[3:09] Yeah. Water rescue.
>> All right, we'll call our work session
[3:13] to order. Have a couple things to talk
about tonight. First up is a request by
[3:18] councelor Moresy to uh consider further
council discussion regarding flidation
[3:24] of the city water system.
>> Great.
[3:26] » There you go.
>> Thank you. I have a statement. I'll try
[3:29] to hustle through it. Then I know
councelor And throw wants to say
[3:32] something and possibly councelor
Monttero.
[3:36] All right. Tonight I'd like to speak
about city of Seaside's water flidation
[3:40] policy. It's history. A few facts worth
knowing and a request I'll bring as a
[3:44] motion later this evening. So how we got
here the 1984 decision. Thank you
[3:49] Spencer and Kim for digging into this
for me. In 1984 seaside voters approved
[3:54] adding fluoride to the public water
supply. I want to be precise about that
[3:59] history because how the decision was
made matters as much as the decision
[4:02] itself. On February 13th, 1984, this
council faced a choice. Adopt flidation
[4:08] by ordinance or refer the question to
the voters. One counselor argued that
[4:12] the council could and should simply
enact it. But the council chose a
[4:16] different path. Council President Robert
Miller said the matter should be put to
[4:20] a vote of the people, in his words, so
it would be supported instead of the
[4:23] council attempting to mandate it. The
council then voted unanimously to send
[4:27] it to the ballot. On March 27th, 1984,
Seaside held a special election. The
[4:32] measure, shall the city of Seaside Place
fluoride in the city water system,
[4:36] passed, 576 to 402. About 978 residents
voted. Roughly 59% said yes and we have
[4:44] fluidated ever since. I start here
because the way that decision was made
[4:48] is important. Referred by the council,
decided by voters. Now, a few facts
[4:52] about water fluidation. Uh, fluoride
does not improve water purity or safety.
[4:57] Unlike chlorine, which disinfects,
fluoride serves no treatment purpose. It
[5:02] does not make our water cleaner or safer
to drink. Number two, its only purpose
[5:06] is dental to reduce tooth decay. That
was the stated purpose on the 1984
[5:11] ballot and it remains the sole rationale
today. It is not the natural occurring
[5:16] mineral form. I think there's a lot of
confusion around this. Uh the fluoride
[5:20] we add is a manufactured industrial
chemical called sodium fluoride produced
[5:25] from hydrophalic acid and in our case
imported from a chemical manufacturer in
[5:30] China. Uh number four cost money. The
city pays approximately 10,000 a year to
[5:34] purchase this chemical according to our
great finance director Zack Fleck. The
[5:39] benefits are modest and contested. So
some studies do suggest a small but real
[5:44] reduction in cavities. Other studies
show no statistical change. But the most
[5:47] rigorous recent review found the
benefits today is much smaller than it
[5:51] was a decade ago now that dental hygiene
and fluoride toothpaste are universal.
[5:56] The potential harms I'm going to try to
state these carefully and factually. So
[5:59] dental fluorosis uh that's a streaking
of children's tooth and animal is one
[6:03] that effects no one disputes at the
levels we use. The leading review
[6:07] estimate affects roughly one in eight
people in Florida communities.
[6:12] Lower IQ in children. In 2024, the
federal national toxicology program
[6:16] concluded with moderate confidence that
higher fluoride exposure is associated
[6:21] with lower IQ in children. And in
September of 2024, a federal court ruled
[6:25] that fluidation at the current levels
poses unreasonable risk and order the
[6:28] EPA to act. Bone effects. Fluoride
accumulates in the skeleton over a
[6:33] lifetime. It's cumulative and at higher
doses, it's linked to skeletal changes
[6:37] and fracture risk. Thyroid functions.
Some studies at higher exposures suggest
[6:42] effects on thyroid home hormones. Vulner
groups, it affects bottlefed infants
[6:47] more because they're getting too much of
it in their bottle milk. Uh even the
[6:51] American Dental Association suggested
lower fluoride water as an option.
[6:54] People with kidney disease have a hard
time processing it. Heavy water drinkers
[6:58] whose dose rises every time they
consume. Uh to be fair, the strongest of
[7:03] this evidence is at concentrations
higher than what we currently put in the
[7:06] water. And credible experts disagree on
whether this is good or bad. But many
[7:11] credible institutions, including a
federal court and a federal toxicology
[7:15] program among them, have reopened the
question we considered closed in 1984.
[7:20] When the experts stop agreeing, the
public deserves to weigh in. One local
[7:24] fact, since 2015, federal health
authorities have recommended a fluoride
[7:28] level of 007 milligrams per liter.
Seaside's most recent reported level,
[7:33] this was a sample in 2021, was about
1.04 04 milligrams per liter above that
[7:37] recommendation. This alone warrants a
closer look by staff. Okay. Why I'm
[7:42] raising this now? So I bring this
forward because it's been 42 years since
[7:45] this council and seaside residents had a
say. I'd like to bring the topic back
[7:49] and open it up to our residents, to
dentists, and to public health experts.
[7:52] Two things to keep in mind. This is
entirely our decision. So Oregon does
[7:56] not mandate fluoride. Seaside has the
full authority to continue it, to end
[8:00] it, or to return it to voters. Two,
seaside is not an outliner for asking.
[8:05] Roughly 74% of Oregonians on public
water systems do not have fluidated
[8:10] water, including our neighbor to the
south can of beach. Only about 26% do.
[8:16] And this conversation is happening all
around us. In just the last few years,
[8:20] Oregon communities have taken this up
again and again. Sweet Home Council
[8:23] voted to remove it 2025. Lebanon voted
to end their flidation program. The
[8:28] voters did in 2024. Hillsboro voters
rejected add again in 2024. Portland,
[8:33] the largest city in Oregon, does not add
Florida and they rejected it again in
[8:37] 2013. And then Warrington, right next
door up the road, voters chose to keep
[8:42] it in 2026. The lesson isn't which way
they went. Some kept it, some mended it.
[8:46] The lesson is of community after
community decided deserves a fresh
[8:50] public decision and let their people
make it. All right. My biggest concern,
[8:54] it's a policy no one can opt out of.
So, just to name it plainly, the policy
[9:00] has real consequence for residents who
are worried about this additive because
[9:04] there is no way to opt out of it.
Everyone drinks water. We bathe in it.
[9:07] We cook with it, water our gardens and
lawns with it. At a coffee shop or
[9:11] restaurant in town, you're drinking it
too, whether you know it or not. A
[9:14] resident who has read the recent science
and decides that they want to avoid it
[9:19] cannot. as long as the city adds it for
everyone. A policy this sweeping with
[9:24] potential second order effects deserves
closer and current examination. And
[9:28] there is a related problem. Even among
those who drink it, there's actually no
[9:32] way to control the dose. So fluidation
sets a concentration in the water at the
[9:36] the city level and not a dose per
person. So everyone drinks different
[9:40] amounts of water. And a construction
worker, an athlete who's drinking
[9:44] gallons a day is going to get far more
than someone who just drinks a glass or
[9:47] two a day. a large adult, a small child,
someone with a medical condition that
[9:51] makes them drink more. All receive very
different amounts from the same tap is
[9:55] unlike any medication a doctor would
ever prescribe where the dose is matched
[9:59] to the person. Here concentration is
fixed and the dose is left to chance. So
[10:03] what I'm asking tonight, I'm not asking
anyone to decide tonight whether flood
[10:08] stays or goes or is good or bad. What
I'm saying is that a policy decision of
[10:11] this magnitude, one that reaches every
person that drinks our water, deserves
[10:15] our time and attention, deserves input,
and the generation living with it today.
[10:19] The original decision was made 42 years
ago. Very few people who made it are
[10:23] still here to speak to it. The gen this
generation of Seaside deserves a vote.
[10:28] No decision needs to be made tonight,
but later this evening, I will make a
[10:32] motion to bring the issue back to a full
agenda so the staff can analyze it and
[10:36] with a chance for our residents or
dentists health experts to be heard. And
[10:40] I'll hope that you will join me in
giving them this opportunity.
[10:44] » Thank you.
>> Your cost estimate, it's about actually
[10:49] two to three times that the 10,000.
actually closer to 20 to 30,000 after
[10:55] you do the permitting stability. Okay.
Pumps, all the systems.
[10:59] » I think that was just the cost of the
actual
[11:01] » just the cost of the material. You're
right about that.
[11:03] » I'll update that.
>> The whole fluoride system and the
[11:06] permitting is 20 to 30,000 a year.
>> Thank you for that. Uh councelor. Yeah,
[11:14] I I support everything you said and you
hit a lot of the high spots that I was
[11:19] going to bring up. And uh I'm just going
to reiterate a couple of things. Uh
[11:24] there are several states that recently
reconsidered
[11:27] or prohibited fluoridation and federal
agencies have begun re-examining aspects
[11:32] of fluoride policy particularly
regarding ingested fluoride products for
[11:37] our children and a broader health
questions. Uh Oregon as you pointed out,
[11:43] remains one of the least fluidated
states in the nation, ranking near the
[11:46] bottom of the percentage of residents
receiving fluoridated community water.
[11:51] Uh some points, uh when this was rolled
out in the 1950s, many Americans had no
[11:57] regular dentist. Uh fluoride toothpaste
wasn't common place. Dental sealants
[12:02] didn't exist. Oral health education was
limited. Sugar consumption patterns were
[12:07] different. Today, fluoride toothpaste is
nearly universal. Fluoride mouth rinses
[12:14] and professional treatments are readily
available. Sealants protect children's
[12:18] teeth. Preventive dentistry is standard
practice. Even on every tube of fluoride
[12:25] toothpaste, it reminds us not to swallow
it. That naturally leads many people to
[12:30] ask reasonable questions about adding
fluoride to the drinking water. Those
[12:34] questions deserve respectful discussion.
I'm asking that we place the topic on a
[12:40] future agenda for discussion. Whether
someone supports fluidation or opposes
[12:45] it isn't really the point. Public policy
shouldn't be placed on a shelf for 75
[12:52] years and never looked at again.
Community water flidation began in the
[12:57] 40s and became federal policy in the
50s. At that time, dentistry, nutrition,
[13:02] preventive dental care, it all looked
very different than it does today. We
[13:07] now have fluoride toothpastes, fluoride
rinses, dental sealants, routine
[13:10] cleanings, and much better public
education about oral health. At the same
[13:16] time, communities across the country are
once again asking whether this remains
[13:20] the right public policy. States are
reconsidering it. Federal agencies are
[13:26] reviewing aspects of fluoride policy.
Regardless of where each of us stands,
[13:31] it's fair to acknowledge that this
conversation is happening nationwide.
[13:36] I believe asking questions is exactly
what good government is supposed to do.
[13:42] If after reviewing the facts, our
community decides flidation should
[13:46] continue, then so be it. If our
community decides otherwise, then it
[13:51] should be respected as well. Our role
isn't to decide that for the people
[13:56] today. Our role is to ensure that they
have the opportunity to hear the facts,
[14:02] that they have the opportunity to ask
questions and ultimately make an
[14:07] informed decision. That's why I'm
supporting placing this issue on a
[14:11] future agenda and if appropriate
allowing the voters of Seaside to
[14:15] decide.
Our responsibility is not to defend
[14:19] yesterday's decisions. It's to make sure
that they're still the right decisions
[14:24] for today.
[14:30] Well, this couldn't be more timely
because uh as you know, I had my
[14:34] orientation uh dance card over the past
week and a half and as soon as uh I went
[14:40] up to the water treatment plant and met
with Ron and I took notes specifically
[14:46] about the fluoride and the next morning
I'm in the shower and we know what
[14:53] happens when we're in the shower. We
think
[14:56] » we well we we hope we know. So I I came
up with this and then all of a sudden
[15:02] this is on the agenda. So I appreciate
it. Uh the seaside water use and
[15:06] fluoride fluoride treatment cost
analysis. The following is ba is based
[15:11] on the seaside residential population of
seven roughly 7,300 plus 2700 visitors
[15:17] in out of city users for a total of
10,000 person average daily population
[15:23] outside of high season. So as you can
find this information anywhere, the
[15:28] typical water use per person uh is
approximately 100 gallons per day and
[15:35] that's laundry, dishes, shower, toilet,
cleaning, washing your car, whatever
[15:39] you're doing. Uh and the daily household
per person water usage for drinking and
[15:45] cooking is anywhere from one to 2%. So
the left hand column is if you used 1%
[15:52] of water and the right hand column just
shows if you used two gallons of water.
[15:57] So there's your math. So on a basic on a
10,000 population daily total we are
[16:06] using a million gallons approximately
and that is based on the uh city's
[16:12] website report. I'm sure it's goes up
and it goes down but I'm sure it goes
[16:16] more up. So that's our water usage. When
you're looking at the fluoride itself,
[16:22] these 50 lb bags come in a pallet with
50 and so they're approximately $60 per
[16:30] bag and they're put in every other day.
So you could say $30 a day, right? Okay.
[16:37] So $30 a day at 365 days a year is
$10,950.
[16:45] Okay. The annual Cost of fluoride
effectiveness
[16:49] is either 1% or 2%. In other words, the
total consumed discharged fluoridated
[16:57] water based on 1% actually consumed is
99%.
[17:03] You're we're flushing it down the drain.
