's impossible to argue the idea that ceasefire has made an impact in that, both in terms of the office and the approach broadly, and I appreciate the distinction being drawn there. When I was at the a gun violence peaked in 2022 from a homicide perspective, and that was there was emergency declaration. Director howard was at the mayor's office at the time as well. It was involved in that. And there were I remember the conversation being that we would never see pre-pandemic levels of gun violence again, the the sort of new normal phrase was, was thrown around. And I appreciate very much being able, many years on now to, to refute that and to show it numerically and to appreciate how many folks have been involved in it. It's incredible work. It's got a clear impact. It's a tangible impact. And I know that if I imagine nick in the back is, is probably involved in, in making the chart and showing how clear and tangible it is. So appreciate everyone who's not up here for doing that as well. I wanted to, to also appreciate the conversation around how you connect with regional partners in terms of looking and seeing how there may be a connection. If there's a previous shooting that was maybe outside of the jurisdiction, how far does that region go? How are you looking? You know, seattle down to, you know, grants pass. How far are we going here?

So two components there. One is the shooting review. We're bringing in pretty much anybody in the county. Gresham police department Multnomah Multnomah county sheriff's office, federal partners. To the extent they do gun violence, work for the national integrated ballistic information network. That's a national network. So we can tie shooting incidents anywhere in the country if those casings have been entered in another jurisdiction. So we've had cases linked to eugene. Again, I don't know of any any out of state that come to mind, but it's theoretically possible we could have one in a shooting incident in florida that we're able to connect to our shooting incident here in Portland.

Got it. And that's the nibin system. Thanks. I think I'll wrap there. But thank you again.

Thank you. Councilor I'm curious about what do you think the actual size is of the group of people who at any given point are at risk of being, committing or being victimized by gun violence? Are we talking about a few hundred people in the city, a few thousand, a few dozen.

It's a few hundred people. And then you have a smaller number who are actually pulling the trigger.

Okay.

But also remember that those bullets don't have names on them, right? So like what happened at the business downtown? It hit three and three, three people. And that was not the intended target.

So I think I just thought it was important to get the number out there because that underscores it really is a small group of people that, you know, a limited number of people can work with. It seems to me you were talking about responding, anticipating individual events, responding to individual events, but you're also talking about working with people over a period of months. And I

Assume there can be a different answer to this depending on which organization you're talking about. But sierra, on balance, how much time do you think people involved with ceasefire spend working, responding to or anticipating a particular event, and how much time working with people who you just, you know, are at risk of one way or another and you have an ongoing with them?

I mean, the time frame is, is difficult to answer, but we, we, the community based organizations that we work with, they employ their, their staff 40 hours a week, full time. And so that is their job. They have caseloads that they are connecting with individuals. You know, a person who might have been referred, you know, they're starting the program versus someone who might have been in the program for nine months. The the intensity is different for that person. So we, you know, we expect for the organizations to make sure that their employees are, you know, connecting to the people who we refer in terms of like events and gun violence. We anticipate different events have higher risk. And so that planning, depending on the events, cinco de mayo was one just based on the information we had from the event organizers from last year, how many guns they turned away, and then, you know, good in the hoods coming up. They had significant issues there last year. So we really want to support them this year. And getting a, a comprehensive plan on how and how the security and the safety and engagement with the community that is attending. That goes, I think marvin can answer this a little bit better around like how much actual time is spent.

Well.

I think a big piece missing here when it comes to the individuals being served and the victims and everything is the word retaliatory. The reason why is because that sets a. Strict population. And that is what we're dealing with when it comes to the actual shooters. When it comes to the victims, I can't give you a flat out number for that. But when an individual comes into our program or comes to the cease fire model and then is referred to us, the individual is in our program for approximately 18 months. When they some individuals, they will take the service right upon being called. Some of them. You have to do a relentless pursuit. Once you get them into the program. We have a cvi team. So our cvi team people will call them an outreach worker. My program is set up with cvi and case managers. So the cvi is the individual who works daily with this individual. We have 3 to 5 contacts a week. When it's when they are in phase one, 2 to 3 contacts a week when they're in phase two, two weeks, a month, two times a month. When they're in phase three, these individuals come into our program. Once they graduate from our program, then we have a group. That's because what we learned down the line was we would complete somebody from our program, and they would pop right back in. Like they would come back up because they will now be if they came in as a victim, their name will pop up because their friend is probably a victim or they was, they finished the program and got caught up in another situation. So the time frame can go anywhere with our program, it's a minimum of 12 to 16 months, but our program length is 18 months. And then aftercare.

Thank you. My last question is how do you convince somebody not to retaliate? Because I have to say, if somebody I cared about was shot, I'd want to shoot somebody. And I'm actually not sure what would convince me not to do that. So how do how do you when you've got when you've got somebody who somebody they care about has been shot, how do you convince them not to retaliate? What arguments work?

So this is where the influence piece come in, right? I got this is where the influence piece come in. Because there's a, there's, there's a structure to everything. And so in this line of work like this has never happened. It wasn't happening. This opportunity was not here when I was out here. So. My organization deals with 18 to 44. Some of them be older than 44. Sometime you have to you have to do the whole family. You have to take care of the whole family. So that's where pieces like jihad and, and others in the community, you, you have to start putting everybody that's being served into this ecosystem. And that wasn't being done at first. It was just focused on this one person. Right? When you use the influence and you come from a structure and these people is involved in the structure that was created by some individuals that were 30 years older than them, and they're now following the structure that the first generation destroyed and never prepared them for sometime. Like, you know, you guys get voted in as politics. It's politics to everything. And sometimes you just have to tell them the truth about what's going on. See, like, it can be food to say, we can stop everything. We can't stop everything. And we know that. But when you're setting the example of like, for my organization, we have prior, prior. Adversaries working together. And so these individuals who you're talking to, they have a very high respect for some of these individuals that's working here. And so their question is, how are you guys working together when they know that in 90, a situation occurred between you guys as family and that carried into 2000, now you guys are pushing us not to do it. A lot of these young men, they don't want to do it. But they think it's a norm. So like all these abnormal behaviors that's being promoted through social media, through all television, everything. And then individuals who. And I'm just going to bluntly put it out there. There wasn't nobody back in the 80s and 90s and 2000. That's who's gas in these babies. So they now they have outlets where they can call. These little dudes will call you. We know a lot that happened before it even get to the police. So these little babies will call you and tell you what's going on. So it's not really as hard as you think it is. Everything seems to be spontaneous. Like you will run into that individual. And when you have two scared individuals with a gun and they're behind the keyboard telling what they're going to do to each other, that's when you get in the shootings.

Thank you. We could continue this conversation for another hour, and really hugely grateful to everyone who's been here. We need to move on to the call allocation study discussion. But thank you so, so much. Could the clerk read the next item?

Item number two. Document number 2026-14. Sorry. 185. Public safety call allocation study discussion.

Come on down.

My name is nick mcdonald. I'm a performance analyst with the public safety service area, and I'm going to let my colleagues introduce themselves.

Yeah. Alicia russell, lieutenant with the Portland police bureau, and I currently work in the chief's office.

April roe, interim program manager with Portland street response.

Todd davis, interim operations manager with boec.

So thanks for your time this morning. We're here to talk about the recommendations from Novick oh two from last year about reassignment of welfare checks. This is the call allocation working group has been working on looking at the calls that are allocated to police bureau as welfare checks. This working group includes boec, Portland street response, the public safety service area and the police bureau. So yes. Next slide please. Sorry. Yeah. So in November last year, boec and PPB undertook a study of the welfare checks during a two month period. And this was a total of about 3000 calls that went to the police bureau. Boec. And the police bureau did a very thorough review of the reasons these were dispatched. The nature of the calls, and I'm going to pass over to catherine russell to talk about the findings.

Okay. All right. Next slide please. Okay. Sorry, I wasn't planning on addressing these ones.

I beg your pardon. I can I can go with this.

If you keep going.