And if you are a high water drinker,
[17:08] then it's 98%. [clears throat]
So there's asterisks on here. and
[17:15] drinking tap water, food prep, cooking,
boiling pasta, washing vegetables, and
[17:20] making hot soups or beverages uses an
average of 0.1 to one uh gallons per
[17:26] total per person daily. Portion of total
used. The direct oral and culinary use
[17:34] represent only one 1% to one and a half%
of total households.
[17:39] a household is based on uh four people
and that is according to the US EPA.
[17:49] Um
household refrigerators with filtered
[17:53] water dispensers do not remove fluoride.
Fluoride is a mineral. Statistics do not
[18:00] include restaurant ice makers and
restaurant tap water consumed is
[18:04] approximately 1% of uh all water use.
So, I'm coming from a a different angle,
[18:13] but um I just wanted to make everybody
aware and that's that's just for the the
[18:19] sodium fluoride itself and has nothing
to do with the pipes and permits and
[18:23] everything else. So, it's an expense
that we are literally flushing down the
[18:28] drain.
>> Great input. Thank you.
[18:32] » Else want to make a comment before we
move on. I'd be interested in knowing
[18:37] what the sodium fluoride does to our
pipes.
[18:42] Maybe our public works director can tell
us.
[18:48] » I think staff would prefer
to find out what you want to know and
[18:53] come back prepared rather than just off
the cuff
[18:58] remarks. I think and I think that's what
council mores is asking is to bring it
[19:02] back for a larger discussion. But if we
do that, it would be helpful for us to
[19:06] know what should we come prepared with.
Exactly like that.
[19:10] » Yeah, I think that's part of it. But I
know there's also a lot of members of
[19:13] the public that want to speak as well.
So maybe it's a combination of your
[19:16] analysis and then taking testimony.
>> Yeah.
[19:20] » Well, it be like any other item we bring
up.
[19:23] » There'll be a staff report about it,
public comment.
[19:27] Do
>> you have anything?
[19:28] » That that was really where I was headed.
I don't know anything about
[19:33] what what else has to be done besides
not putting this bag in the water. Like
[19:39] does it require any other um
reconfiguration or reconstitution of the
[19:44] way that the water is treated at the
treatment plant the cost to the city?
[19:48] » That would be good question for the
staff report to answer as well.
[19:55] » This has been a a issue that's
come about
[20:01] mo mostly recently. So, um I'm fine with
it going before the public. It's you
[20:08] said it's been a long time and I don't
see any reason why we wouldn't
[20:14] go to the public as opposed to us
deciding. I think we're all agree with
[20:18] that, right?
>> So, um
[20:23] there are there are counterpoints to
some of your points.
[20:29] thing that I always look at is uh dental
plans are not available to a good
[20:36] portion of our public both young and old
because that's not covered under
[20:41] Medicaid and that means a lot of our
kids that are at the poverty level you
[20:47] know they're going to have to find some
place to make sure they get the fluoride
[20:51] and maybe toothpaste is enough
but there's certainly a lot less dental
[20:57] care available
And so hearing from Dennis will be an
[21:01] important part of it. Um we can you know
like you said Warrington just went
[21:05] through this so we can
follow up what they said see what they
[21:10] did and
obviously sees sides of different
[21:14] cities. So we'll see.
>> I do have a motion but I'll I'll bring
[21:18] that out during my comments.
[21:23] » Don't really have to have a motion. Um
>> I'm the that sets the agenda along with
[21:29] you and and staff. So, as far as I'm
concerned, I think we have a consensus
[21:35] that yeah, it's it can become an agenda
item.
[21:38] » Great.
>> Tell you that
[21:40] » not be able to go on the ballot this
year. We don't have enough time for
[21:44] that.
>> So, we'll probably be looking at the May
[21:49] um not sure costwise. That's something
else staff can figure out. um it will
[21:57] cost us something to put it on the
ballot and if it's at a general or a
[22:02] primary election for instance and it's
less it's not nearly as expensive.
[22:08] » I can tell you that um any child that um
is enrolled in Head Start once a year
[22:14] headart offers the fluidation treatment
and the parents can elect not to have
[22:20] it.
>> That's a pretty small amount of kids
[22:24] compared
the hundreds in our primary schools
[22:30] school.
Okay.
[22:33] » Yeah. Just thank you everyone for the
input.
[22:35] » Thank you. Thanks for putting it on the
topic.
[22:39] » Okay. Next up, uh we have a item on the
agenda tonight, consideration of the
[22:44] parks advisory committee's estuary
plaque proposal. So, who's uh going to
[22:52] come up?
I have a uh
[23:00] » I think Nancy and Bill and probably
Paul, do you want to come up as well?
[23:07] » Okay.
[23:10] [clears throat]
>> Make sure you're in a spot where we can
[23:12] catch your lovely faces.
You got him.
[23:25] » You want to introduce this
[23:30] » mayor and council? Um, I'll introduce
this. So, this came this I think was
[23:35] announced. This is the first time I
heard about was at our last meeting. Um
[23:39] but it's been from what I've told been a
discuss topic of discussion for many
[23:44] years at the parks committee level and
so um once I think councelor Ansbro
[23:51] mentioned this um there was a parks
committee is planning a plaque ceremony
[23:56] thought okay let's let's dig a little
deeper into that and councelor Tono um
[24:01] also um asked for more information about
it um and so looked into it and um the
[24:09] parks committee would like to do a
plaque ceremony recognizing Neil Maine
[24:15] at the estuary park and uh they've uh
made some plans and I uh met with Nancy
[24:23] and we had discussion about how and a
reminder about how the parks committee
[24:27] is advisory. So, they want to do
something. That's where they need to get
[24:30] council approval. And we talked about
how the new um updated council ordinance
[24:35] would help with that and provide a
better mechanism for clear
[24:39] communications and direction and things
like that. So, um but um there was time
[24:45] between um the event that they would
like to hold uh and uh well, we have
[24:51] this meeting in between then. So there
was an opportunity for the council to
[24:55] come and listen to the uh idea, the
proposal, ask some questions, provide
[25:01] some feedback, and then if you're
comfortable with it, they can move
[25:04] forward. If you'd like to make
adjustments to it, um that can also
[25:08] happen. Um if you'd like to go a
different direction, that can also
[25:12] happen and we can have that discussion.
And so it's on uh what we can talk about
[25:16] in the work session and then any
decision from the council will be in the
[25:20] regular meeting.
And I've got we got a couple of slides.
[25:25] Um here's I think people are generally
familiar with the Echuary Park across
[25:30] the street from the old high school.
Here is the um advertisement that
[25:38] they've put together. And then Paul can
fill you in a little bit later if you
[25:43] want do want to move forward. His
recommendation is not so much on a rock
[25:47] like that, but on a pedestal. And this
is what we're talking about where it
[25:51] would be located. But I'm going to leave
it on this slide and turn it over to
[25:55] Nancy as our chair of the parks
committee to introduce it and talk a
[25:59] little bit about why the parks committee
would like to pursue this.
[26:06] » I think Paul knows too though. Um, we
need to wrap up about the quarter to
[26:10] six. So again, we're not making any
decisions here, counselors. This is
[26:16] strictly a discussion. We want to make
any decisions, we'll do it in council.
[26:24] » Good evening. I'm Nancy Holmes, chair of
the parks advisory committee, and to my
[26:30] left is Phil Monttero, our vice chair.
Um,
[26:35] in January 2023, the city of side
initiated initiated a complex pro
[26:42] process of purchasing land which is now
known as Esttoary Park. At the same
[26:47] time, several residents came to the
park's advisory meeting, suggesting that
[26:51] if the purchase was successful, Neil
Maine, a local educator,
[26:56] conservationist, and wildlife
photographer, should be recognized for
[27:00] his work in helping protect the vital
coastal estuary and wetland habitats
[27:06] along the Oregon North Coast. During his
31-year tenure at the Seaside School
[27:12] District, he taught biology, created
outdoor programs, connected with our
[27:17] students, connecting our students with
local ecosystems. After his retirement,
[27:23] he was one of the founders of the North
Coast Land Conservancy. That was 40
[27:28] years ago. Based on public
recommendations, the committee looked at
[27:32] several ways to honor Neil for his
lifelong work. In their September 4th,
[27:37] 2025 meeting, the committee and members
of the public suggested creating a
[27:43] plaque as a tribute to Neil. Several of
Neil's former students and friends of
[27:48] the committee designed the beautiful
plaque you see on the flyer.
[27:53] Aware that Neil is in poor is now in
poor health, anonymous donors arranged
[27:59] for the plaque to be cast and presented
to the committee so Neil could be
[28:04] honored during a living tribute ceremony
while he was still able to share in the
[28:09] occasion.
Lexi Halahan has engaged former students
[28:14] and longtime friends of Neils to speak
at a living tribute event planned for 1
[28:21] p.m. Tuesday, August 11th.
Many other friends and former students
[28:27] have been invited to join at the edge of
the beautiful seashore sea side estuary
[28:34] to reminisce about the exploration of
that land and when they had an
[28:39] opportunity to discover its secrets with
their miss with their teacher Miss
[28:43] Germaine. The committee has applied for
a vent permit from the city. Several
[28:49] potential locations for the plaque, both
public and private sites, have been
[28:53] considered. The parks advisory
committee's recommendation to the
[28:57] council tonight would would be best
would it that it would be best mounted
[29:03] on a rock or concrete monument to be
installed at Estuary Park. We can talk
[29:09] more about that. We respectfully request
your approval of our recommendation to
[29:14] provide permanent public recognition of
Neil Main's extraordinary service and
[29:20] lasting tri legacy through the
installation of this commemorative
[29:24] plaque as part of the living tribute.
Thank you.
[29:33] » Bill, anything to add?
>> No, we looked at several locations. Um,
[29:38] we talked to school, you know, school
district is willing to do it. Land
[29:41] conservy's willing to put a plaque
there. We thought it was most
[29:45] appropriate here in Seaside because he
was a seaside teacher and brought a lot
[29:50] of the stu the people that we all know
to the estuary and actually made him
[29:54] aware of what it is and it's expans.
[30:01] » Okay, counselors questions. Uh, I I
guess my only concern would be if we do
[30:07] do an upgrade to Estuary Park, are we
going to put this in a place where it
[30:11] doesn't have to be moved? So, we almost
have to kind of figure out what we're
[30:13] going to do there, I think, before we
place it.
[30:16] » Why don't Why don't we We had that exact
discussion we met on site today. Paul,
[30:20] do you want to walk through your ideas
here and what we talked about when it
[30:24] comes to that? What I told Paul is that
I don't want to design the park around
[30:29] the plaque. So we have to do it in such
a way that it can be relocated if
[30:36] necessary.
>> So uh I talked with my folks and we came
[30:40] up with this idea for a concrete base
for the for the plaque. Um you would sit
[30:46] about a foot underground. So the three
feet below the plaque is really two feet
[30:52] and the five feet's really only going to
stick up four. But, uh, we made it a
[30:57] certain size so we could sling this out
of here very easily and move it around.
[31:02] Um, it would be solid as it was, but it
would be an easy matter just to pick it
[31:07] up and move it wherever we wanted to. If
they had to move it out of the park or
[31:11] if we had to move it to another location
of the park, that's definitely something
[31:14] we can do. It's not beyond the
equipment's uh mass loading and it's not
[31:21] like anchored into a much larger base
which would be far more problematic to
[31:25] move
>> and it's heavy enough that nobody else
[31:29] could do it.
>> Yeah. So, [laughter]
[31:32] it's it's just under 3,000 lbs with that
much concrete. So,
[31:37] » um
>> Wow.
[31:39] » Yeah. It's um it's fairly substantial,
but not too much that our little mini
[31:43] excavator can't pick it up and move it
around. So, that's kind of the the
[31:48] weight limit that we were looking at in
order to kind of uh satisfy the
[31:53] requirements.
[32:01] » Thank you.
>> The estuary is not in good condition. in
[32:05] the extruary park is not in good
condition and um I would suspect that
[32:11] we're going to be doing a lot of work
there in the future. Um so one of the
[32:16] questions I have is because it's not in
good condition and there's activity
[32:23] there
all the time. Um what would be the plan
[32:30] for the um to
maintain
[32:36] this and maintain the plaque? I really
don't want to see something like that
[32:43] defaced.
>> Right. So um we still have um the
[32:49] process of going through maybe some uh
concept with architects on may how we
[32:54] may adjust
work out there. Um the platform does
[32:58] need help. It uh is in disrepair. Um we
have two um staircases going down, both
[33:05] made out of wood. Um I'd like to pull
both out, replace one of them with a
[33:10] concrete one. I think the best thing to
do, uh since Echuary Park has, you know,
[33:15] a natural habitat theme is to keep
everything man-made in one little area.
[33:21] So, as you can see in that photo, right
to the extreme left on the lower photo,
[33:27] that's where the stairs go down right
now. And the other one is way down on
[33:30] the end. I would take the ones on the on
the north end out completely, replace
[33:35] these with uh concrete. Um, since it is
in the flood plane, um, there's going to
[33:42] be permitting. I'd rather not rock the
boat, as you may say, and rebuild on the
[33:47] existing platform that's there, um,
which would be a minimal regulatory
[33:53] impact to us, um, while still
preserving, you know, a wonderful place
[33:58] to observe the estuary.
>> So, if we were to pull out that
[34:02] platform, would we be legally permitted
to put it back in?
[34:05] » Um, well, what's really we're talking
about are the pilings. That's what's in
[34:10] the flood plane. So that's what's
holding the stuff up. We maintain those.
[34:14] They're in good shape. It's it's the top
decking and some of the railings that
[34:17] that need replacement that if we just
did like for like it shouldn't be an
[34:22] issue whatsoever. Um if we want to
upgrade it to say using a composite
[34:28] material like TX or something like that,
we'll have to put additional supports
[34:33] underneath of it. But I don't believe we
would need more pilings. So that which
[34:38] actually impacts the flood plane of the
pilings, I don't believe that we would
[34:42] need additional ones that we could build
the structure off of the existing.
[34:47] » Cross your fingers.
>> What's the cost for the concrete basin?
[34:52] Who's paying for that? Um the cost um
we're talking let's see
[35:00] we're talking like a $100 worth of
concrete
[35:03] um and maybe another $100 worth of just
uh boards for forming it up. So
[35:08] basically $200 worth of material cost
and about a day to put it together. So
[35:15] » So labor for a day.
>> For a day. Yeah.
[35:18] » For one person.
>> Mhm.
[35:21] And then $200
>> pretty much. Yeah, it's a pretty low
[35:25] cost. And that's the doing the boulder.
It would have been really difficult to
[35:30] find a boulder with a face. And the
boulder itself probably would have cost
[35:34] at least $600 to $1,000
after all said and done. So, um I think
[35:39] that the pedestal we can control it
better and it'll make a better mounting
[35:43] surface and we can move it easier, too.
Um a boulder that size would be probably
[35:50] one and a half to two times the weight
of that. So, it'll be a little more
[35:54] difficult and it wouldn't sit, you know,
we can lay this on its end and move it
[35:58] around if we had to move it to another
location. It would be an easy, safer
[36:01] move to this. It's also easier to anchor
[clears throat]
[36:05] um the plaque down to this.
>> So, how high is this above the ground?
[36:10] » Four feet. The top of that will be four
feet. So, the top, it says five feet
[36:15] from the bottom of the top. The bottom
foot will be below grade.
[36:20] » Do we have to worry at all about
skateboarders?
[36:23] » Um,
[36:26] there's not a lot of what I would call
good skateboarding surface right there.
[36:31] We're going to be off of the pavement
anyway. Um, I I think it I'm trying to
[36:39] see how a skateboarder would want to
utilize that.
[36:43] » Um,
>> they do prom. Yeah. Um, we've tried to
[36:48] put it as far back from any of the paved
surfaces so it doesn't um congest any
[36:54] ADA or any people coming in and going.
It also pulls it back far enough so that
[36:59] we went in and rebuilt the platform.
It's not going to be in the way of the
[37:03] construction, too. Plus, it's I think
it's a good prominent location. People
[37:07] come in there and it's right there and
they can see it, but it really doesn't
[37:10] get in the way of, you know, wheelchair
traffic, pedestrian traffic, uh, even
[37:14] bicycles. So,
>> I like that they have it turned around
[37:19] so they have to get out of their cars.
[laughter]
[37:24] » Yeah. But then they're have their back
to the estuary when they're reading it.
[37:30] » They're out of their cars.
>> That's it. Yeah. Um
[37:35] » concrete. Uh we have a lot of concrete
that likes to get tagged.
[37:41] » Yeah. Um
>> aggregate.
[37:45] » We could I mean they'll still tag it. I
mean
[37:49] we can we could try to seal it um as
best as possible to try to mitigate uh
[37:54] you know make it easier to clean. Um
>> can we seal it? We can you can seal
[38:02] concrete to a degree um just so that it
has a more uh the surface is easier to
[38:08] clean.
>> Then you have to redo it.
[38:11] » You have to redo it. So
>> um I don't know if tagging has been an
[38:15] issue out there. Um but again
if you build it they will come.
[38:20] » Yeah.
>> Kind of a thing.
[38:22] So, uh, yeah,
[38:28] there's only so much you can do.
>> And that's the question, and I am
[38:32] certainly not the engineer, so let me
caveat my comment with that.
[38:35] » But, um, it seems like
when you see a plaque somewhere, you
[38:42] don't typically I mean, I'm not like
envisioning it in this big concrete
[38:46] block that has to be moved by an
excavator. It just seems sort of
[38:52] like a heavy installation to me for
something like this. But like I said,
[38:57] I'm not an engineer. I'm hearing the the
the point of making it so heavy is that
[39:02] so it can't be moved or so that nobody
can tamper with it. Is that accurate?
[39:07] » Yeah. So, I mean, it's it's not so heavy
that it can't be moved um by heavy
[39:11] equipment, but it's too heavy to
basically if someone leans up again,
[39:15] it's not going to fall over. It'll
weather better this way. Um and that was
[39:19] the intent. It's like what's going to be
something that's going to be the least
[39:22] amount of maintenance. It's going to
hold up to the weather as best is not
[39:27] going to be, you know, if someone tries
to knock it over. It's going to it's
[39:30] going to be pretty difficult. You'd have
to have several people pushing on it to
[39:33] knock it over. Um but still be able to
move it uh in case it's in the way of a
[39:37] future development of the park. So,
>> okay, that makes sense.
[39:41] » That was our compromise.
>> And what about the maintenance of the
[39:45] plaque itself?
if there's tagging or there's um I I
[39:51] doubt that somebody could remove that
from
[39:54] » it's pretty similar but in fact it's
identical to what you have on prom all
[39:57] along all the along each light post you
have brass plaque or bronze plaque
[40:04] exactly the same
>> even the Louiswis and Clark statue is
[40:09] » yeah so I mean
>> it's no different than that so if
[40:11] somebody were to tag it you can use
acetone on it and it's not going to
[40:15] degrade the brass
for the bronze on it and it's raised
[40:19] lettering. So,
>> good
[40:22] » with a with a rough background. The
photograph is the only thing that might
[40:26] take some special
>> is that sealing? It's sealed already.
[40:31] » I haven't tried estim
[40:35] use a Q-tip because alcohol works
better.
[40:39] » Touch it till it's tagged.
>> Huh?
[40:41] » I can touch it till it's tagged. It's
tagged. That's right. We can replace it.
[40:45] » You could replace Yeah, you can replace
that.
[40:49] » Keep the photo.
>> It's a lovely project.
[40:55] » We do or have in the past anyway.
refinished some of the plaques around
[41:02] town. The one at the turnaround, for
instance, for our uh for the prom was
[41:08] redone. The one out here was redone by
public works a number of years ago.
[41:13] There was I don't remember which guy it
was, but one of them knew how to do
[41:17] that. And they clean up really well. Of
course, you know, it probably been there
[41:22] for 20 years, so
it's possible. Very doable.
[41:31] Well, Neil Maine did a lot for the
community. I think it's definitely
[41:34] deserved. So, I applaud you for making
that effort.
[41:37] » Yeah, we had a lot of people. They
wanted to name the park Neil M. He just
[41:41] said, "No, that's not our job."
>> Easiest,
[41:46] » but that difficult part.
>> We thought the easy ask was a plaque.
[41:50] [laughter]
>> Yes.
[41:52] » Well, and we don't have an official name
for the park. Not yet.
[41:57] » Let's put that on the list.
>> It is.
[42:01] » Okay.
>> Thank you guys for
[42:05] » Thanks.
>> Thank you.
[42:14] » Anything else you want to discuss that's
on tonight's agenda?
[42:23] Just a reminder that we are going into
executive session
[42:28] » to discuss Spencer's review. Uh anything
that's done or said in there will stay
[42:34] in there. It doesn't come back here at
the end. I've written up a
[42:41] general statement that I'll read
assuming you guys agree to the
[42:47] um we will discuss any changes to his
salary or
[42:54] any of the benefits and we do have a
option to discuss there.
[43:02] » This is all standard. This is how we do
it every year.
[43:07] Is this
what it is? I'm trying to
[1:03:10] Call the city council meeting to order
for July 27th. Please rise for the
[1:03:16] pledge of allegiance.
[1:03:21] To the flag of the United States of
America and to
[1:03:27] » nation under Gody
and justice
[1:03:42] » again. Please call the role.
[1:03:47] » Thank you.
[1:03:53] R. Montero here. Coun.
>> Oh, excuse me. Councelor R. Monontto
[1:03:59] » still here.
>> Councelor Baker
[1:04:02] » here.
>> Council President Morsy
[1:04:05] » here.
>> Mayor Wright
[1:04:07] » here.
>> Councelor T. Monttero
[1:04:12] » present.
>> Councelor Ansbro
[1:04:15] » here. You
>> guys are throwing me a loop. N
[1:04:18] » all all present and accounted for. I
have a motion for approval of our agenda
[1:04:23] for tonight.
>> So moved.
[1:04:25] » Second.
>> Council President Morrisy, Councelor
[1:04:28] Baker. All those in favor say I.
>> I. I.
[1:04:31] » Any opposed? Motion carries.
No proclamations tonight. Public
[1:04:37] comments.
Do we have anybody signed up in audience
[1:04:41] for public comments? We have one person
in Zoom.
[1:04:47] didn't didn't make it. Okay,
>> she made it.
[1:04:52] » We had some um file written comments.
They'll be in the minutes.
[1:04:58] Any counselor wish to declare a
potential conflict of interest?
[1:05:03] » Just noting that uh Bill Montero of the
parks advisory board is my husband.
[1:05:09] » Thank you.
[1:05:13] » I have a motion for approval of the
consent agenda. I would move to approve
[1:05:17] the consent agenda.
>> A second.
[1:05:20] » Council President Morsy, Councelor
Baker. All those in favor say I.
[1:05:24] » I.
>> Any opposed? Motion carries,
[1:05:29] but it's nice when we can just write
through. No reports and presentations
[1:05:33] tonight. Uh, city of Seaside Boards,
City Council commissions and committees.
[1:05:38] We still have a vacancy on airport
advisory one, community center
[1:05:44] commission two, planning commission one,
transportation advisory commission one,
[1:05:50] city tree board two, and city council
ward three. A reminder, W three remains
[1:05:57] open until we appoint somebody could
remain open until um the election of
[1:06:04] 2028 unless somebody decides to step up.
Anybody that we do appoint will remain
[1:06:11] in office until then.
[1:06:16] Unfinished business. Ordinance 2026-06
regarding
[1:06:23] amending chapter 31 to establish uh
general provisions for boards,
[1:06:28] commissions, and committees.
[1:06:32] We had this on the agenda before.
Spencer, you got a quick update for us?
[1:06:38] » Yeah. So, this will cover the changes
that the council discussed and wanted
[1:06:43] implemented uh since the last meeting.
The first was to clarify membership and
[1:06:49] terms. So, um you can now serve on up to
two committees. Um the and there was
[1:06:57] some discussion of ordinance versus
policies. The ordinance says you're done
[1:07:01] at the end of your term. The policy may
allow someone to stay on until they're
[1:07:06] reappointed, but that's not contained in
the ordinance, which was believe my
[1:07:11] understanding of the direction.
And then uh their temporary service is
[1:07:16] obviously not a guarantee of uh
reappointment. We want to open it up as
[1:07:21] much as possible. So recruitment and
reappointment. So the city recorder will
[1:07:26] uh begin the process at least 60 days
before the term is expired.
[1:07:32] Um we will basically want to broadcast
this out to as many people as possible
[1:07:36] including the person who's currently in
the role. if they want to continue and
[1:07:41] then the city council may consider all
applicants including the person if they
[1:07:46] choose to be reappointed and they the
discussion there has been you know
[1:07:51] making sure there's an opportunity for
um fresh ideas to come on board.
[1:07:57] There are some questions and comments
and direction on quorum and
[1:08:00] subcommittees. So, we clarified added
clarifying language on what's a quorum
[1:08:05] that they uh cannot take action unless
they're uh officially a quorum and we've
[1:08:11] kind of given some examples in there
what that would be making any decisions
[1:08:15] and whatnot. Um but they could receive
updates. I think it's especially
[1:08:19] important for our committees where
sometimes we're less sure if we will
[1:08:22] have a quorum, but for those who do
come, we want to recognize their efforts
[1:08:27] to come and at least have a meaningful
discussion or an update if we can. And
[1:08:32] then subcommittees, we add the language
to say that the the committees cannot
[1:08:36] create any permanent or standing
subcommittees without first coming
[1:08:40] through to the city council. And then
one I think the the provision there we
[1:08:45] want to be careful of is off the
committee work takes considerable staff
[1:08:50] time and resources and we want to make
sure that we are not multiplying that
[1:08:54] and so there will be a review process as
to whether staff can accommodate that
[1:08:58] whether staff needed and maybe any other
considerations.
[1:09:04] Those are all the changes uh that were
requested to go with the after the first
[1:09:09] reading. And so here's the requested
action and an optional third reading and
[1:09:14] adoption if you choose tonight.
Okay, I'll uh open the floor to anybody
[1:09:21] from the public that wants to make any
comments
[1:09:26] seeing none counselors any comments?
>> I don't have any comments.
[1:09:31] » I'd be interested in knowing if um
anybody from any of the committees has
[1:09:35] given us any input. I've not received
any feedback from the committees.
[1:09:40] » Okay. [snorts]
>> And then there's one thing um where
[1:09:44] attendance at the at a virtual uh
attendance at a meeting can be virtual
[1:09:50] and I think um we talked about it last
time as well. Um
[1:09:56] it did not follow the same rules of the
council where if we attend virtually we
[1:10:04] must be visible at the meeting. I
believe I sorry I should have put that
[1:10:08] on here. I believe I updated language to
include the phrase with camera on or
[1:10:12] something like that. Uh
>> didn't see that
[1:10:14] » to make it in compliance with the
electronic meetings policy.