Yeah, sure. Absolutely. I beg your pardon. So when we look at the total welfare check calls in the study, we grouped them into five areas. So we've got calls that the nexus was aggression or violence, things that took place in a private building, things that involved traffic or a vehicle calls where Portland street response was unavailable and calls were weapons were called out. So these are the reasons that these calls went to the police bureau in the first place. Right. So currently, Portland street response does not deal with calls that have weapons or aggressive or violent people as a subject. They don't respond in private buildings. They don't involve. They don't respond involving traffic. If we get the next slide. So of these, the ones that we thought had the highest likelihood of being able to be rerouted, are these calls involving traffic hazards and calls involving non publicly accessible spaces. So we broke out these traffic calls into calls involving bicycles, wheelchairs or people in traffic vehicles in the roadway and vehicles not in the roadway. And we determined that Portland street response could potentially respond to about 85% of these calls. And then the other big bucket that we looked at was calls involving non publicly accessible spaces. So these are calls involving a potential crime, civil custodial issues, calls involving children. These we recommend stay with PPB. The ones that we recommend moving are medical checks possible medical issues, unable to reach possible or suspected mental health or drug crisis, and person needs to be checked on. So we think psr could field about 69% of these. And of the total 3000 calls, we think psr could have responded on, about 60% of them. So if we could get the next slide. So the core recommendations of the study. Where there's no evidence that suggests a concern about the safety of the public, the responders or a criminal nexus, alternative responders can and should be the primary response. We think PPB should remain the primary responder for welfare check calls involving running vehicles, vehicles in a traffic Lane or otherwise creating a hazard. As well as anything where there's a criminal or safety nexus. We think alternative responders can be the primary response for calls involving pedestrians, wheelchairs and bicycles, even if they're interacting with traffic. And then regarding private buildings. Calls that currently meet the criteria for psr should be assigned to psr, even if they're in a public building. So we get the next slide. Okay, great. Catherine russell.

Okay, so you can see here the average of welfare checks over the last three years have been very consistent, averaging just over 23,000 calls per year. Next slide please. So what we did is we took that 45 day pilot project data. We looked at it at a three year average. And that's what the numbers that you're looking at right here. So those 42 calls, like nick said, it's like those, those calls that have some component of aggressive or violent nature that we're looking at possibly 4500 calls. And those would stay with police, those 42 calls, that person that might be, you know, an example is that person that maybe stepped off the sidewalk at one moment is back on the sidewalk, maybe back and forth. That is a call we realize that could probably go to an alternate responder or, you know, in a vehicle. So those are about 6800 calls as you see there, those private buildings. That was the biggest, the biggest number 9400. And those 42 calls, those are the ones when psr wasn't available, it was after hours or it was they were busy on other calls. And then obviously those 42 w calls, those are the ones that would stay with police. And then those ones that say no data, those are that came out of the study. They were coded incorrectly. That's since been changed, but we hadn't updated the slide here. Next slide. So again, those those, those calls that involve vehicles or traffic those vehicles in a roadway, obviously there could be some impairment. Maybe somebody stopped at the Green light not moving. Those would clearly be calls that would still stay with police. And again, you know, those person bicycle or wheelchair possibly in traffic, maybe on the sidewalk or on the side of the road. Those are calls that could possibly go to an alternate responder. And then those vehicles not in roadway, that parked car, maybe somebody living out of it possibly, or it couldn't run those calls would go to psr or an alternate responder. Next slide. And again, this was the biggest bucket. As you saw earlier, those 42 calls. We probably could have 20 categories here. That just covers a ton of different calls. Those welfare checks in a private residence or a building and those all other calls that 2900 calls that could be, you know, obviously something involving a weapon. It could be, you know, a custody issue or somebody under 18 years old. Those are calls that would not go to an alternate responder. And then I know nick already touched on a lot of these medical check unable to reach. That could be that person that didn't show up to work appointment, didn't not answering their phone. And somebody would like them to be checked on. And obviously somebody also in a mental health crisis that could possibly go to an alternate responder.

This is a little more of a breakdown on what those calls look like. And I just what we were looking at for psr on taking on approximately 14,000 calls is making sure that the calls that we're talking about are currently within mobile crisis and using that as the lens. So if you notice, it's we're not changing what we're responding to. It's more the where we would be responding to and then breaking it up in a way that is very clear. Like we talk about the welfare check bucket, it's a huge bucket. We could have had so many more categories. And trying to break these down in a way that makes sense and leads us or gains the opportunity that we can do a staged. Addition if that's the route that we go in order to handle staffing up training, and making sure that psr is prepared to do handle these calls in a safe way for responders. Here is again, specific recommendations. And again, this allows us to staff up to train and to provide additional safety training for our folks vehicles, not in a roadway. That seems like a very simple one. That's why we kind of put that on the year one, as if we were looking at these consecutively. How would we staff up to be able to gain that total 14,000 estimate? And so that is exactly what this is set out to do. This recommendation, year by year does not account for increases in psr call volume outside of this call reallocation, as well as 24 over seven. So that would this is just for call reallocation. So if we are looking at some of those other things, it would need to be a blended staged model for those.

Yeah. So our recommendations as you as you all know, our call response times need to improve. So if we could lower those, you know, shift some of those calls to alternate responders, ultimately that would, you know, lower our call response time to those more urgent incidents. You know, and we put on here, you know, obviously we could devote more resources to investigating those property crimes, which we're well above the national average. Unfortunately, we could devote more resources to that. So through this reallocation, potentially saving hundreds and thousands of officer hours over time, you know, to improve those persistent property crime and lower those numbers. So strategically, strategically redeploying our resources and pursuing both together will strengthen the overall impact of this effort. And as psr expands, you know, it doesn't reduce the demand on PPB, it just redirects it where sworn officers are are needed the most.

Right. Thanks. I just want to say thank you to everyone who was involved in putting this together, like the sense of real commitment to looking at the 911 system as an integrated resource. Just as really impressive to me. And thank you, sir. Thanks very much.

Thank you. Let's see.

Councilor Kanal.

Sameer Kanal: Yeah, thank you so much for all this. I appreciate I was going to ask this question that you just put up the slide on. So that saves us all a lot of time on who was on the workgroup.

But you wanted to see that.

No, no, no, it's good that it's in there. I appreciate the in there. You can you can put it on the other slide that you were going to. I wanted to first. Thank you. Councilor Novick once again for the note that sort of started part of this process up, and I know that there was a long. There remains an ongoing call allocation workgroup and study for many, many years now. I wanted to ask a couple questions to one. One related to the. If you go back one slide, there's the the years layout or actually it's one more than this. Love that slide. By the way, the, the pb one felt like we've, we've had this conversation for a long time and I really appreciate it. This one. Where is the private building component?

So those are the 42 b calls. So year four. And that's going to take the most amount of training for our folks to really make sure that they understand what safety concerns and how to respond inside a confined space. And I think labor is also going to be a big component in being prepared to take those calls on or the labor negotiations.

Okay. Yeah, let me just big picture. Loved everything in this except the number four I that we've we're how many years into this pilot now. And I would love to get this done a lot faster than that. So I will probably be following up asking, you know, how do we do this in a shorter period of time? I don't want to take up the time here with that, but that's, that's the only real concern I had with this. And then my questions are largely clarification. Other than that, since you mentioned labor, is this going to be. Are you expecting both the components of bargaining? Sorry. Are we expecting concerns on the side of where the calls are coming from or where they're going to or both?

Both.

Okay. That's good to know. Have you been in communication or has anyone on this workgroup been in communication with bhr as it relates to the currently ongoing bargaining processes? Because some of the relevant unions are in conversation here.

I'm into bargaining. With protech and with for for the community health medical responder. Currently, this is not on the table right now as far as what we're working on. So these recommendations were coming here first.

Great.

We have nine days to put something new on the agenda of one of these particular contracts. So let's please make sure that it gets on that list with bhr. I did ask about it. I think it may already be on the list. It's just a question of which articles are open, but I'll leave it there to not go beyond what I'm allowed to talk about. But the deadline is nine days on that one. The other question, if you I think it's two slides forward. With relation to the weapon reported. I understand it's a very small number relative to the 30,000 calls that we're talking about here, but they often lead to the highest profile outcomes. And so I wanted to ask, have those you with the vehicle calls, you disaggregated them further into the type, the subtype. Has there been work done on the disaggregation of the weapon calls so that we can start talking about the difference between a knife, a stick, a gun and the different types of reports there.

I don't think we broke it out in this study.

Not in this study, no.

But, you know, I, I will say that we know that folks in the community that we serve tend to have ways to defend themselves so that that's not unusual. If there is something out in, in active play and brandish, that's definitely where we're going. These are pb calls. If somebody just mentions, I know they have a stick and it's, you know, laying outside their tent or, you know, nearby, that doesn't necessarily preclude them from, from psr, from going currently.

Yeah, I think there's a little bit of, of reliance on then the dispatcher kind of making the determination, I think it might be helpful for clarity. There's a there was a call last June in my neighborhood involving someone who was allegedly hanging a knife out a window. They the access point was not through a window, right? Access point was through the door of the apartment. And it ended up with somebody dead at the end of that. That's a situation where obviously it would be it's a moot point if we're not talking about getting into private buildings. But now that we are starting to have that conversation and thank you for doing it, I do also want to have the conversation about trying to get a little bit more information there. I understand 187 calls is a very small number relative to the size. But again, I do think when there's something that goes wrong in these situations, it tends to be higher profile. And so just wanted to, to ask if we can get that number broken down a little bit further for the future. Doesn't have to be right now in terms of understanding how many of those are knives, sticks, guns, whatever, as well as I appreciate the distinction between possession existing and brandishing in the moment of the the 911 call being made. Thanks.