[1:10:21] » Um yeah,
>> I didn't see that. Um the other is um on
[1:10:30] the section that if a member's term
expires and nobody's been appointed yet
[1:10:38] um
you said the vacant they can serve
[1:10:42] temporarily until the vacancy is filled
if they're willing to continue serving.
[1:10:47] Is there any time limit on that?
>> No. That would be um the council can
[1:10:56] make a decision at that point.
I think trying to keep uh options open
[1:11:01] for the council,
>> right? Trying to leave us as much
[1:11:03] flexibility as possible.
>> And that's in policy.
[1:11:08] » That's what I'm reading.
>> Right. It's in policy, not ordinance.
[1:11:11] » Yeah.
>> Yeah. And that's Yeah. It doesn't say
[1:11:14] there's any time limit. So if it takes
us 6 months or a year, that person can
[1:11:19] continue to sit on a temporary basis. Is
that intent?
[1:11:23] » Well, if if they want to as well. I
mean, if they're not signing up again,
[1:11:27] they probably won't want to go that
long.
[1:11:30] » Okay.
>> So, um, councelor Mont leaves in our
[1:11:33] hands. Yeah.
See, um, page 46 of your packets
[1:11:41] in the,
uh, in the policy,
[1:11:47] let's see,
second paragraph on page, sorry, page
[1:11:52] 45, second paragraph.
To be counted as present while
[1:11:56] participating electronically, a
committee member must be able to hear
[1:11:58] the meeting, be heard by others,
participate in discussion, be identified
[1:12:02] for attendance and voting purposes, and
keep members camera on during the
[1:12:06] meeting unless otherwise allowed by law,
the city the city council's electronic
[1:12:12] meetings policy or an approved
accommodation.
[1:12:16] » So, keeping the camera on is different
from being visible.
[1:12:20] I could keep the camera on and you don't
see me. So I might not be
[1:12:26] » Do you want to suggest an amendment to
the language?
[1:12:28] » I think that what we've got for
counselors
[1:12:32] I does the council one say just keep the
camera on.
[1:12:35] » I'm guessing this is that language but I
can look at
[1:12:38] » okay
>> I just think it should be equal. Um,
[1:12:44] also on page 39 under reappointments,
um, you said,
[1:12:52] "A [clears throat] member seeking
reappoint is not required to complete a
[1:12:56] full new application unless requested by
the city council, city recorder, or city
[1:13:02] manager." Um, you know, I think that
starts to get um somewhat unfair because
[1:13:10] that means that one person asking for
reappoint might not be asked to fill out
[1:13:15] an application while another one might
be asked and um uh it starts to look
[1:13:22] kind of judgmental against that
incumbent. I think everybody should be
[1:13:27] doing the same thing and you could add
to an application
[1:13:33] um a space for any kind of comments that
a new applicant or an incumbent
[1:13:38] applicant might want to say about what
they're doing. I know that later on you
[1:13:44] do have uh that the council may
reappoint and they may consider
[1:13:49] attendance, participation, preparation,
conduct, etc.
[1:13:54] Um, I just I just think that saying
we don't have to ask for this, but maybe
[1:14:00] we will and it kind of ends up depending
on who that person is. And so I kind of
[1:14:07] I would like to see it be the same for
everybody.
[1:14:11] » So I will say I don't think staff has
any plans or I can't envision a time
[1:14:16] when we would request it on our own. It
would be somehow at the council's
[1:14:21] direction. So, if you want to remove
that language, that's fine. The um the
[1:14:26] question about whether or not they
should fill out full application was
[1:14:30] something the council discussed last
time and the direction we received from
[1:14:34] the majority was we didn't want a full
application again. Um, but again, just
[1:14:41] putting in some flexibility in case
there are circumstances where where it
[1:14:46] makes sense, but I I can't see any
reason why staff would initiate it if
[1:14:51] council hasn't. Um, maybe there could be
a time and that's why there's some
[1:14:54] flexibility. So, I'd be fine if you left
it in or removed the city manager and
[1:14:59] city recorder. The only thing I could
see would be if our application had
[1:15:05] changed and so there was just some
information that we wanted from them so
[1:15:09] that we had it on file that we didn't
currently have or something. But
[1:15:13] otherwise, I can't see us initiating
that.
[1:15:16] » And and my comment isn't about staff
requesting it. So, I'm going to share a
[1:15:21] story.
This is back in about 2005.
[1:15:27] I sat on what was then called the
advertising committee. I had sat on that
[1:15:32] committee, attended every meeting, been
very active uh for three years.
[1:15:39] I I'll say it really nicely ticked off a
few members of the council
[1:15:46] who for the first time ever
asked that a someone who wanted to be
[1:15:53] reappointed made me do the application
and made me do the um the interview.
[1:16:01] They never asked anybody else. There was
nobody else who wanted the position. I
[1:16:07] don't ever want anybody going through
that.
[1:16:18] That's why I am so committed to you do
it the same for everybody
[1:16:26] because it should not be political.
[1:16:38] I'm not really [clears throat] as
concerned of what the process is. I just
[1:16:42] don't want to have to see folks fill out
a new application that are already
[1:16:46] serving because we already have such a
challenge of getting volunteers. But
[1:16:51] whether it's a email to Kim or a written
confirmation or a phone call, I mean, I
[1:16:57] don't really have strong feelings about
what that process is. I just know that
[1:17:00] it should be simple if someone's already
been approved and is already serving.
[1:17:05] I I agree. I I think it's the second
sentence in the [clears throat]
[1:17:09] paragraph that's important. The city may
use a simplified written confirmation or
[1:17:13] reappoint form. So,
>> well, because you've already got the
[1:17:19] original application on file,
>> right? But this is four years later and
[1:17:26] we don't know if that person I hopefully
the committees will be giving the
[1:17:31] reports. Did that person participate?
Did they attend the meetings?
[1:17:37] And that kind of thing. Reappoint
shouldn't be automatic.
[1:17:42] It should be based on whether or not
people fulfill the commitment they made.
[1:17:50] And doesn't the uh the committee chair
uh give a report as to what's going on
[1:17:57] anyway?
>> The leazison.
[1:17:59] » That's what we're hoping for. the layers
on.
[1:18:01] » This is just one small piece in that.
>> Yeah.
[1:18:04] » As we move forward,
>> I think what you just said is different
[1:18:10] than the process for reappointment in
this paragraph. So, I'm not quite
[1:18:16] understanding.
[1:18:20] Well, the next paragraph or two
paragraphs down, it does say the council
[1:18:25] may consider attendance, participation,
preparation, conduct, relevant
[1:18:29] experience, committee needs, the annual
report and work plan, the value of
[1:18:34] continuity, and the value of providing
opportunities for new applicants.
[1:18:41] And how do you consider that if the
person hasn't if all the person has said
[1:18:46] is I want to stay?
[1:18:51] I think there is a difference between
uh staff
[1:18:57] uh andor the committee providing
information like a report to go with
[1:19:02] someone who's interested in being
reappointed and them filling out an
[1:19:08] application. I think those are two
different issues. So, one is are you
[1:19:13] interested? Yes, we can pass that along.
And as we're passing it along, here's
[1:19:18] the feedback from the chair or here's
their attendance record or whatever we
[1:19:23] decide and you decide is helpful for you
to make that decision. We can provide
[1:19:27] that, but that's not something that
would come from the person serving in
[1:19:31] that role.
[1:19:38] I'm okay with the way it's stated right
now. The um it leaves as much
[1:19:44] flexibility as we want and it's going to
be our decision in the long run. Um
[1:19:53] hopefully everybody uh pays attention
and doesn't make it a personal thing.
[1:20:00] But you know, we can't stop that from
happening by changing some language. Our
[1:20:06] application is not really that useful
because it just has data. It doesn't
[1:20:13] tell us anything about the person.
That's why we interview them. And one of
[1:20:17] the things I'm looking forward to is
getting that annual report and working
[1:20:22] with the committees so that we can say,
"Okay, here's what we agree with you on
[1:20:28] going forward. what happens next year
and then um reviewing that and going
[1:20:34] forward we end up with a much more
efficient way of all of our boards and
[1:20:41] committees working with the council and
doing the council's work.
[1:20:46] There is plenty of flexibility there
now. Um and the things that we're
[1:20:51] considering remployment
basically none of those are on the
[1:20:55] application. Those are all going to be
things that we find out from the annual
[1:21:00] report and you know who's doing the
work. It puts a lot more work on
[1:21:07] committee chairs making sure that people
are showing up and recording when
[1:21:13] they're not or why they're not. So, um
we're going to depend on them uh
[1:21:19] significantly
and
[1:21:22] » but the committee chairs change. It's
not always the same person. Not for the
[1:21:28] four years.
>> Doesn't have to be. They have a job
[1:21:32] described in the uh the documents.
And it shouldn't matter who that chair
[1:21:38] is.
>> And who will be making sure that that
[1:21:42] job is done?
right now
[1:21:49] » if we don't get the report.
>> Okay.
[1:21:59] » Any other comments,
[1:22:03] » mayor?
>> Yeah,
[1:22:04] » just circle back. I pulled up the um the
city council's adopted electronic
[1:22:09] meetings policy and it does mirror that
language. It says members of boards,
[1:22:14] commissions, committees or councils who
wish to participate in electronic
[1:22:17] meetings must keep their video on during
the meeting to be considered present. So
[1:22:21] I think the intent was that they are uh
I think the intent was to avoid a
[1:22:26] situation where I'm sure many of you
have been in a virtual meeting. Yeah.
[1:22:30] Where some people choose to just keep
their camera off to participate. I think
[1:22:34] that was the point is to avoid that. We
have not had an issue to my knowledge of
[1:22:40] people having their camera on but
pointed somewhere else. If that becomes
[1:22:45] an issue, we can certainly bring it up.
It is in the policy. That's much easier
[1:22:49] to change than the ordinance. And the
policy is not what's up for adoption
[1:22:52] tonight. It goes with it. Um I think um
if the council uh does a second reading
[1:23:02] tonight, we'd probably bring back the uh
policy at the next meeting to adopt with
[1:23:08] the adoption of the ordinance. Or if you
choose if the council chooses to do a
[1:23:13] third reading and adoption tonight,
there's always a 30-day um period until
[1:23:19] the ordinance goes into effect. So, we
would bring back the policy at the next
[1:23:24] meeting to go into effect at the same
time as the ordinance. So, um but again,
[1:23:30] just going back to the policy, it's
easier to change.
[1:23:33] » You indicated that we haven't had any
input from any of the um committees. I'm
[1:23:39] not sure which of the committees have
had the opportunity to view this and
[1:23:44] talk about it at one of their meetings.
Um I know for both of my committees they
[1:23:50] have not had that opportunity yet.
>> The um
[1:23:55] there not we have not changed very much
in the year and a half since the first
[1:24:00] draft was put together. Recently it's
been more
[1:24:04] um procedural in splitting it up between
ordinance and policy but the bones of it
[1:24:09] are essentially the same. And um there
was a request put out to the u each of
[1:24:15] the committees at that time with a copy
of that proposal and everyone right away
[1:24:20] started working on or looking at
discussing their own personal committee
[1:24:24] stuff and did not provide any feedback
on the overarching policy and I think in
[1:24:30] the discussions I've had with the staff
liaison people are generally in favor of
[1:24:37] one overarching
uh ordinance
[1:24:41] and then specific things for their
individual um committees. Um but uh like
[1:24:47] I said that we did reach out and there
just wasn't any
[1:24:52] that wasn't the topic they wanted to
talk about. So
[1:25:01] » Okay. May I have a motion? I move for a
second reading of ordinance number
[1:25:06] 2026-06
by title only. I'll second. It's
[1:25:12] » council Baker. Councelor R. Montero. All
those in favor say I.
[1:25:17] » I.
>> I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Spencer.
[1:25:25] » Ordinance number 2026-06.
an ordinance of the city of Seaside,
[1:25:29] Oregon, amending chapter 31 of the
Seaside Code of Ordinances to establish
[1:25:34] general provisions governing city
boards, commissions, and committees.
[1:25:39] » Thank you.
So, we'll discuss the uh third reading
[1:25:45] on uh our next meeting. New business,
consideration of the parks advisory
[1:25:51] committee estuary plaque proposal. We
had that um during our work session. I
[1:25:56] think we understand what's going on.
Anything you want to add, Spencer?
[1:26:02] » No, I think that's it.
[1:26:07] » Any further comments from the council?
[1:26:12] I don't know if we have a proposed We
have proposed motion.
[1:26:20] Can um
Is Paul still here? Hey. Hey, Paul. I
[1:26:26] got a question for you. Um,
[1:26:31] and I I got it confused between the
pedestal and the uh boulder. What What
[1:26:36] is the weight difference between the
pedestal and and the boulder?
[1:26:40] » Uh, boulder is variable, but it would be
probably somewhere between 3500 lb and
[1:26:47] 5,000 lb. Whereas the pedestal is about
2,700 lb.
[1:26:51] » Okay. 2700 lb. Okay, cool. And um is
there going to just out of curiosity I
[1:26:57] know that the footprint on that is
>> the base is 2 feet by 2 feet.
[1:27:02] » Okay. And um no worry about that sinking
down or having an impact on the uh
[1:27:08] environment?