Councilor Smith.

Loretta Smith: Thank you. Based on the sample, staff estimate that of roughly 23,000 welfare checks per year, about 14,000 could transition to psr, while about 8600 should remain with pb. With a full transition, it is estimated that it might take about four years. Can you give me the clear criterion in which boec will use to decide whether a welfare check goes to psr, pb or to another first responder?

Well, right now psr, we have our set criteria for psr, which we get from psr, and right now it is a lot of it is person down, not checked. People who are experiencing some mental health crisis, people that need resources. If psr is available, we try and send them. If they're not available, we send the police out.

So in terms of the staffing, training, labor bargaining and infrastructure changes that are needed before psr can absorb the 14,000 additional calls per year, what is your what is your sense about that, about them being able to meet the moment on these additional calls?

I'm not sure I totally understand the question. So when looking at the 14,000 number, our total call volume in 2025 was 15,000. So that's doubling what we have now. So that is a lot of staff to train. And I think this year was highly aggressive in our training and our hiring. And we promoted and hired 22 individuals this fiscal year. And it it really was a challenge for our folks. So hiring that many and getting them ready for solo status, then trying to hire or train our existing staff on new safety techniques and new areas that they're responding to. It's a large it's a large endeavor. So it is just going to take us some time.

So it's new techniques that you'll need to train and staff for, for those additional 14,000.

So such as vehicle vehicles and roadway. How to safely approach a vehicle. How, what what things to look for for safety and how to begin that engagement is very important. Is this something that we would need to look at blocking a Lane of traffic? We've never done that. What can we legally do and how would we do that safely? Same with like responding to a building, you know, training our folks. What are the safety concerns? How should they approach a door? How should they knock? How far into a building should they go? And what should they be scanning a room for? Those types of things.

Just that's what I was looking for in my question to see what this is exactly what I wanted to find out what new changes or things that we needed to do to be able to meet that moment. And I want to talk with the police. How will what she just said about the training and different techniques, how will this affect pb response time for higher priority calls? Will that have some impact in terms of how quickly you get to a very high priority call?

Yeah. I mean, like April said, this isn't, you know, this is a a graded response. This isn't going to happen overnight, right? As far as allowing us that time. But yes, I mean, if you can see if they take four, you know, are able, you know, to take an extra 14,000 calls a year, I mean, that's a significant number that would allow us time for, you know, like I said, those other investigations or respond to those other those more urgent calls a lot quicker.

And right now, are we tracking any of those outcomes about how, how quickly we get to a call and how psr is how they're offsetting.

Not, we think not in this work group. No, we didn't get to down to those details. No, I know those numbers are being tracked. Unfortunately, christian, who is our data guru, isn't here today to answer some of those. But I know that is those conversations are happening as well.

Because I think that's what it's going to come down to. It's going to come down to we're going to look at the data. What does what does the data show that we can actually do? Because that is what will make sense in any of these new policy changes that that we may go forward with.

And I'll just add, I mean, if they they increase their call load by this much, there will be a dedicated dispatcher, psr dispatcher. So that will change that as well. I don't know how far out we are on that, but I know that is, you know, part of this training that we're that we're talking about.

And I am looking forward yesterday was the deadline for a report that I asked dc a call for in terms of how much would it take in resources, time, training to put another 400 officers in Portland police bureau and what that would look like realistically, because I heard you loud and clear, I want to have some realistic timelines too. And so they're not finished with the report yet, but that's going to come out in a couple of weeks. But I would strongly encourage you to look at that, because this may help to inform what you all have have done as well. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Councilor Zimmerman.

Eric Zimmerman: Thank you. As we discuss the private building, I have a question about private building, public access or private building, private access, meaning an apartment is a private building, so to speak. Starbucks is a private building, so to speak, but it's public access. Are we are we squaring that out or is it all private building?

Yeah. The we currently respond to publicly accessible areas. So starbucks during business hours, we respond to for this study, we're talking about private residences.

Okay. Thank you. That that really helps. I wasn't quite sure. I know that's been an evolution. So we are psr will now go into a publicly accessible private building. Currently.

If the recommendation is implemented. Yes, a private residence. Oh I'm sorry.

No, no sorry. Fred meyer, a store a convenience store will go into a building. It's not just an outside thing anymore. Correct. Got it. Great. Okay. Thank you. You know, I think I would encourage folks to just there's so much nuance when it comes to the proper approach and safety when we're talking about a vehicle, right? A honda, a honda civic with, with not blacked out windows, something you can see into versus an rv. Right? Those approaches are so different. So I do want to, you know, verbalize, I think, permission to take time in the training approach. I think that, I think that what you've laid out here makes sense. And not all vehicles are a safe approach for anybody. And in that case, we have a dedicated group of sworn officers for the most critical and dangerous situations. So I do think that there's a there's a spectrum here that's important to acknowledge. I am I both see the value in the private home access, and it gives me a great deal of anxiety. A friend of mine is a person who responded to a call, a domestic home, and he never went home that night. Right. So I think about that. And, you know, oftentimes we talk about like, co-response isn't a thing we want to promote, but I see where co-response could make a lot of sense of assess if it's a safe situation. If it is, then maybe one service backs off. If it's not, then a different service backs off. But I see that being a positive approach. But the idea of a lot of these calls, and here's my other piece, is. A call for a welfare check. I guess maybe I need to understand better what the what the procedures for a person who goes to a welfare check might be. Because when it comes to can you enter a premises? What is cause? Who can do that? Who can't? If your neighbors or your family have called because you haven't shown up to work for a few days, what does that look like? And are we just kicking the can a little bit? If we send a group who can't respond, who can't do anything if nobody comes to the door, which I think is the psr version, can't do anything and nobody comes to the door.

Right. And I'm glad you brought that up, because that's something we spent a lot of time discussing in this group. And I mean, it was really, what is the outcome that we're looking to, to have on these calls? And so we kind of went down that rabbit hole of if it's somebody who didn't show up for work today, I'm worried because they were sick yesterday. Can we, you know, knock on the door? Sure. We can knock on the door. But is that the outcome that we want? And, you know, if it's more like, I really am worried and I want somebody walking around the house to check and make sure they're not down somewhere, then that becomes a pb call. So there is a lot of nuances in call in how these calls are handled, and we have to keep that in mind. With any of these, there's always going to be some of these nuances where we are going to have to bring in our partners when it isn't, when our responders don't feel like it's safe. Because again, it's a vehicle. Like I can't see into it. I can't do my safety checks. Now I need to bring in that higher level of care. And same again with going inside a private building, even when we're invited. Like, I don't want my folks going down into the back bedroom with somebody. I want them where they have an exit at their back and somebody they're able to get out because that's the only that's the only recourse they have is to leave. So just I appreciate you bringing that thoughtfulness up because that's, that's where my heart lies as well.

Okay.

If I may, just on that one, one of the things that isn't in this presentation, which is in the broader report is the role of project respond, which I believe does a lot more aggressive co-response with police. I don't know whether you want to talk about that, captain.

Well, yeah, I mean, we're talking about yeah. On those, you know, you know, mental health crisis calls. Of course, that would be a resource we would use. But we did. I mean, to your point, councilor Zimmerman, we talked a lot about the, you know, should we even send psr to these calls at houses when they can only go to the front door, they're not going to walk around and look in the other windows or look around the back. Is that a good use of their time, or should that just be sent to the police? Because we might eventually have to come. So we did spend, like April said, a lot of time talking about that, but we also spent a lot of time talking about the collaboration between us and psr and not saying like, okay, psr, you're going to go, but you don't want to be seen with us. You're going to leave before we come or vice versa, like just really talking about the collaboration and how helpful that will be for the community and for us to get to know psr better and then get to know pb a lot better. So we did talk about that just, you know, yeah, maybe we're going to co respond, maybe psr sticks around why we do look around the house and maybe they have resources to give that person if that person is inside. So we spent a lot of time talking about the collaboration piece between us too.

And I also want to highlight project respond is currently responding to residences that is there. I mean, we're not we're not looking to do anything differently. That is a model that they have been doing for a long time, and they've been able to do it safely so that we are looking to them and taking the information that they have in their experience into consideration on how we develop psr.