>> No. What we'll do is we'll dig a hole
[1:27:12] and we'll put some gravel in there and
compact it to give it a good subbase and
[1:27:16] then it'll sit upon that and it should
distribute the load pretty well.
[1:27:19] » Make a foundation. Yeah. Okay.
>> Thank you. That's what I had.
[1:27:24] » Where is that new business?
>> Anybody else?
[1:27:30] Um I see that one. Oh, do you have
something else? I saw um that one person
[1:27:37] in the audience wants to make a comment.
We did not list uh public comments, but
[1:27:42] we generally allowed. Is that okay with
the council? Okay. Step forward.
[1:27:47] » Thanks, Paul. My question.
>> Oh, okay. No question.
[1:27:53] I think this is a great way to honor
Neil Maine's legacy. So, I would move
[1:27:57] that we'd approve the monument at
Echuary Park.
[1:28:01] » I'll second. It's
>> Council President Morrisy and Councelor
[1:28:05] Armono.
Okay.
[1:28:09] » All those in favor say I.
>> I.
[1:28:11] » I. Any opposed? Motion carries.
So there will be an event assuming that
[1:28:18] it can get done by August 11th, right?
No problem. Okay. So um August 11th at
[1:28:27] 1:00 at Estuary Park. You're all
invited.
[1:28:34] Thanks to the parks committee and uh for
what you've done so far on that and
[1:28:39] we'll see you at the event.
[1:28:48] Next up's the liquor license application
limited on premises sales license. Uh we
[1:28:55] got uh owner here. You want to come
forward, introduce yourself, tell us a
[1:29:00] little about your business.
[1:29:06] » Hi. Uh my name is Mario Garcia and uh I
have a seven years opened small business
[1:29:14] in a south uh 800 South Reserve belt.
>> And you're located just north of the
[1:29:22] like the Shell station, right?
>> Yes.
[1:29:24] » Okay.
Any questions from the council?
[1:29:32] » No questions. No.
>> All right. Can I have a uh motion?
[1:29:38] » Looks like Seaside Police Department
reviewed the liquor license application
[1:29:42] and did not discover any disqualifying
information. So, I would move to approve
[1:29:47] the liquor license application for
Tequira
[1:29:51] El Tarasco LC.
>> I second Elasco.
[1:29:57] » Okay, Council President, Council
President Morrisy and Councelor
[1:30:01] Hanssboro. Any further discussion?
All those in favor say I. I.
[1:30:06] » I. Any opposed? Motion carries.
Congratulations.
[1:30:11] » Thank you.
[1:30:15] » Next up
item about library intergovernmental
[1:30:20] agreement. We have our library director
Jennifer here.
[1:30:27] Yep.
Welcome. tell us all about
[1:30:33] what we're doing here.
>> Uh this is basically Is that working?
[1:30:36] Okay. Um basically just a restatement of
uh an agreement that we've had uh in the
[1:30:43] past. Uh we took the opportunity to
clean up some of the language and just
[1:30:48] reinforce that all of those things were
still happening is uh the agreement
[1:30:52] between the three cities uh to provide
the library services.
[1:30:57] Uh we also um took the opportunity to
remove the termination date or the term
[1:31:03] limit on it. Uh in the past it had been
either for three years or five years. Uh
[1:31:07] this way you don't have to come back in
5 years and have me do this again.
[1:31:16] » That's it.
>> That's pretty much it. Um I included in
[1:31:20] the packet uh information you the
background of how uh this uh evolved
[1:31:24] from uh just sort of uh librarians
driving books around in between the
[1:31:31] different locations to establishing a
courier uh system and then uh joining
[1:31:38] forces to share a library catalog. And
uh that's really where um the all of
[1:31:43] that information um all of this allows
us to be able to provide that service um
[1:31:50] with the expectations that all three uh
libraries will maintain their
[1:31:55] collections and um be good partners.
[1:32:02] » I only had uh one question uh on item 12
on notices. Um, it said, um, any notices
[1:32:10] under this go to the library director or
designated representative. I mean, it be
[1:32:14] obvious to you. I just thought it
probably be a good idea to have a copy
[1:32:18] go to the city manager as well since
it's a intergovernmental agreement.
[1:32:23] » Mhm.
>> So, I'd ask for a slight change there.
[1:32:31] » I noticed Clatup County was involved.
What is their connection to all this? So
[1:32:36] they um generously fund the libraries
rock program. Uh so we receive uh a
[1:32:43] chunk of money for for that program. And
so it's just sort of the continuation of
[1:32:48] having the support for that program um
and providing library services and
[1:32:54] materials to all children in ClassUp
County.
[1:33:00] Mayor, in my orientation uh at the
library, Director Reading
[1:33:06] really offers a slick operation behind
the scenes. I mean, those those books
[1:33:12] are going out, those books are coming
in, and it's a wonderful, wonderful
[1:33:17] service for anybody who's a part of it.
And thank you. I
[1:33:21] » think it's always a surprise, I think,
to folks when they come and they they
[1:33:24] say, "Well, I have a card at Atoria." I
said, "Well, yeah, they [laughter] could
[1:33:28] you can use the library here, check out
materials. We can move them around.
[1:33:33] » It's wonderful.
>> It's a nice feature."
[1:33:36] » And of course, it's worth the drive for
them to come because we had the best
[1:33:40] library.
>> That's right. [laughter]
[1:33:42] » Sure.
>> I wanted you to be on the record for
[1:33:44] saying that. [laughter]
[1:33:48] » Well, the other thing I'm, you know, I'm
always thinking money. Um, Atoria pays
[1:33:52] for their library operating out of their
budget, but they had to get a levy to
[1:33:58] actually do their new building.
>> It doesn't
[1:34:01] » um Seaside's entirely city paid.
Warrington uh needs a property tax levy
[1:34:08] and it's been questionable on and off
and obviously the county has no library,
[1:34:13] but it's great that they support uh your
group. So, of course, we have the best
[1:34:18] library. Any other comments or
questions?
[1:34:24] » I like that you all work together
>> up and down the North Coast. I think
[1:34:28] that's great.
>> Yeah, it's it's really it's a nice
[1:34:31] opportunity. And I'll share, you know,
people always ask why isn't Canon Beach
[1:34:35] part of it. Canon Beach isn't um a
public library because it doesn't
[1:34:39] receive any public funding. So, it is is
a private library.
[1:34:43] » So, otherwise um they would be we would
bring them into the fold.
[1:34:51] Can I move it make the motion? Ready for
it?
[1:34:56] » I think so. Anybody?
>> I move to authorize the city manager to
[1:35:01] execute the intergovernmental agreement
for cooperative library services subject
[1:35:06] to any changes deemed necessary or
appropriate by the city manager or city
[1:35:11] attorney.
>> I second that.
[1:35:13] » It's councelor T. Monttero and councelor
Ansro. Any further discussion? All those
[1:35:19] in favor say I.
>> I.
[1:35:22] » Any opposed? Motion carries.
>> Thank you.
[1:35:25] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[1:35:33] » Wow. We're moving right along.
[1:35:37] Okay,
this is going to be a tough one.
[1:35:43] Come
>> on up.
[1:35:48] It's not often you have a question about
buying something where the the
[1:35:54] department brings the money to buy it
with you them. [laughter]
[1:35:58] » Well,
>> division chief, please tell us what
[1:36:01] you're asking for and why.
>> Uh so, good evening, council. Appreciate
[1:36:05] you guys. For those that don't know me,
I'm the EMS chief for Seaside Fire and
[1:36:09] Rescue. Um we are here I think about a
month ago uh with our NDA report talking
[1:36:14] about ambulance operations. Um and
during that time we uh uh informed you
[1:36:19] guys that we'd went after uh two grants.
Um they started awarding those on July
[1:36:24] 1st at 8:00 in the morning. But about
7:52 that morning we were told that we
[1:36:29] had received one of the grants um to
purchase a new ambulance and outfitted.
[1:36:35] Um, with that, um, the one we are
attempting to get is a bronze select
[1:36:41] ambulance. Uh, it's the latest and
greatest. It has kind of the gold
[1:36:44] standard. Um, and it's through True
North out of Hillsboro. They're the
[1:36:48] local dealer for that.
>> That's great. Um
[1:36:52] but with that it uh the in your packet
it it talks about the amount of the
[1:36:57] ambulance um and which exceeds the uh
city manager's authorization to purchase
[1:37:02] without city council's approval. Um it's
over that $150,000 mark. So um I know
[1:37:09] the number for what the cost of the
grant was versus the ambulance is
[1:37:12] different. I know I've had that question
a couple times since we've uh received
[1:37:15] word that we got that. Um, just know
that that's the purchase price uh listed
[1:37:21] there is just for the ambulance itself.
It's not a cardiac monitor. It's not a
[1:37:24] stair chair. It's not the gurnie, the
power loader. All that
[1:37:29] » fully fulfills the whole $600,000 that
we were awarded. So,
[1:37:35] » so will you be able to use the balance
for those other things you just
[1:37:39] mentioned?
>> Yeah. Um when we when we applied for the
[1:37:42] grant um we included uh outfitting at
all except for the basic medical gear
[1:37:47] which we have in stock at the station.
Um but it's all for the big purchase
[1:37:51] items.
>> Great. Outstanding.
[1:37:53] » So
>> wonderful.
[1:37:57] » So it's basically an additional 50% just
to outfit the uh
[1:38:04] » uh
>> close to it.
[1:38:05] » It's close.
>> I'm not going to lie. Yeah. Um we've
[1:38:08] seen a lot of price increases over the
last couple years and so
[1:38:13] » when do you think we'll be able to put
it into operation?
[1:38:17] » So um so that was the big that was one
of the biggest things is the timeline on
[1:38:21] this uh it has to be operational.
Everybody trained on it by September
[1:38:25] 30th of 2027.
>> Um the uh the current one that we're
[1:38:30] looking at right now is will be built in
April of next year and be delivered by
[1:38:36] August. Uh it's absolutely the quickest
we can get it.
[1:38:39] » Um if we went for a custom build, we
would be almost two and a half years out
[1:38:43] on an ambulance. So um this is what they
call a demo unit. It's just kind of a
[1:38:48] cookie cutter box. Um but we did have
one here and if it's a cookie cutter we
[1:38:54] get, I'm okay with that cookie. So
>> um so yeah, we would receive it August
[1:39:00] 1st. Um uh it would be decal painted,
everything would be installed and it
[1:39:05] would give us about 45 days to get
people trained up. Uh it's quite a bit
[1:39:09] different than our current one where
everything is switches uh in the new one
[1:39:12] everything is touchscreen.
>> Oh.
[1:39:14] » So it's it's a training opportunity. So
>> Right. Definitely.
[1:39:19] » And um you think the one we've got now
is going to last that long?
[1:39:24] » Fingers crossed.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Um, yeah, it's got, like I
[1:39:28] think we talked last month, almost
300,000 miles on it and it's
[1:39:33] » 21 years old this year. So, for an
ambulance, it's it's seen its days. So,
[1:39:40] » you're going to need a bigger garage.
>> We could bring that back to city
[1:39:44] council, but [laughter]
[1:39:48] » there's the catch.
>> There it is.
[1:39:51] » Grants aren't always the easiest thing
to apply for. So, thank you for doing
[1:39:55] that on behalf of
>> Absolutely. We use this uh program. It's
[1:39:59] called Funding Navigator and they helped
us write this and back and forth. It
[1:40:03] probably took about two months to get
this dialed in, but uh they have been a
[1:40:06] lifesaver for us. Great.
>> So, yeah.
[1:40:09] » Wonderful.
>> Awesome.
[1:40:10] » It's always worth spending money to get
a whole lot more money.
[1:40:14] » Absolutely.
[1:40:18] » Definitely.
>> Spencer, anything to add? No, I'm just
[1:40:22] This is excellent that we able to get
the grant and uh because it's a really
[1:40:28] expensive thing for what we're trying to
do, but I think this will be a great
[1:40:32] service our residents for a long time.
[1:40:38] » Any further comments, counselors? If
not, I'll take a motion.
[1:40:43] » I move to authorize Is this a good time?
All right.
[1:40:47] » Good. I move to authorize the city
manager to execute a purchase agreement
[1:40:51] with True North Emergency Equipment for
an ambulance in the amount of $416,467
[1:40:59] as outlined in the staff report and
direct staff to complete any necessary
[1:41:05] budget action to recognize the grant
revenue and related expenditure.
[1:41:09] » I'll second.
>> Council Hanssboro and Councelor T.
[1:41:14] [clears throat] Montero. Any further
discussion?
[1:41:17] All those in favor say I.
>> I.
[1:41:20] » Any opposed? Motion carries.
>> Thank you.
[1:41:23] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[1:41:25] » Yes.
>> Excited. I want to ride in it on in the
[1:41:28] front.
>> Yeah. [laughter]
[1:41:30] » Yeah. We don't want to be in the back.
>> Next up,
[1:41:37] uh, ordinance 20267,
ordinance adding chapter 97, parks and
[1:41:42] park facilities to the code. Spencer,
any introduction?
[1:41:48] » Sure. This came up at a work session
last time I think it was in April uh to
[1:41:53] get some initial direction from the
council and uh we took your initial
[1:41:58] thoughts uh and the major policy
questions to the parks committee to get
[1:42:04] uh their input and discussion.