Okay. Thank you. And then I just want to compliment the person. Bicycle, wheelchair in traffic. I think that sometimes in government, we get quite funny about the line of demarcation. If it's a sidewalk, it's this group. If it's a street, it's that group, right? And even outside the public safety realm, like to clean graffiti on a road sign that's PBOT to clean graffiti on the side of a of a building. That's bs, right? There's some silliness that always happens, but there are everyday people who are constantly dealing with somebody who is in the roadway and they're untrained, and they're doing what mom and dad taught them to do is look both ways and make yourself seen because they're trying to intervene all the time. So I just appreciate this seems like a common sense approach. And it requires you as a supervisor to provide enough ownership and cover for your employees to say, yes, I know I could have responded, but it wasn't a safe situation. So I didn't respond. I was staged off the side because they weren't just in the roadway. They were in the roadway of 99 w and it was like, not safe for us. Right? Which is different than on the corner of third and Burnside, which right now I guarantee there are three people laying in the street, right? That is what happens at third and Burnside in northwest every single day. I don't know that the police are the only group that can respond to the, you know, in front of street roots, so to speak. So I just I think that that's a good and there's a lot of calls. So I just think that that's a good dispersion. So thanks for the study. I do appreciate it. And I hope as you move forward, remember that the nuance will matter. This is a spectrum. And none of these choices were binary and that the decision on the ground by the responder and sorry, I just looked at boec and I want to I want to remind folks, I always try to that giving a lot of grace to the person who is dispatching to make the best assessment based on the information you as a caller give, is also a really important part of this equation. I meet way too many people who don't realize that the way to get sr to the place is to still call 911, right? That you are. Your team is trained to say that's a psr type of response or that's not a psr type response. And so I always try to encourage people, if you don't have to remember a bunch of numbers, it's the same number your mom and dad taught you when you were a kid. 911 will get you whatever you need to, if you're in crisis or someone you see is in crisis. So that that decision making at your level, your team's level is something I find very important as well. Thanks for everybody.

Appreciate that.

Thank you. I wanted to say that I am grateful and fascinated and encouraged by this report. I'm grateful because this is exactly what we were talking about doing last year. I'm fascinated because the results are different from what I expected last year. Talking and having anecdotal conversations with some people in boec and in the police bureau, I was under the impression that most welfare checks was like somebody lying on the sidewalk somewhere, and that very few of them were private residence calls. It turns out that that was simply not true. And I'm encouraged by the fact that even though the numbers aren't what we what we expected, you still think that there is substantial capacity for these calls to be shifted to unarmed responders. I had two questions, one of which was psr generally deals with mental health response and a lot of these calls, there's no particular reason to think that mental health is involved. Like, I haven't gotten a response from somebody from somebody I work with or a family member doesn't necessarily means they're mental health issue. So was there thought given to the possibility of maybe having rps three respond to those instead, or was that thought canceled by the mayor's proposing to cut rps three by 80%?

Well, we started the workgroup long before the proposal to cut rps three. But know that I mean, that just is not in their contract. And we were we inquired with the police union, and that was not going to be bargained into their contract as well to respond to these calls. So we didn't talk much more about it after that.

Well, and I think also having our medical responders and crisis responders on, you know, on the same team kind of gives us a couple of lenses on showing up to assess, you know, somebody's well-being in the moment. So it kind of gives us a more robust lens on these calls.

So you don't think that the reaction of a lot of psr people will be, for god's sake, you're sending me these random calls that don't necessarily have a mental health nexus.

I think are down in and checks are the same thing. You know, I think they they are down and unchecked is really we don't have enough information to know whether or not somebody is okay. And I think that's the same as what we're asking in this point is we don't have enough information to know if somebody is okay. So.

Okay. Thank you. And nick, following up on councilor Zimmerman's question about basically about the safety of going to without unarmed people going to a private residence. I think you've told me before that there's a lot of data about the safety of unarmed responders going to lots of different kind of calls around the country, in the world. And generally the results are pretty good. So am I remembering that correctly?

Yeah. So first off, I want to say we have the utmost concern for the safety of all our responders, and we don't want to be sending people into situations that they don't feel safe in. Any responder, when they get on scene, always has the option to call for backup or other services to support them before they enter a building. So we never want to be putting someone in an unsafe situation. That said, we believe the data from project respond and the data nationally is that these kinds of services, when they're responding to any kinds of calls, be that in a vehicle or a private residence or on the street, have an excellent safety record. I'm not aware of anyone in this line of work in the last 30 years being killed in the line of duty, except through traffic accident, and I'm not aware of any situations within Portland with any of the alternative response systems that have resulted in serious injury or death. That said, we definitely want to monitor this very carefully as we roll it out. We want to learn from other organizations. We want to put people in the position where they have the best training, the ability to make the best decision about what they go into and what they don't for sure. Do you want to add anything, sir?

Well, we we brought in and I don't remember the acronym, but the same, the psr in la, I can't remember their their exact name right now. And they actually respond to a lot more calls that psr isn't even considering going to. They have a very, very robust program. And so we learned a lot from our meetings with them, and then also have asked for their some of their policies. And, you know, just to get, you know, just to understand more because they seem to be very successful down south and want to bring that information up here as well.

Thank you. Councilor Kanal and do you want to we have another item to get to, and we were scold you. Yeah. Yesterday the the council president sort of scolded those of us who were chairs for not giving sufficient breaks during our meetings. So we needed to take a 15 minute break before the next item. So I'm hoping we can wrap this discussion up quickly.

Thanks. I think you're talking about circle the la program in canopy roots. And yeah, I had a chance to meet with with their. They do it in canopy roots does a similar program in minneapolis and they have part of la as well. So I spoke about that also. I think there's there's a lot to be learned there. I agree three quick things. One is the. I'm comfortable. I want to understand the next steps for how we can. You said if the recommendations are accepted a couple of times. April. So I wanted to just understand how that occurs and how we can lock that in so that if it's going to take longer than two years, I want to make sure that we have it locked in so that the the electoral timeline affiliated with the mayor's office does not interfere in this, because that has been a risk in other contexts. So I want to I want to just understand the next step on that. And then I have two quick other.

Well, I think I think a big part of that is budget, right? All of these include staffing up. If we don't have the funding to staff up to handle the calls, then we're it's kind of a moot point. We also then have to bargain with all of, I think the police officers association and the other two, you know, unions representing psr folks. And then there's a lot of work that we have to do with boec, and we're already have begun that work for dedicated dispatch, because as it is right now, our call volume is getting to the point where it's really a huge burden for our psr staff to try and triage calls on their own with a single call type without having a dedicated dispatcher. So there's some work there, but budget is going to drive a big portion of that.

Okay.

I'm more thinking about code as a way of locking things in. I'm that's my primary concern here. And we did start on a timeline last June to get to a place where psr will get into code. So I wanted to talk about that. I think bargaining is also super important. The budget side that can, you know that that has volatility built in. Of course, the second thing I had was chat considered as a potential responder to the welfare check categories that are exclusively physical health focused or that we believe at the time of dispatch are primarily physical health oriented.

And I think, yes, but the ones that we are psr responding to don't have enough information for it to be triaged as a medical call. So ours are third party and it's like, I don't know, they don't look very well. So I don't know, in the absence of information, that's why psr is going to obtain more information. If it is a higher acuity, of course we're calling them in. We often are still calling in chat on those calls when we have determined that there is a longer term need there. If it's something that our folks can't address in the moment. So we are using again, it's that lack of information. And we're going because there's only so much we can get from a third party caller or through the phone. And it's always different when we show up. And then we assess and evaluate and then try and get that other response if needed. If it's not something that psr can address.

And then the third piece is just to, to follow up on the project respond piece, that project respond cannot be dispatched through 911 as per like directly from the caller. It has to it involves the Portland police officer requesting. Is that correct?

Correct. Yeah. Police will respond. They'll request project respond, we'll send out a page and then they'll contact the officer directly.

So as.

Long as transfer callers through to the bcc, the behavioral health crisis behavioral health crisis center, and then they dispatch project respond as well. So if we have a caller that we transfer over to them and they deem, oh, we should have some follow up, they'll contact project respond. They also have access to their, their records, their, their caseworkers, and they can handle all those notifications and contact directly as well.

And that's usually for something like a person calling for themselves.

It can be first party or second party, okay. Typically first party is best because they can actually speak with the person, but sometimes it could be second party.

Okay. Because the.

Reason I'm bringing this up is to say, as long as it is dispatched differently from either psr or Portland police, which kind of have a similar process of direct. Yeah, then it doesn't make sense to me to consider that a part of the response continuum in the same way, because again, to use the same example, project respond probably should have been dispatched to damon lamar johnson. And the fact that it wasn't is a failure of a system that has been brought up reporting from the mercury shows about 3% of the time that it is responded that that project respond is dispatched is because of calls from the city side. So that's that's the thing that we have to, to look at here and try and ensure that, that we're either not building a future that relies on something that's dispatched differently or we're fixing it either way is fine with me. I just want to make sure that's on the table. Thanks.

Thanks, counselor. Thank you very much. Really appreciate it. And we're going to have a 13 minute break before getting to the psychedelics item. So please be back at 1140.

Thank you.

Oh, sorry. You could do your job.

All right, I told people 1140, it's 1141. We do have a quorum. So could I have the clerk read the next item?

Item number three. Document number 2026-186. Add psychedelic health and safety code and create the Portland psychedelic advisory commission. Add code. Chapter 14, b .140.

And counselors Morillo and Green. This is your show. How do you want. What do you want to do first?

Councilor Green. Why don't you come up and I wasn't sure if councilor Pirtle-guiney would be here as well since she's another co-sponsor.

Apparently she can't make it.

Oh, okay. I see her chief is here though.

Councilor Mitch Green, for the record.

Do you want to introduce yourself as well?

Oh yes. Sorry. Devin mullins I'm policy manager for councilor Pirtle-guiney.

Elana Pirtle-Guiney: Awesome. Thank you. Feel free to take it away.

Thank you so much. Thank you, chair Novick. Thank you, vice chair Morillo for making time to talk about this ordinance that I've co-sponsored with councilors pirtle-guiney and councilor Morillo, which, you know, seeks to sort of formalize a low law enforcement priority in the city of Portland for the use, cultivation, and practice of psychedelic. Substances like like, you know, psilocybin and the like. There's going to be a lot of folks behind me. I think that can answer a lot of technical questions. And there's been a lot of work that our three offices have put into it. But I think for you, for for our purposes in motivating this, I'd like to just speak from the heart for a moment, for a moment. A big motivation for me in supporting this legislation is it does it is important for people with post-traumatic stress disorder to to find a pathway to wellness and healing. It has had this effect on a lot of people, particularly in my life. I'm a veteran of the united states army, saw combat. A lot of my friends did too. And I know for me, psychedelics was a big part of finding some sort of peace and reckoning with that experience. I don't think it's a replacement necessarily for talking to a therapist and a trained practitioner, you know, doing it sort of on your own because, you know, a guy who knows a guy. I mean, that's, that's not what I'm advocating here. But what I am saying is there were a lot of my friends who had the same experience I did overseas. My brother, in fact, who took a different path. They ended up developing a pretty significant opiate addiction. My brother was a heroin addict on the streets of Portland for three years and in seattle, and, you know, he's clean today. That's great from a lot of help. But I know that there were folks in my life who walked that edge. And then were able to experiment with psychedelics under the sort of care of people who were pretty practiced in their communities and had an outcome that actually allowed them to sort of come out of that experience in a, in a very sort of healthy kind of way. And so I'm hoping that what this ordinance can do for us is allow us to articulate that it is a low it's, you know, lowest law enforcement priority that we have and allow us to stand up a, an advisory body to help us learn from this and to help us sort of create a nexus with folks in our communities who, who have some expertise with this, these materials to, to, to actually engage in evidence based community practice of wellness. So I think for there, I'll just leave it there. And, you know, thanks for letting me be vulnerable with my ptsd.

Chair Novick members of the committee. For the record, I'm devin mullins, policy manager for councilor Elana pirtle-guiney. I'm delivering these remarks on behalf of the councilor. She apologizes for not being here. The councilor is excited to be introducing this ordinance alongside councilors Green and Morillo. This ordinance simply says that noncommercial personal use of naturally occurring psychedelics is a low priority for law enforcement, and creates an advisory body to guide future work on these issues. Our office hears over and over again from constituents that they want us focused on activities, including substance use, that are doing real harm, that are killing people and wrecking lives. This ordinance allows our limited public safety resources to go towards what is actually causing the most harm in our community, the most harmful substances, the ones that most lead to overdose death in our communities, the activities that pose the greatest risk to community safety. And at a time when we have very real challenges in the city and and a challenging budget environment, we need to prioritize. We have finite law enforcement and behavioral health resources. That's just a fact. So every decision we make about priorities is also a decision about what we are not focusing on. This ordinance allows us to focus our resources on the highest risk issues in front of us. Importantly, we are not deprioritizing the activities where any substances, including natural psychedelics, do cause harm. We are maintaining regular enforcement against illegal sales, impaired driving and unsafe behavior. All of these will remain normal priorities for PPB. The ordinance also creates an advisory body to provide evidence guidance on harm reduction, education and implementation. This is something that community members who have experience with natural psychedelics and including spiritual or medicinal, or who have experience with law enforcement of natural psychedelics, have been asking for for years. Advisory bodies help us engage folks who might be left out of the conversation, and help us learn from diverse community perspectives, bringing in expertise we don't have on our city staff. I'll note, because I suspect we'll hear this is a rather niche cause for an advisory body, that we have some very niche advisory bodies. These are important groups, though none of them, including the one we're proposing here, need to last forever, just long enough to get the work done. Last year, council passed new rules on advisory bodies, which includes mandatory sunsets. That's a good change, and it's appropriate here. The advisory body gives us a structured way to monitor how the prioritization concept is working and make adjustments over time, and it gives us an opportunity to learn from the the advocacy community in this space and understand how we can shape meaningful, meaningful policy going forward. The north star of this ordinance is focusing on what matters most for public health and public safety, knowing that we live in a world of increasingly scarce resources. It's a small but meaningful change, and the councilor Encourages the committee to support it.

Thank you. Councilor Morillo do you want to move on to public testimony, or are there other experts that you want to bring up? First, there are six people signed up for testimony, is my understanding.

Yeah, I think I just want to thank you so much for saying all of that. I think that outlined it really well. I appreciate both of you coming up here and you coming in. Councilor pirtle-guiney place. The only last thing I want to add is one of the co-sponsors as well, is that I think that when we talk about psilocybin and its uses, we. Part of that is destigmatization destigmatization. And that can only be done when we actually change our laws to deprioritize it. And internal PPB memo doesn't necessarily change how it is viewed by the public. Only actually taking that legal step does. So I think that's why it's important to do this today, and why it's not just a niche thing to do. We do have some community experts here who have studied and worked on this for a very long time, and I would love to bring them up. I believe we have nate howard, courtney moran, and max kellerman coming up to present briefly, and then we will move on to community testimony.

Come on up.

May I begin?

Yes. And please introduce yourselves for the record.

Okay, great. Good morning, chair Novick, council vice chair murillo, members of the committee. I am courtney moran. I'm founding principal of the Portland based law firm earth law llc, and I'm also the chief legislative strategist for agricultural solutions. I'm here today testifying on behalf of the Portland psychedelic society action fund to testify in support of the ordinance, to add the psychedelic health and safety code and create the Portland psychedelics advisory commission. This ordinance affirms noncommercial personal use of natural psychedelics as a low priority for law enforcement. This is not decriminalization. This is not legalization. This does not authorize sales. It is simply a statement from the city that the personal use of naturally occurring psychedelic plants and fungi is a low priority, while maintaining enforcement of impaired driving, illegal sales and other unsafe conduct. This allows limited law enforcement resources to more effectively focus on urgent community needs, including high risk substances associated with addiction and overdose, drug trafficking, and activities that pose the greatest public safety concerns for our city. The ordinance also establishes the Portland psychedelics advisory commission, a publicly accountable advisory body that provides expert guidance and recommendations and reports directly to city council. Duties of the commission include studying the use of natural psychedelics and alleviating addiction and treatment, substance use disorders, recommending evidence based harm reduction approaches, cataloging medical, psychological and scientific research, disseminating educational materials, offering recommendations to law enforcement around best practices and monitoring at the state, federal and international levels. Policy evolution pack provides a community driven approach to advance public health. Provide evidence based education, best practices, and safety related to natural psychedelics. We respectfully ask for your yes vote. Thank you.