Um, so for our public, uh, just so they
[1:42:10] know, we don't, the city has never had a
parks ordinance and so
[1:42:14] » where that comes,
>> we have signs though,
[1:42:18] » right? And so if we ever [laughter] want
to choose to enforce those signs,
[1:42:22] um, which isn't often, we need to have
an ordinance. But I will say one of the
[1:42:26] areas that we consistently have problems
have to do with parking lots in our
[1:42:31] parks. Um, we have lots of signs around
the city that say no overnight parking.
[1:42:37] That's also difficult for a police
officer driving by to determine what's
[1:42:42] overnight. If they're there from
midnight to 3:00 a.m., is that overnight
[1:42:46] or it's a there's a lot of ways to argue
it. And so, the cleaner thing is you
[1:42:52] can't be parking here between these
hours. You pull up, you know, if if
[1:42:56] right or wrong. And we do, this is the
time of year we do see some people
[1:43:00] setting up shop
>> in estuary parking lot, cove parking lot
[1:43:04] and and elsewhere. And so this will help
us put up clear signage that is also uh
[1:43:10] enforcable.
>> Um and so we don't have that. That's why
[1:43:14] it's needed.
Parks Committee reviewed it and uh
[1:43:20] approved or recommended approval of all
the major policy issues you had already
[1:43:25] addressed and given some initial
feedback on.
[1:43:29] Um those main uh so main approach here
with the ordinance is that we have again
[1:43:36] kind of like our committees one baseline
ordinance governing everything and then
[1:43:40] we can have um park specific rules and
whatnot as determined. Generally we want
[1:43:47] them to be the consistent throughout the
city police officer or anyone else
[1:43:51] doesn't have to think what's different
about this one. usually be different if
[1:43:55] there's a different use of the park and
there's good situations for that.
[1:44:01] Uh some of the the highlights of this is
having our park hours. They're open from
[1:44:07] 5:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Um parking lots
would follow those same parking hours.
[1:44:13] And again, we can have different ones
for other parking lots. you know, for
[1:44:17] example, I don't and uh the what we
traditionally call the convention center
[1:44:22] parking lot, the downtown parking lot
isn't really associated with the park,
[1:44:26] but um let's say the one at 12th Avenue
is, there might be a good reason why
[1:44:32] that one with access to the beach would
have different hours. Um, sometimes the
[1:44:38] um
the clamming
[1:44:42] opens up earlier than 5:00 a.m. and
people are going out. Um, although other
[1:44:47] otherwise downtown parking, there are
businesses that are open past 11 p.m.
[1:44:52] and we don't want people to not be able
to stay because the parking lot's
[1:44:57] closed. And so those are some situations
where we might have uh different hours.
[1:45:01] Um, but otherwise, these are what the
hours would be.
[1:45:06] Um the recommendation is that we
prohibit smoking, vaping, any tobacco
[1:45:12] and marijuana use in city parks. Um
generally speaking, if there's a need to
[1:45:18] specify a designated area that the
ordinance does allow us to do that.
[1:45:25] Um, dogs must be on leash and uh unless
they're in a designated uh area such as
[1:45:32] a dog park and uh following public
comment, the leash must be under the
[1:45:38] physical control over the handler and
then protections in place for service
[1:45:43] animals.
Um, we do the ordinance does allow uh
[1:45:50] for event reservations and private res
reservations. We don't have that set up.
[1:45:54] Now, this ordinance doesn't necessarily
create that, but it creates the
[1:45:58] opportunity if we want to begin having a
pavilion
[1:46:02] uh reservation program. We can generally
speaking, if there isn't a great need, I
[1:46:07] prefer to do it as a first come, first
serve, but things change and this would
[1:46:12] allow us to create a policy for that at
a future date.
[1:46:17] Commercial activity, generally speaking,
it's prohibited unless you have
[1:46:21] authorization. So, um, authorization
could come through a permitted event
[1:46:27] through the city, some sort of license
agreement or other permit or something
[1:46:31] like that. [snorts]
Um, as an example, um,
[1:46:36] uh, what is a good example?
Uh, let's say someone wanted to do a
[1:46:42] yoga class in the park. It's one thing
to have a group of people come together
[1:46:46] and do a yoga class. Someone wants to
teach a private class in the park,
[1:46:50] that's a different thing. they're
running their business. And so if that
[1:46:53] were to come up, we would want there to
be uh an approved process. Uh so when we
[1:47:00] do and don't allow, do they have
insurance? You know, things like that.
[1:47:04] Uh and so um it's allowed and as those
come up, we can either address them
[1:47:10] through our current processes or create
new ones if if one hasn't been um
[1:47:15] created.
Uh no fireworks allowed in the parks and
[1:47:22] uh based on the feedback from the fire
department, they don't want any open
[1:47:26] fires, open flames with the exception of
propane grills that are meant
[1:47:30] specifically for that.
[1:47:34] Those are the major
changes or not changes, those are the
[1:47:39] major items in here. And so if you're
ready, here's the motion for a first and
[1:47:43] an optional second reading. I'm happy to
take any questions.
[1:47:50] Council Evansboro, you have any
questions?
[1:47:54] » I like the consistency. I like keeping
things regular and and so that they're
[1:48:00] right there and there's no real question
about uh how to implement these things.
[1:48:05] Um are we going to be changing any of
the signs in any of these parking lots
[1:48:10] to reflect these new hours?
>> Yeah, for sure. uh the that will we'll
[1:48:15] we'll we've already begun a kind of
assigned inventory of what our parks and
[1:48:19] parking lots say and so based on this
they'll probably be updated as needed.
[1:48:26] » Um for sure anything outdated or
inaccurate would be removed and areas
[1:48:31] that we know are problematic areas we
would want to ensure signage is up.
[1:48:37] Everything in between um we'll go
through and see what's really needed.
[1:48:42] » Thank you.
That's it.
[1:48:44] » The um I missed um allowing the public
to say anything. Anybody out there have
[1:48:49] a comment?
[1:48:53] » State your name.
>> Sheamus McVey. Uh I just want to ask for
[1:48:58] clarification because I didn't follow a
particular example given in the prior
[1:49:04] slide to this one on uh commercial
activities. In the example, uh, city
[1:49:10] manager Kyle, you said if somebody
wanted to have a yoga class, uh, that
[1:49:16] would be permissible. Um, however, if
you wanted to teach a yoga class, then
[1:49:22] you might need a different thing. And
and I think I'm confused on the
[1:49:26] difference between
>> commerce
[1:49:28] » teaching a yoga class
>> and having a yoga class.
[1:49:33] » I think is is it
>> charging for the commerce? Okay. If it's
[1:49:38] a free yoga class, then it's okay. If
it's a
[1:49:41] » if you're if you're operating your
business in the city park,
[1:49:45] » then there needs to be an authorized
process.
[1:49:47] » If it's just people getting together to
recreate, then it wouldn't be
[1:49:52] » uh that would just be permitted
outright.
[1:49:54] » So, the formality level then,
>> I think it's if you're charging for it
[1:49:58] or not.
>> Okay. Thank you.
[1:50:03] » Anybody else?
[1:50:07] Okay. Councelor Montero. T- Monontto.
>> T- Monontto. Yes. Um the most egregious
[1:50:15] instances that I've seen have always
been at um uh the Estuary Park and
[1:50:22] they've uh always been either campers or
RVs. Um we don't specify campers or RVs
[1:50:30] in your definition of motor vehicles. I
would like to add that I know that we've
[1:50:36] got some ordinances that are very old
that uh we've not been able to do some
[1:50:42] things we need to do because um they
didn't say trailers or motor homes or
[1:50:49] you know this kind of thing for for some
other items. So, I' I'd like us to be
[1:50:55] specific on campers, RVs, and motor
homes
[1:50:59] because that's that's who I see down
there most of the time.
[1:51:03] » Yeah, I can I I can I can that's easy to
include. The one thing I will say is
[1:51:09] with a park closure, it doesn't matter
what it is.
[1:51:13] » I understand, but if we, you know, if we
don't include in the definition,
[1:51:18] somebody can always dispute it. Um the
other thing is that um again at the
[1:51:26] estuary park what I see a lot of is
people uh parking and take and parking
[1:51:32] laterally instead of heading in and so
they're taking up two or three parking
[1:51:37] spots. And so I'd like to make sure that
we have something that says you can't do
[1:51:45] that.
>> I think uh and I'll check on that and
[1:51:48] you brought it to my attention
previously. I think our traffic code
[1:51:52] probably already it's already
>> against the rules to do that.
[1:51:57] » Um that being said, at the estuary we
don't have striped parking and so um
[1:52:02] we'd probably address that with signage
at that location because otherwise I
[1:52:08] think there are likely already existing
laws on the books that say you can't,
[1:52:13] you know, take up multiple parking
spaces or something like that. So
[1:52:17] whether you're a
trailer parking sideways or a
[1:52:22] » car
>> luxury vehicle that doesn't want any
[1:52:25] dings and parks in the middle of two
parking spaces, either one would be a
[1:52:30] violation,
>> right? Um you also uh say you can't
[1:52:35] vape, smoke, etc., etc. Do you need to
include um the uh consumption of
[1:52:41] alcohol?
I think that's addressed. Well, it's not
[1:52:46] addressed because the council direction
was not to include it. That was the
[1:52:51] council direction was we didn't want it
didn't seem to be a problem. So, we
[1:52:55] didn't want to uh
>> restrict it.
[1:52:58] » You restrict it. And so, if it becomes
an issue, then we would address it then.
[1:53:03] But, uh I think if I recall, the
direction was let's not create a more
[1:53:08] restrictive law where it hasn't been a
problem. And then if somebody has a
[1:53:13] permit or a reservation to use part of
the park or the the uh cooking area,
[1:53:20] does that limit the use of that area by
anybody else?
[1:53:26] » Yeah. So, we don't have a process for
that, but certainly, let's say, um,
[1:53:31] Seaside Kids wants to do T-ball at
Cartwright Park, like they do, um, we
[1:53:37] would have a process for that. So they
could reserve that and then they would
[1:53:41] yeah they would have exclusive right to
um use that for their T-ball programming
[1:53:47] as an example. Um certainly I could see
this when we build the north 40 and we
[1:53:52] have more program sports happening there
that there will be a pretty robust you
[1:53:57] know reservation system and uh if you
reserve it then you are able to have
[1:54:03] exclusive access but we haven't created
any of that and so um
[1:54:10] at the time when we wish to start doing
uh implementing process like that we
[1:54:14] would put um all that together in terms
of a uh rental policy, reservation
[1:54:21] policy.
>> Okay. Thank you.
[1:54:27] » Do you have any thoughts on what that
process would look like as far as a
[1:54:31] reservation system and is that something
you're planning on managing?
[1:54:35] » We're not planning on doing it right
now. I think right now we have a first
[1:54:38] come, first serve and it works well. Um,
mostly what we have is, uh, when
[1:54:44] anyone's trying to hold an event or
something, um, we have our event
[1:54:49] permitting process. And I think that's
typically how we would handle it. Now,
[1:54:54] um, I don't think we have,
um, a big demand for pavilion rentals.
[1:54:59] If we did, we'd probably look at some
sort of online resource. Um, it's also
[1:55:04] very possible that this may there may be
an opportunity to partner with Sunset
[1:55:10] Empire on some of the online
registration they have and work with
[1:55:13] them on parks reservations. U, that's
something I've Skyler and I have, you
[1:55:19] know, had brief discussions about, but
nothing nothing serious. I think more
[1:55:24] likely we'd cross that bridge when we
get there.
[1:55:27] » And as far as specific park rules, what
is that process going to look like?
[1:55:33] Um I think as we identify specific parks
that need exceptions or something
[1:55:40] different um that would be a good job
and I think I've already kind of briefly
[1:55:45] suggested to the parks committee this
would be a good uh assignment for them
[1:55:50] would be to go through each of the parks
and say okay what exceptions are here or
[1:55:55] what special rules need to apply here
and that uh we would bring that back and
[1:56:01] um I think that we would implement those
through uh not necessarily in the
[1:56:06] ordinance but through um a resolution.
Uh either that or it's possible on some
[1:56:13] things that staff can handle it alone on
some of the signage and whatnot. Um, but
[1:56:17] I think we'd have them do some of the
initial work of canvasing our parks and
[1:56:23] uh coming up with that list of um
uh ideas of what parks need something a
[1:56:30] little bit different than the governing
policy.
[1:56:33] » Some of that work happened right Nancy
during uh the time when we came up with
[1:56:38] all the signs because not all the signs
are the same for every park. So again,
[1:56:43] we've got the cart before the horse in
some cases, but some of that work's been
[1:56:48] done.
[1:56:53] Either one. Any comments?
>> Go ahead, Chris.
[1:56:55] » I appreciate that you took the previous
comments um and made the adjustments and
[1:57:03] in particular the restriction around the
open container because I think that was
[1:57:06] an important one for residents. So
appreciate that as well as the parks
[1:57:10] committee reviewing it and giving their
blessing. So I'm good.
[1:57:15] » Well, this was before my time and I
can't say thank you enough. It's about
[1:57:19] time that this is being solidified. Um I
have a couple questions.
[1:57:26] So if I understand right, you're saying
that yes, if you wanted to have a beer
[1:57:30] in the park and you're over 21, you can
do it because it's not a problem. Okay.
[1:57:34] So, has has the the vaping and the
smoking and the whatever whatever become
[1:57:41] a problem?
Because I notice on some of the signs
[1:57:44] right now, Goodman Park, it says no
smoking within 20 10 or 20 ft of
[1:57:49] building. So,
was there a problem that this all of a
[1:57:55] sudden is a solution for?