Is it my turn? There's no applause in here, right? Oh, there is applause. Applause. Thanks, courtney, I would applaud. There actually is no oh, there's sparkle fingers. Oh, I remember that from back in the day. A real treat to be here. I mean it, I feel like city hall for me kind of feels like a fun summer camp. My name is nate howard and thank you, chair Novick vice chair, aye, Morillo members of the committee, thank you all for your service, for running, for serving. Yeah, I really mean that. And thanks for hearing this today and for being yeah, being willing to hear this policy. So I'm a district three resident, a former city hall staffer. It really does feel lovely to be back here. And in 2018. Coming out of city hall and about a decade of different campaigns and political work, a and this is not the case for everyone. Sometimes it takes multiple. But a single evening with a psychedelic session where my now wife sat with me, changed my life in many ways, my relationship with my parents. I became open to dogs, realizing that I was just wrong about dogs and a lot of other stuff happened, including working with two therapists who ended up creating ballot measure 109, the first legal psychedelic health care program in the world governed by the government or regulated. And the big thing is that it also helped me recover from what I realized later was severe political burnout that led to alcoholism, which I never thought would happen for me, having seen it happen with my parents and family members. And so since then. Feels like a long time. But I guess it's eight years. I have spent all of my professional and volunteer time working to advance broadly science based psychedelic health policy here, statewide, nationally, and increasingly internationally. And so it's with that context that I offer that this policy is not new. It's not untested. It is a best practices approach already adopted in dozens of cities or counties around the country, which will max maxwell speak to a bit more. And here in Portland, this effort has been shaped over several years and by several, I feel disappointed to say six years that we've been working on this just because, you know, it's it's a, it's a lot of time and it's really worth it because over the process that has included hundreds of people that have been part of stakeholder involvement, community leaders here nationally and internationally, legal and policy experts, health care professionals, importantly, the national council, the native American church was part of the the origin of this policy and helped shape it. And yeah, so we're here now and we're hearing from city hall and beyond that, now is feeling like the right time to codify cultural norms that already exist in portland's culture and in law enforcement community. And we have to the best of our ability through surveys and polls, we have as good a evidence as we're going to find that there is somewhere in the tens of thousands of portlanders, somewhere in the realm of tens of thousands of portlanders who already have some relationship with these naturally occurring plants in noncommercial contexts. And when we say relationship, we're talking about like eating a cactus or eating a mushroom. Those are the kind of natural medicines we're talking about. With no commercial components. So this is no money is changing hands. And lastly, the policy here clarifies again that commercial sales are not allowed, which courtney alluded to, underscoring that there has been confusion in the past. And so this wants to clarify that while helping to ensure that addictive and harmful substances remain a priority for law enforcement, really underscoring what devin said earlier. So personal, noncommercial use, law enforcement priority. The idea is that there's more education, there's more clarity, there's more psychological safety for everyone and those. That is often the substrate. In other areas of policy. We've seen where the normalization makes it easier for people to have conversations, ask honest questions, seek education, and consider whether this medicine has a role in their health care routine and in their healing. So one idea is, you know, how do we make it easier for people to have the kind of life changing experiences that I had in 2018 passing this would would support that. So we generously ask you all for your support and for your your hardest questions. Thank you. Did I go over time?

Fine.

Sparkle fingers.

Thank you. Good morning, chair Novick vice chair and members of the committee. My name is max kellerman. I'm a district two resident and the executive director of the Portland psychedelic society, oregon's largest and longest running psychedelic education and community organization. And over the past decade, our community has grown to more than 11,000 Portland area members seeking education, support and responsible approaches to psychedelic use. As both my colleagues have described here, and I'd say one of my greatest privileges of this work is witnessing people who might not otherwise meet find each other through our community. They come from different backgrounds, professions, generations, and life experience. Yet they share this common desire to learn, grow and support one another. I want to emphasize today, as we sit here, that Portland already has a substantial psychedelic economic ecosystem, including licensed facilitators and service centers, physicians, therapists, researchers, recovery advocates, educators, coaches, spiritual leaders, authors, conference organizers, and countless portlanders exploring new pathways for healing and well-being. And together, they are helping address some of the very challenges our city continues to face, including depression, anxiety, ptsd, addiction, grief, and social isolation. This ecosystem is already here, and it continues to grow. And Portland, as nate mentioned, is not acting alone. More than two dozen jurisdictions across the country, including seattle, san francisco, denver, minneapolis, Washington, d.c. Have adopted similar approaches, while states, universities, health care systems, federal agencies and policy makers are increasingly establishing advisory bodies, task forces and commissions to help navigate this rapidly evolving psychedelic landscape. The proposed Portland psychedelics advisory commission would be a municipal adaptation of this emerging governance model, and Portland is uniquely positioned to benefit from it. Because we already have practitioners, researchers, educators, service providers, and community organizations with decades of experience supporting these conversations. And one of the greatest benefits of this proposal is its potential. As a councilor Morillo described, is to help destigmatize and demystify these conversations while creating a constructive framework for education, public engagement and informed decision making. Public interest in psychedelics continues to grow, whether through scientific research, health care discussions, media coverage, and personal experience. When people of all backgrounds feel safe asking questions and learning from qualified professionals and trusted community resources, better outcomes become possible. Stigma and silence rarely improve public health or public safety, but education does, and perhaps there's a reason why many people aren't in this room today. Portland has been a long leader in innovation and community based solutions. This proposal creates greater clarity around an issue that is already present in our community and supports a future where education, safety and informed decision making can thrive. So I just want to say thank you for your consideration and encourage your support.

Thank you, councilor Morillo, do you have any more invited testimony? Should we move on to public testimony? Public testimony? All right. Oh, and Kanal has a technical question. Sorry.

Yeah. So for the sponsor for this is really something that devin mentioned, but anyone can answer it. There's reference to the sunset provisions of the a, b, c project that we adopted last year as it relates to the commission, but it multiple times. And this says ongoing. So I just wanted to understand the intention here as to whether or not the. You know, and I'll be very specific here in exhibit a 14 b one 4010 part c, it says establishing an ongoing advisory body. And in exhibit b it refers to ongoing several times. So my understanding from the a, b, c project is that if it says nothing, there's a mandatory sunset, but that it can be explicitly created as ongoing through this process. And so my understanding is that the text would create it in an ongoing way. Is that in line with the the legislative intent here?

Councilor thank you for the question. Yeah, it is for the record, devin mullins, policy manager for councilor. Elana pirtle-guiney that that was not my read of the what was adopted by council last year on abc's my read. And I'm trying to find the specific provision now was that all ongoing advisory bodies had to come up for renewal after four years, and council could take an explicit action that renewed them. That was the intent at which we drafted it with council, you know, leaving that discretion to council to decide whether or not that, after four years, it was worth making that renewal. If if that is an incorrect interpretation of it, which I can certainly check, we can add clarity to the text.

I might be wrong on the as well. I'll check.

If I can add something. Chair Novick councilor Kanal. Under the commission membership section sub f. It does say that the pac will continue as an ongoing advisory body unless terminated by the city council. So the council has the right to terminate the body when they feel that the work is completed.

Right. So that would involve a different council action. I'm asking about whether or not it would be automatic sunset provisions would apply, which we adopted last year. Thanks.

Councilor Zimmerman.

Eric Zimmerman: I think.

I can hold questions. I think let's let the public stuff come out. And then I think we'll have a larger discussion. I've got a lot of questions, but I think I'd rather hear from the public first. Thanks.

All right.

I can't wait.

Move on to public testimony.

Thank you. I will call folks up in groups of three. For those testifying in person, you will see a timer countdown displayed on the monitor in front of the testimony table. For those testifying virtually, the timer is displayed in zoom. You will hear the timer chime twice. Once is a warning when 30s are left, and the second time when your time is up. Finally, before you begin, please state your name for the record. Thank you. First up, we have jennifer lucht, followed by henry fields and yelena belyakova. And you can start whenever you get to the table.

Thank you.

Hello. Very grateful for all of you and I'm grateful for the time today. Hi, my name is jennifer lucht. I'm a district three resident, a decolonial community psychologist, communication strategist, and a phd candidate. My research focuses on the benefits of psychedelic plants and fungi for healing, and how communities can leverage public health initiatives to reduce harm and create safety for individuals and collective healing. In my personal journey with natural psychedelics, these medicines have helped me heal from depression and anxiety. When pharmaceutical interventions wouldn't work in my family and my community, I've seen psychedelics save lives and end cycles of addiction. I can confidently say that there are people in my life that would not be here today if it weren't for these natural medicines. They have impacted me so much so that six years ago, I decided to shift careers to work in this space and went back to school to get my master's in psychology. As a straight, state trained psychedelic facilitator, I've experienced firsthand how community led education on safety, preparation and integration can protect community members, and how we can provide them with the information and support they need to safely navigate these experiences with natural psychedelic medicines. For many portlanders, it can be difficult to find the information and support they need out of fear of retaliation or prosecution. We must all accept that both regulated and non-regulated substance use exists, exists in our society, and we should choose to minimize the harmful effects rather than simply ignore or condemn them. When we accept that noncommercial personal use of these substances exists in our city and work to promote education and safety, we create more protections for folks and position communities as the experts of their own healing. The public education components of this policy allow us to tap in to both traditional knowledge and modern research around these natural medicines, relying on the cross-cultural communities that have been intentionally working with these substances, some for hundreds of thousands of years. Positioning Portland as a leader in safe psychedelic policy that meets community members where they're at. This policy allows us to codify a cultural, cultural norm that already exists in this city by creating more education and safety around these medicines, we are listening to some of our Portland community's real needs and prioritizing quality of individual and community well-being. This is why the council should vote yes. Thank you again.

Henry's online. Henry, you can unmute and begin your testimony.

Hi, councilors and chair. My name is henry fields. Thank you for your time. I am a licensed psilocybin facilitator in Oregon. I found that that substance was extremely useful for helping me with my personal addiction, as well as depression. And I'm a spiritual seeker. So whatever that is you want to name. When people truly ask to be connected in that way. I found that psilocybin was extremely useful in that I'm also a steward of an access fund called the inward dive fund, which is directed to work with the formerly incarcerated and the population that's affected by the stress and trauma from dealing with the criminal justice system. So namely formerly incarcerated, but also family members and advocates in the space. So I help educate about the efficacy of psilocybin as well as remove the financial barrier. What I will say is that in speaking to that population, there are two energies. One is of really rapt attention and curiosity about using it in a healing way, and the other is just fear. Just fear of anything to do with drug, drug, drug laws, sentencing. So I, I've found that speaking about a legal framework, it's starting to soften some of that apprehension and population that really could be serviced by using the substance is starting to change their relationship to how they think about it. So a measure that's being considered today where that fear could be reduced so that people could even feel like they're qualified to start this conversation or start the path of curiosity, I think would be extremely useful. Thank you very much for your time.

Good morning. My name is yelena belova. I'm a district one resident here today in support of the ordinance you have before you. For more than a decade, I carried a depression so heavy I did not believe I would survive it. I came to this country ten years old with my family, but with no one to help me navigate the language or the country or the inside of my own head. After a series of traumatic events, asking another human being for help did not feel safe. Naturally occurring psychedelics saved my life. Psychedelics were a resource when no other resource was available. They are how I found enough healing to face what was inside me. Psychedelics are how I learned to trust the person enough to ask for help, to find a therapist, a doctor, and community. I'm standing here today because of natural psychedelics. For a long time, I was afraid to say that out loud. And I'm not the only one. There are people in this room, people in your districts who have a story like mine, who will never tell it. Some are afraid of their doctor, their employer, their family, and law enforcement, and some are afraid of the medicine itself because they have been told their whole lives that the thing that could save them is dangerous, criminal, and shameful. So they go through it alone, and the people who could help them never hear them. You have already heard what the ordinance does and does not do, and I'm here to tell you what real healing work looks like. When people are not afraid. It looks like being able to say out loud what helped you? It looks like a community that can support someone through hard process. It looks like doing the deepest work of your life without having to hide it. Portlanders are already doing this work, and right now, without clear education, they do it with less support and more risk. This ordinance lets them do it safely and without fear. That is psychological safety. That is public health, and that is public safety. That is how people like me stop healing and silence. I'm asking this committee to vote yes. So Portland residents get to heal out loud safely. Thank you.

Next we have peggy parks, sarah hunnicutt, and steven maris.

Good afternoon council. My name is peggy parks. I am a Portland resident, a senior citizen and a volunteer with the Portland psychedelic society. Thank you for the opportunity to share my perspective today with you. My first experience with psychedelics was when I was 19 years old. That experience was not recreational in the way many people imagine. It was profound, deeply meaningful and spiritual. It gave me a sense of connection to other people, to nature, and to something larger than myself. More than 50 years later, I still remember it as one of the most significant experiences of my life. At 77 years old, I've watched our understanding of these substances evolve over nearly six decades, and I believe it is time for our policies to reflect both the evidence and the lived experience of responsible adults. Like many people of my generation, I grew up through the decades of the war on drugs. When discussion of psychedelics was largely replaced by fear and stigma. Yet in recent years, research and personal experience have encouraged many of us to take a second look. As a senior, I have seen growing interest among older adults. Many people my age are facing grief, loss, serious illness, and questions about aging and mortality. Author and journalist michael pollan has written that psychedelic experiences can help people see death, quote, not as a wall, but as a horizon, unquote. That simple idea resonates deeply with me. Many seniors are seeking greater peace, connection, and acceptance as they navigate the later chapters of life, and for some, psychedelic experiences may offer a meaningful path toward those goals. This measure is not about encouraging use. It's about prioritizing education, safety, and sensible law enforcement. It allows our community to focus resources where they are most needed, while reducing the harms that can come from criminalization. I respectfully ask you to support this measure. Thank you for your time, your service to Portland, and the opportunity to make these comments today.

Chair.

Vice chair, Morillo and members of the committee. My name is sarah hunnicutt. I'm a district three resident, a licensed psilocybin facilitator, and the lead of something called soul liberation fund, which is a scholarship program for folks who have experienced houselessness and addiction to receive psilocybin services. At 13, I was shunned, excuse me, from my fundamentalist community. By 10th grade, I was out of school and my parents home with very little direction or support. The stories from the pulpit were clear about what happened to people like me, abandonment by family, addiction and jail. My lived experience includes all of that. I'm here today without shame, largely because of the healing and self-acceptance that I've found through plant based psychedelics. I went on to earn a master's degree in economics and have supported the development of some of the world's largest utility scale renewable energy. Someone who witnessed my journey donated funds to create that scholarship program for others who've struggled with addiction and homelessness because they saw what was possible. These medicines are a miracle for the recovery community. After knee surgery, I became dependent on opioids, as many did as many Americans did. We were overprescribed and under-supported. Plant medicine was part of my path back. My clients in the oregon's regulated psilocybin model aren't just seeking a substance. They're seeking what I needed to, which is connection and community. These medicines carry a low likelihood of harm to self, others, and addiction, and that is based on peer reviewed scientific studies. I came up in the rave scene. I witnessed its beauty and its underbelly. I also lost friends along the way. Much of that harm was compounded by secrecy, because telling the truth had legal consequences. It stayed hidden, and people suffered for it, and I suffered for it. Real equity is looking around and seeing who is at the table, who isn't at the table and doesn't have the resources, and then doing the work to change that, you have the chance to be a part of history today. Help make it safer for our lights to shine, so that those of us who have found our way back can become beacons for those who are still lost, please vote yes.

Good afternoon. My name is stephen morris. I've lived in the Portland area for roughly half my life. I work as a cpa. I care about this ordinance because I've had the personal benefit from working with natural psychedelic medicines within cultures where it's intertwined and ingrained in both personal and community healing. My story is fairly common. One, I quit drinking and was looking for a better way, a better path forward. I wanted to be a better parent, better son, better community member. I started with ketamine assisted psychotherapy in Portland. In addition to. In addition to this, I was seeking to experience other psychedelics and. Within cultures that have long traditions of knowledge passed down through the generations. This path led me to mexico and peru. My life has been impacted profoundly and changed for the better. It's been around six years since my last drink, and I credit in part, my work with the natural psychedelics for this. While I've also participated in the measure 109 regulated framework for psilocybin, I've been able to firsthand see how community and culture can pass on these traditions, practices, and knowledge to access the healing potential of psychedelics to access it in a safe way. I also know there would be some in Portland that may not have the time or the money to travel, and to follow the same path that I've gone down. I thank you for your time and hope you will vote yes for a couple reasons. First, psychedelics may not be for everyone. They also may not be a cure all, but they are a beautiful medicine. Second, the people of Portland deserve the potential for healing and the autonomy to explore their consciousness. They deserve this without the fear of prosecution or the stigma attached. Thank you.

Thank you.

And that concludes testimony.

All right. Councilor Zimmerman has a whole raft of questions. Want to start asking them.

Okay. I won't make any assumptions that we're going to get through this since it's only 13 minutes to the end. Okay. So. Let's if you wouldn't mind, I'll start with a couple. And I know there are others, but with the invited testimony, nathan and others in come on up. So. I want to. With respect to psychedelics, are there any evidence about a physical addiction as it relates to psychedelics?

Well, yeah, there's evidence that it's low risk of addiction, low risk, very low risk. There is a chart that does the risk profile of addiction for common substances, alcohol being number one. Okay. Psilocybin pretty much at the very bottom. Okay. And so.

What other kind of things are up near alcohol.

Fentanyl, heroin, opioids, even cannabis is above psilocybin.

Caffeine is kind of high up there. Of course, you know, risk profile. Risk profile. Yeah. Me too. Yeah. It's my main drug risk profile is different than addiction. But but in terms of addiction, they're up there. What we're talking about specifically naturally occurring non-synthetic psychedelics as close as it is responsible to you can't say non-addictive because like caffeine food, but it's almost it's as far away as you can almost get natural psychedelics.

Yeah.