>> I uh I'm not aware of any problems. I do
[1:58:00] think more and more
um most cities that have adopted rules
[1:58:05] in the last 25 years or so are leaning
towards um no no smoking, no tobacco use
[1:58:14] uh for a number of reasons. One is so
it's not around other people. Often it's
[1:58:19] so it's not around children or an
enticement for teens and stuff like
[1:58:23] that. Um, I would say that's the uh that
would be what I sense is the general
[1:58:30] direction for most cities. I think
that's um a pretty
[1:58:36] standard rule from every park I've seen.
>> Okay. I was just wondering on that. Um,
[1:58:43] so let's see. I I want to rent a space
at Broadway Park. Is there going to be a
[1:58:49] QR code on that sign that'll take me to
the city so I can make a reservation?
[1:58:55] » Right now, no, because we uh are not
we're this ordinance makes it possible
[1:59:00] in the future if we want to have
reservation program, we can at that time
[1:59:04] we would we would we could put something
together, but this ordinance itself
[1:59:08] doesn't do that
>> in general or even just contact in
[1:59:11] general. If I had questions about a park
or Yeah. whatever. Uh,
[1:59:16] we can put signs in there. I would, uh,
that if you have questions about the
[1:59:20] park, you can contact city hall or
something like that. I think that
[1:59:23] happens naturally already, though.
>> Yeah. Well, that's what I was thinking.
[1:59:25] QR code might just make it simpler. Um,
so the reservation processes to follow
[1:59:30] down the road. So, to uh, piggy back on
uh, uh, counselor T. Montero's note,
[1:59:38] Nanakum, as we know from um, uh, 1st to
12th. Mhm.
[1:59:45] » And will we be be putting up uh the
parking hour signs there as well?
[1:59:49] » So that that one is not covered under
this code because this code is covering
[1:59:53] parking lots associated with a park.
That is the parking regulations that
[2:00:00] exist in our traffic code and parking
code which is a different chapter. And
[2:00:04] so those are not a part of this. Um, I
am aware that there are some updated
[2:00:10] signs that are likely needed, but not
necessarily associated with this
[2:00:14] ordinance.
>> And I do support the parking space
[2:00:17] striping at at Estuary Park.
>> And that is it. And thank you for doing
[2:00:23] all the work here on this policy. I
appreciate it.
[2:00:29] » I uh don't really have any other
questions. Um, the one thing I thought
[2:00:34] of was what if somebody is in their car
smoking? U
[2:00:41] whether the windows are up or down, I
don't care. But basically, is that
[2:00:45] covered under our ordinance.
>> I think by strict interpretation, uh,
[2:00:50] that would not be permitted. That being
said, there is what's allowed and what's
[2:00:55] not allowed and there is what the police
are going to do.
[2:00:58] » What they're going to do. Yes. And so
>> so I don't propose changing anything for
[2:01:03] that. [clears throat]
The uh and the other thing to note is
[2:01:07] that marijuana use already prohibited
outdoors. So we're just reiterating that
[2:01:13] » some of this will also be I mean there's
the rule and there's how we communicate
[2:01:18] it through signage and other other
things like that. And a couple of my
[2:01:23] neighbors specifically asked I at least
mention this that um
[2:01:29] the one about dogs being on a leash at
all times except where specifically
[2:01:35] designated Cartrite Park has a place
where people like to throw the ball and
[2:01:40] let their dog chase it and they're off
the leash. They're away from people. So,
[2:01:45] um they hope that whoever decides that
will decide that that is a designated
[2:01:50] spot and some of the other parks are big
enough to do that as well. So,
[2:01:57] okay. Um and that was
Yeah. The other comment um you know we
[2:02:06] um councelor T. Montero wanted to add
RVs more spec specificity
[2:02:13] for motor vehicles just make sure that
we don't run a foul of anything that
[2:02:18] we're trying to define motor vehicle
that the state may say something
[2:02:22] different about. I wouldn't think they
would, but uh we want to be careful with
[2:02:26] that.
Okay.
[2:02:30] May I have a motion? If that's all the
comments,
[2:02:34] » I move for a first reading of ordinance
number 2026-07
[2:02:38] by title only.
>> A second.
[2:02:41] » Councelor Baker. Uh, Council President
Morrisy. All those in favor say I.
[2:02:46] » I.
>> I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Spencer.
[2:02:51] Ordinance 2026-07
an ordinance adding chapter 97 parks and
[2:02:57] park facilities to the seaside municipal
code in establishing rules for the use
[2:03:02] of for the use of city parks, parks
facilities, and park associated parking
[2:03:06] areas.
>> Thank you. That be on our next uh
[2:03:11] agenda.
Wow.
[2:03:16] One hour in and we got through the
regular agenda
[2:03:19] » record. [laughter]
>> Yeah.
[2:03:21] I thought that might take longer. City
staff, anybody else?
[2:03:29] » Actually, [laughter]
um
[2:03:32] when can we expect to get some sort of
report on um all of the Fourth of July
[2:03:37] activity?
[2:03:45] We'll uh I'll talk in our department at
meeting tomorrow and we'll see what's
[2:03:50] left to gather and what we'll take to
put it all together and and uh we'll put
[2:03:55] it on an upcoming um agenda.
>> Thank you.
[2:04:07] » Sorry, I just got one more uh from Chief
Daniels. Um, so over the last couple
[2:04:12] weeks, um, we had the honor of being
deployed on wildfires.
[2:04:16] » Um, I just returned today with my crew,
uh, that was out. We were gone for 14
[2:04:22] days, uh, Sumpter, Oregon, Milton, Free
Water, and then into Primeville. Um, but
[2:04:27] just kind of an update on that. Um,
division chief Dave Rankin is still
[2:04:30] deployed with the OSFM red team as a
division supervisor. He's on, I'm going
[2:04:35] to mispronounce it, the Aawa fire
outside his sister's organ. and he's
[2:04:39] been he should um he's currently I think
set to wrap up his 14-day deployment on
[2:04:46] Thursday. Um we do have a crew over in
on the Hagen fire outside of Milton
[2:04:53] Freewater. Um the primary or the
preliminary word is they're going to do
[2:04:58] demob tomorrow morning. They timed out
on Saturday, but after 11 days, it
[2:05:01] sounds like they're going to come home
in the morning. And then this afternoon,
[2:05:05] three and a half hours after my crew got
home, we deployed another team and they
[2:05:10] headed to the Grasshopper fire in Wasco
County. Uh that includes Chief Daniels,
[2:05:13] division chief Jennese Dennis and two
one of our career staffs and one of our
[2:05:17] part or interns.
>> Um I know talking with the OSFM team
[2:05:22] overheads. Um so far I think they've
deployed 35 uh task forces um so far
[2:05:29] this year. Um it's uh reflecting of the
2020 wildfire wildfire seasons which was
[2:05:35] one of the worst in the Oregon history.
Um with the 18% snow pack this year, uh
[2:05:39] they expected to get uh worse somewhere
not even in August yet. So I just want
[2:05:44] to give you guys that update that we do
have crews out. Uh we are covering
[2:05:47] everything at home and we appreciate
everybody's support.
[2:05:51] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[2:05:52] » I think I read that we're over a million
acres are on fire now. Jeez Louise.
[2:05:58] » [snorts]
[2:06:04] » John, anything?
[2:06:10] » I asked him to uh give us an update on
what's required for the upcoming
[2:06:16] elections.
>> Put my glasses on for that.
[2:06:20] since every one of us is uh or at least
our positions whether you're all running
[2:06:27] or not. I I am I'm on the ballot now. Um
make sure that the dates are you're all
[2:06:33] aware of that. Keep in mind that the uh
the one term the one position for ward
[2:06:40] uh three is going to be by appointment.
That's the only way we can fill that.
[2:06:47] Kim.
>> Yes. So, all of this information is on
[2:06:52] the city's website or you're welcome to
call me. Uh I will help you uh go
[2:06:59] through everything that you need to do
as far as if you would like to run for a
[2:07:02] position for the city. Right now you
have positions that are filled by for
[2:07:07] instance
um Robin Monttero is in ward
[2:07:13] uh
>> one two
[2:07:14] » two one and two excuse me at large
Christine Baker is at ward one Seth
[2:07:21] Morrisy is at ward three and four at
large you have Mayor Wright's position
[2:07:27] mayor
uh TA Montero's position ward two is
[2:07:31] open and Um
and uh Patrick Annsboro um he his
[2:07:39] position is open actually for Ward 4. So
W three is the only position that's not
[2:07:45] open as far as for elections. It's only
you can apply but it's for the city
[2:07:49] council.
So, all of these positions are open and
[2:07:55] even though Patrick, Teta, the mayor,
Seth, Christine, and Robin all sit in
[2:08:01] those seats, they're all open for
anybody to apply.
[2:08:05] Um, the
application process is actually very
[2:08:11] easy. You just fill out one sheet, you
come in and get that approved, and then
[2:08:15] you can go out and you just get 20
signatures. And that's really what it
[2:08:19] entails. The deadline for that actually
elections opened on June 3, 2026.
[2:08:26] The last day for a local elected
incumbent, for instance, Teta, the
[2:08:32] mayor, Seth, all are incumbents. They
were um elected by the people of the
[2:08:38] city of Seaside. They all will get their
applications in if they so choose to
[2:08:44] rerun by August 18th at the latest.
That's their deadline, a week before
[2:08:50] everybody else. August 25th would be for
Robin, for Christine, and for Patrick
[2:08:58] and for anybody else that runs for
elections outside of um the council.
[2:09:05] And so I would just like to see some
people get some applications in and
[2:09:10] let's just have a great election year.
So if you have any questions, you can
[2:09:14] come and see me um or it's on the
website. You can go and review that.
[2:09:19] Call me and I'll talk you through
everything. Just I'm here to to help to
[2:09:24] get people running for the city of
Seaside that are interested.
[2:09:28] » Okay.
And you actually strongly encourage
[2:09:33] people to get them in at least two weeks
earlier in those dates if you can
[2:09:38] because they need to be ver the
signatures need to be verified by the
[2:09:43] county.
And uh even though you know they look
[2:09:47] fine to you, the county may not agree
with you. So uh get it done as soon as
[2:09:52] you can uh so Kim can get it to the
county clerk.
[2:10:00] Okay,
[2:10:04] Spencer.
>> The only thing I think I'd add to that
[2:10:08] is uh for our vacancy on W three, I just
encourage our council, you're the
[2:10:13] biggest champions of the city and I
think where we haven't had a lot of
[2:10:18] interest in applications,
um our best bet is going to be through
[2:10:23] direct recruitment. So, be thinking
about people that you know that live in
[2:10:27] Ward 3 and reach out to them, encourage
them. I think oftent times people
[2:10:34] wouldn't normally consider it, but if
they're approached and someone says, "I
[2:10:37] think you'd be really good at this," it
motivates them to consider it. Um, and
[2:10:43] I'd say the same for any of those who
you think are influential in the
[2:10:47] community to do the same. But I think uh
I don't think Ward 3 will be filled just
[2:10:53] by
biting our time. I think [cough] it's
[2:10:56] going to take some uh some recruitment
and this is one area where I will stay
[2:11:01] completely out of it. Part of my code of
ethics is I don't get involved in that
[2:11:07] kind of stuff. So we did place on the
city's website an election page that's
[2:11:12] uh encouraging people to consider it and
just has information on there. Um but
[2:11:17] when it comes to individuals, that's
where I will let you all do it. Um but
[2:11:22] certainly um the success of our future
council will be really the makeup of
[2:11:28] seven individuals. So to the extent
you're able to recruit someone that
[2:11:31] would be great on our council, um that
will go a long way and who also serve
[2:11:36] those residents in W three. So just
encourage you to be thinking about that
[2:11:40] and uh reaching out to those who you
think could also be influential in
[2:11:45] getting others to consider it.
>> Thank you.
[2:11:51] Council bro.
>> Yes sir.
[2:11:57] » Counselor comments.
>> Okay.
[2:12:01] Uh, first of all, I want to thank our
police officers, firefighters, EMS
[2:12:06] crews, dispatchers, tow truck operators,
and everyone who responded to the two
[2:12:11] serious accidents our community
experienced this past week. Uh, I happen
[2:12:16] to be caught in the traffic from both of
those accidents. So, I understand how
[2:12:20] frustrating it can be when traffic slows
down to a crawl or comes to a complete
[2:12:25] stop for hours. I know people had places
to go, places to be, jobs to get at. Um,
[2:12:31] it's in those moments it's easy for
frustration to take over. Unfortunately,
[2:12:37] impatience can lead to unsafe decisions
that create additional hazards for the
[2:12:42] very people who are working to help.
The next time you find yourself stopped
[2:12:46] in a traffic because of an accident, I
invite you to take a deep breath, say a
[2:12:52] prayer, uh or simply send a kind thought
to those involved and remember that um
[2:12:59] how fortunate you are that it isn't you,
your family member or a friend that's
[2:13:05] involved in that. Hopefully, a little
perspective and a little gratitude can
[2:13:10] go a long way for all of us.
Uh moving to uh the community here. Uh
[2:13:17] Seaside's newest mural was unveiled at a
ribbon cutting ceremony. Uh and it was
[2:13:24] created by Casey McMman and assisted by
Seaside High School student Kennedy
[2:13:30] Clumper. And I got a chance to meet her
family. And they are so proud of you,
[2:13:35] Kennedy. They are really proud of me.