And I'm going to ask a lot of questions. So if you're a member of the media, I would encourage you to really lock in now, right? In terms of there's a responsibility to cover this the right way. So not just my questions, but others, because headline media on this type of topic won't do us any good. So. Bringing a little levity, I thought that the first time that I'd only heard the word fentanyl was in the current era. I'm a fan of the office. It turns out that there's an episode where creed talks about fentanyl in the hospital as a thing that was that was given to a person for pain. Okay, you live and learn. I didn't realize, right, that fentanyl until the last few years, I didn't realize it was actually a drug that wasn't just a street drug. So you mentioned natural psychedelics. Our country is going through a hell right now because of a synthetic adaptation to fentanyl that has hit our streets. We still use the word fentanyl, but it's obviously something else. So can you talk a little bit about your emphasis that I see time and time again with the word natural psychedelics, in what your aim is with that word in front of the word psychedelics?

Yeah.

This simply grow from nature, right? It's a fungi or a plant. So there's no processing or minimal processing. There is no chemistry involved. It's literally taking what nature grows naturally and letting it dry. So it can be easy to store and consume. That's as simple as that. And that's why we want to emphasize natural because of it's accessible for folks to do this on their own. There's no degrees in chemistry or any processes they need to learn beyond just learning how to store plants, essentially.

Okay.

Can I underscore the natural to max's point means grows out of the ground. So what do we picture here? A picture, a cactus, like literally one of the cactuses that people used to call yuma, which we also call san pedro. You can find them at some hardware stores like home depot. And if you have a lot, it produces mescaline, the same active ingredient that's found in peyote, which different native folks in this continent had used for likely millennia. Best we can tell. And so mushrooms, cactuses, I would love a bunch of visual aids, you know, because it's like pretty, you know, it's like beautiful plants.

We continue.

This conversation. I might actually ask you to bring those.

I'd love to bring some visual aids. Yeah. And so the reason we say natural too is because there are synthetic psychedelics, which are incredible. And some of these things are the reason that we just had that excellent executive order from the oval office. And those things have higher risk profiles than what we're talking about. Still non-addictive, but have higher risk profiles. What we're talking about have as close to little risk profile as possible. And so that's another reason for the word natural.

I'm going to, since there are only seven minutes, I'm going to go ahead and reserve. I know there are a few other people in the queue, but I do take your commitment to continuing this with another meeting because I think this will be a robust conversation. So thank you guys.

Councilor Smith.

Loretta Smith: Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you all for coming and giving us a presentation. Is this by accident that we don't have any additional mainstream health care providers and or anyone from the public safety service area.

By accident.

Like speaking today? No. No accident.

It was it was on purpose.

Well, no intention applied. There are members of our group and our committee who are members of public safety and our health care professionals. Some folks are here and most people are not.

So I guess I should be more specific. Thank you. Is there anyone from Multnomah county who does mental health? Is there anyone from our public safety service area who could also offer some some remarks on this? Because I'll tell you what I'm trying to figure out, and I know nothing about this other than just what I've been briefed on in my office. So if I understand this correctly, the psychedelics, right, they're banned by federal, state and local law at this point.

With the exclusion of psilocybin at the state level. Here in Oregon, there is a department of the Oregon health authority called the Oregon psilocybin services, which was created through that measure 109 and 2020 and began. And in fact, the Oregon health authority just released their. It's a four year plan. It's called their state health improvement plan. And included in that, it's a whole list of health improvement plans, but they've included the destigmatization of psilocybin as part of that four year priority plan. And so they're very much engaged with this topic as well. But it's at the state level.

Thank you. And, mr. Howard, you had said earlier that you've been working on this for six years. Were you talking about working within city hall to try to get this passed with? You were getting pushback. That's why I hadn't passed in the past.

I would say less pushback and more just a lot of conversation about why this, why is it important? We have so many other issues, you know, build more housing. And really the the reason why it's moved this slowly. And we've, we've worked on versions of this that have passed in other cities, seattle included is largely because the two sponsors at the time. Weren't reelected when we changed forms of government. And so we restarted and we essentially pushed pause. So pushback.

So they obviously couldn't get three votes in the previous council for this.

There was a there was a as close to as a three vote, maybe more, but not a consensus that it was the right time to bring it forth.

So you couldn't get three votes at that time to do it. Couldn't get most anything. It's timing. Things are timing. And you have 12 new fresh ears to listen to this. But I want to I'm trying to get get some place. Thank you, officer.

Aye, Morillo councilor for the record. Deputy chief brian hughes.

How are you?

Good.

Thank you. So I'm trying to figure out what this ordinance is actually solving for. Is there a a rise of police activity for psychedelics at this at this time?

So. Councilor. No, there is not a rise in enforcement on psychedelics at this time. And I just want to echo that we have been. Briefed in by councilor Pirtle-guiney staff on the ordinance and consulted on it. And I think where you were going earlier about the issues around state law, there are still some some federal laws surrounding some of these substances and being scheduled. So for that reason, I, I believe at this point, the police bureau stance on this would have to be neutral, but.

That's what I'm trying to find out. If any of you have watched me before, whether it be the mask ban or or other things, I'm really concerned about, if we are breaking the law, state, federal, if we are being constitutional and constitutional by putting things forward. And if this is something and I and I did see your stuff, mr. Howard, of other places in colorado that have done this, and I'm trying to figure out and I'm trying to figure out if we're on the right side of this, if this is the right place for this to start. Now, in considering this is a huge health care issue because I've, I listened to a lot of the comments, and the young lady said that she had tried everything and then she got assessed and she started taking the psychedelics. And so I'm. If this is illegal, how can you refer people to this? If this is an illegal substance? And I because I couldn't ask her any further questions, I didn't. But I'm trying to figure out how are people learning about this or even its use if it is an illegal substance? I don't do any of this stuff, so I don't know how folks get it or how folks are are told to use it because it's good for medical reasons. But I'm just trying to figure out how are they evaluating that? Is there some medical data that's out there that we can look to? Is there something in Multnomah county that we can look to, to say, this is why they're being referred to this for a reason. So, mr. Howard.

The answer is yes, we can supply that. And there's really outstanding questions. There's a few in there. I would say that like headline answer to the degree there's a through line there to is individuals are finding this is the personal use component, this cacti or mushrooms essentially through friends and family. And there is what is it, 56 year since the scheduling act began the drug war, the government had had its own evidence, its own study, saying some of these things were nontoxic and as close to non-addictive as possible. They still made them schedule one. Which is why, to your other question, the answer is yes. It's still illegal showing no medical value. Right. And then the guy who crafted that in the oval office was caught on tape saying, we did that to, quote, control hippies and black folks. And so there's a, there's a through line of not having like, the science is on our side, but the government is not caught up. And so, and it is increasingly seen to be the most compelling treatment for people with smoking cessation, ptsd, anxiety. So it's so strong that people are willing to essentially violate a law, right. And they're getting it through friends and family. And so henry, who talked earlier, who I work with closely, the 20 person retreat that we're putting on next month is all with folks, folks who previously incarcerated or justice impacted, meaning they had friends or family who served time. And those are all people who've found it through word of mouth and are coming here to Oregon for that.

Can can I just.

I just have one last question. So here's what I'm concerned about, chief. I'm concerned if we pass something like this and say, okay, police are no longer going to this is going to be a low priority that it's going to cause. It's going to be an opening up the floodgates where it's going to give people the the encouragement to do more. And that's what I'm concerned about, particularly since I don't have the medical data that backs up the use that people are. And I don't doubt that people are being treated for mental health issues and other things, and that there and that it has helped them because they're testifying to that. I have no other reason to believe them what they say. But I'm concerned that there's going to be a if if they know the police are going to turn their head about something, are you are you concerned about that?

And I just need to add, we're at time. So, chief, if you'd answer that quickly and then councilor Kanal something you want to put on the record and then we'll draw to a close. Okay?

Yes, counselor, I can. I can assure you that as it as it stands right now, this is already a low priority for the police bureau. I don't have the statistics on the seizures, but it's a pretty low priority at this time. And I can assure you that going forward, the direction will be in line with alignment with the the ordinance, that it remain a low priority for enforcement.

And if it is such a low priority now, why do we need an ordinance?

You want. I'd love to answer that. So when we're talking about psychological safety and codifying.

Cultural norms, I'm sorry.

We need to cut we need to cut this off. Councilor Kanal quickly.

Sameer Kanal: Thank you. I'll just put this on the record very briefly, because I think we don't have time to talk about it. I worked in advisory bodies. I staffed them for a couple years. And this is where why the level of importance I'm going to give to this comment. I am very interested in the the reasoning for this very supportive broadly at this moment, I want to get more information about the ordinance and about exhibit a. I have lots and lots of concerns about exhibit b, and my vote will probably be contingent on whether or not we can resolve those in the next round of this. I do not want to set volunteers up to fail, and I am the way it's written right now. I think that's the best case scenario in the creation of the of the advisory body. Thanks.

Thank you everybody. And we'll continue this conversation in a later meeting. And now this meeting of the community and public safety committee is adjourned.

Thank you everybody. That was fun. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you nate.