Express that a lot. Um and they should
[2:13:40] be. Uh you can find this awesome work of
art located at the facilities building
[2:13:44] in the public parking lot at Ocean Way
behind the carousel mall.
[2:13:50] Uh parks advisory committee. We have a
large number we are blessed to have a
[2:13:55] large number of parks and a variety of
parks in our seaside community. So I
[2:14:01] would recommend that people reach out to
the visitors center for a list and then
[2:14:05] go for a walk. Uh the Japanese have a
term for being in nature and it's called
[2:14:11] forest bathing and it's very good to get
out into the forest or into uh the
[2:14:18] public areas uh of na and nature and
just breathe that in. It's good for the
[2:14:25] soul and it's good for your physical
being. I uh I also had an opportunity to
[2:14:32] go to a church picnic. I haven't been to
a church picnic in a long time. And this
[2:14:37] was uh Reverend Sarah Kit and the
Calvary Exper uh Episcopal Church. They
[2:14:42] were hosting a picnic uh with uh cool
music by uh Secats jazz band and they do
[2:14:48] that on a regular basis. So if you get
an opportunity and you want to go listen
[2:14:53] some good music uh put on uh check out
the Episcopal Calvary Episcopal Church.
[2:14:59] Um, so my ward updates, um, the Vista
Ridge project. To my constituents in
[2:15:06] Ward 4, please continue to make your
voices heard about this project. Be safe
[2:15:12] and stay within the law when you
document, video, and take photos of the
[2:15:16] project's progress and uh, its impact to
the neighborhood. Just, you know, bring
[2:15:22] your voices to the table here. Uh,
Pacific Power LED replacement project.
[2:15:28] If you have thoughts or questions, we'd
love to hear them. Please submit your
[2:15:32] public comments to city hall and uh yes,
um we talked about the fluoride earlier
[2:15:39] and um I support Seth bringing that and
hopefully we'll get that on the agenda.
[2:15:45] And if you have any uh input with
regards to fluoride, please uh do it uh
[2:15:51] politely and fact-based and submit your
public comments to the city hall.
[2:15:56] All right. And then the city uh the
coffee with the counselor is going to be
[2:16:00] on Zoom this time and I'm going to check
with Kim. August 8th, right? It's the
[2:16:06] second Saturday. Thank you. [laughter]
Uh August 8th, 9:15 to 10:15. Please see
[2:16:12] the city's website for the Zoom
invitation. Uh we can chat from the you
[2:16:16] can chat from the comfort of your own
favorite chair while your cat walks
[2:16:20] across your keyboard. That's just fine.
Uh or something similar. Uh bring your
[2:16:26] ideas. bring your challenges, bring your
solutions. Uh I look forward to seeing
[2:16:30] you all virtually.
And then um just want you to remember
[2:16:36] that um every council meeting is about
projects, budgets, and decisions, but at
[2:16:42] the end of the day, it's really about
our community. It's really about people.
[2:16:46] If each of us leaves here looking for
one small way to make our neighborhood a
[2:16:52] little bit better this week, those
little things add up pretty quickly. So
[2:16:57] until next time, please be kind to each
other, be prepared, and take care of one
[2:17:02] another.
Thank you.
[2:17:10] First thing I want to do is um thank our
our u firefighting people. Um I have
[2:17:17] family in Primeville and um they were
ready to evacuate.
[2:17:23] Um
it's scary to think about what happens
[2:17:29] and we know that you are um keeping us
safe here.
[2:17:36] So, um, it's I think it's hard sometimes
to loan you out and what we all need to
[2:17:45] realize is that you're putting your
lives in danger for so many people and
[2:17:52] we really appreciate it.
Definitely.
[2:17:56] Um,
okay. My committees, the tree board met
[2:18:02] um on July 15th.
We did not have a quorum so we had a
[2:18:07] discussion. Um the community center
commission will meet on August 5th and
[2:18:14] we finally uh have a quorum on that
commission. So hopefully we will be able
[2:18:20] to conduct some business. So that's at
the community center at 10:00 a.m. on
[2:18:24] the 5th.
Um, my coffee with a counselor is on
[2:18:29] August 12th at 10:00 a.m. at the Ocean
Cafe at the Best Western at 4th and
[2:18:35] Prom.
On July 20th, um, the uh, Mechanicum
[2:18:42] Watershed Council had their second
meeting regarding project that they want
[2:18:48] to do regarding Thompson Creek.
um because of there's a lot of flooding
[2:18:53] along Thompson Creek. They gave another
presentation to um uh a group of
[2:19:00] residents and they have they presented
three options for um helping the
[2:19:07] situation at Thompson Creek. And I think
now they're going on to um uh price out
[2:19:15] or uh I can't remember the the word they
use, but to spec out uh at least one of
[2:19:23] those options to see if it would work.
And it it sounds like um they have an
[2:19:29] option to do nothing, an option to do
something halfway, and an option to do a
[2:19:35] big change. And what's interesting to
hear is that the big change would cost
[2:19:41] less than doing the halfway change. And
um it it's very interesting to talk with
[2:19:47] them about that. So I'm looking forward
to seeing um more about that. And I
[2:19:54] think that's it for me.
One thing at the uh community center is
[2:20:00] that I notice uh Paul that he has um
started the drain work for the mini lake
[2:20:07] that was out there. So thank you very
much for that.
[2:20:11] » Yes.
>> T uh our monto counselor.
[2:20:19] Um, first of [clears throat] all, I'd
like to uh echo exactly what Teta said
[2:20:24] because her relatives are my relatives
over in Primeville and we just keep our
[2:20:30] fingers crossed and thank you. Um, first
of all, let's say orientation as a city
[2:20:37] councelor getting behind the desk, if
you will, was a an absolute gas. I had a
[2:20:44] wonderful time with every department
head and appreciate their time that they
[2:20:48] spent with me and their expertise. I
loved every minute of it and I now keep
[2:20:54] a pair of boots in the back of my car at
all times.
[2:20:58] Uh let's see. Um, I got to meet with uh
Director Stall at the transportation
[2:21:06] advisory uh committee and councelor
Bicker was there with me and it it was
[2:21:12] wonderful. Um, Paul had brought forward
the plan the uh parking plan for Avenue
[2:21:20] U and the prom. There were a few uh
minor tweaks, but it's it's going to
[2:21:26] happen. It's going to happen and I'm
looking forward to serving on that
[2:21:30] committee. Had a great time. I love
asphalt. What can I say? Um I am
[2:21:37] announcing my candidacy for the general
election in November.
[2:21:42] Uh collecting signatures as we speak
and I will be having conversation with
[2:21:49] the counselor on Thursday, August 6th at
um 10:00 a.m. at the Seaside Coffee
[2:21:55] House. and thank you.
[2:22:02] » Okay. Um,
we have a social event this week on
[2:22:08] Wednesday from 4 to 6 for the villages
project. I've talked about it many
[2:22:14] times. Quick reminder, it's a grassroots
effort to create a village here in
[2:22:19] Seaside to help older adults age in
their homes and to give support to the
[2:22:26] elderly in our community. So, if you are
interested in a little bit of fun bingo
[2:22:32] um and just learning more about what the
villages are and what we're trying to
[2:22:36] do, it's going to be at the Cavalry
Episcopal Church 503 Holiday on
[2:22:42] Wednesday. Thank you to Reverend Sarah.
She's hosting um from 4 to 6. So would
[2:22:47] love to see people there and there will
be snacks. Um
[2:22:53] I also am super excited about the Avenue
U paving project. I think um it's just
[2:23:00] going to be fabulous for that area and
especially for the people that leverage
[2:23:06] that area to get out to the beach on the
Moby Mats. So, I'm just super grateful
[2:23:11] to Paul and Public Works and everybody
who's getting that going. What I do
[2:23:15] think I heard is that it's going to be
completed before the salt makers
[2:23:19] hopefully mayor. So,
>> that's the plan. Um,
[2:23:26] let's see. I have my coffee on August
1st, Saturday morning, 9:00 Seaside Golf
[2:23:32] Course. Would love to have you there.
And then lastly, um I'm wondering one
[2:23:39] thing I've been wanting to talk about,
uh perhaps during a workshop, so I'm
[2:23:43] wondering if anyone wants to join me,
but I would like to see a review of our
[2:23:49] entire capital project list. We did look
at it during the budget process. I have
[2:23:56] uh a lot of concern over the
infrastructure in our city and I want to
[2:24:02] make sure we are doing what we can to
support
[2:24:05] um city staff in prioritizing and
funding and making sure all of that is
[2:24:11] um where it needs to be. So I would like
to see a review of that at one of our
[2:24:17] workshops.
>> Anyone interested?
[2:24:19] » I think we can manage that.
>> Got it. Okay. try to have maybe a
[2:24:24] quarterly report just where we're at
later on in the budget.
[2:24:29] » That'd be great.
>> And lastly, there is some community
[2:24:33] enthusiasm around moving the Statue of
Liberty
[2:24:39] uh over to Seltzer Park, thinking that
it would go with the theme that exists
[2:24:46] uh veterans kind of theme and uh would
be a good place to relocate the Statue
[2:24:51] of Liberty. So, point of order, how
would one go about making that
[2:24:57] recommendation?
[2:25:02] » I don't know that many [clears throat]
people even know about this little
[2:25:06] Statue of Liberty we have. It is a city
um owned piece of uh statuary. It's
[2:25:14] about 5t tall, something like that,
mounted right now on a pallet if I
[2:25:20] remember right. It had been at the
museum just for the Fourth of July for a
[2:25:25] few years.
Um, I would I don't [clears throat]
[2:25:30] think the council will care. I think
maybe we should ask the parks committee
[2:25:35] to get their approval and uh bring it
back to us.
[2:25:39] » Okay.
>> And by approval, you meant
[2:25:41] recommendation.
>> Recommendation. [laughter]
[2:25:44] Recommendation.
>> How tall is this thing?
[2:25:46] » About 5t.
>> Yeah, it's very green.
[2:25:50] very green. Um, yeah, there's a whole
story about it. Um, the, uh, if I
[2:25:57] remember right, Ken over at the visitor
center has the the actual artist name.
[2:26:03] It was a guy that did this for many
states. I mean, he sent them all over.
[2:26:09] So, it's one of many.
[2:26:14] » The museum used it as a photo op. We
placed it right next to our sign. So
[2:26:20] when people took pictures, there you go.
>> So parks committee add, please add that
[2:26:26] to your agenda. That would be fabulous.
>> You got a uh
[2:26:29] » Oh, yes.
>> Council le theison on there.
[2:26:31] » Asison. Thank you.
>> Thank you. And lastly, I'm just going to
[2:26:36] triple quadruple echo the thanks to the
fire department and um for helping out
[2:26:42] everybody in our community.
Ditto.
[2:26:47] All right. Council Ansbro mentioned it,
but thanks everyone for participating in
[2:26:51] the city water flidation conversation. I
believe this is an important public
[2:26:56] policy that deserves a bigger discussion
and I'm excited this council is going to
[2:27:00] finally make that happen. Uh TAC meeting
July 15th. The discussion was mainly
[2:27:05] focused on tourism grants and we also
got a recap of the marketing campaign to
[2:27:11] try to discourage illegal fireworks on
the fort. So, it's very interesting to
[2:27:14] see everything they went through to try
to make that happen. And obviously, we
[2:27:18] didn't do a perfect job, but I think we
did make some progress. Uh, there is a
[2:27:22] new woman's shower at the cove. This has
been a project that we've been working
[2:27:25] on, I don't know, maybe someone would
know more than me. How many years? Five,
[2:27:30] 10. It's been a long time.
>> Five maybe.
[2:27:32] » Yeah, it's been in public in the public
works.
[2:27:36] » Seven.
>> He says seven. So, [laughter] yeah. So,
[2:27:38] it's exciting to finally see that
installed. And I know a lot of the
[2:27:42] especially female surfers really
appreciate that having their own little
[2:27:46] area. So I don't know if it's just a
woman's shower or if it's for everybody,
[2:27:49] but it is a separate show.
>> Yeah, it's a separate shower. So
[2:27:53] » actually
soft station.
[2:27:56] » Okay.
>> Where we're going to have a group
[2:27:57] shower.
>> Okay.
[2:28:00] » Um and then uh as far as my future as a
city councelor,
[2:28:04] » I did pick up a packet today. I'm not
100% certain what the future will hold
[2:28:08] for me, but I got to speak to the family
and try to make that final decision very
[2:28:12] soon. But with that being said, I just
want to encourage anyone out there
[2:28:16] that's considering serving to reach out
to Kim. She doesn't bite. She's very
[2:28:20] friendly and she will walk you through
the entire process.
[2:28:24] Uh coffee with the council president,
Tuesday, August 4th, 9:15 a.m. Seaside
[2:28:29] coffee house. Thank you.
followed by the mayors. People come to
[2:28:35] his, they don't stick around for mine.
>> Oh, come on.
[2:28:40] » Um,
I'm always and always have been amazed
[2:28:44] by uh the fire department this time of
year when so many people are out across
[2:28:52] the state and sometime other states and
yet we still have great service here as
[2:28:58] well. So, all of our our staff and
volunteers are just amazing.
[2:29:05] We appreciate all that they do. Um, I
attended Tom Horning's um
[2:29:12] memorial, I guess, um, at North Coast
Land Conservancy a week, two weeks ago,
[2:29:19] and it was it was amazing. Um, heard a
lot of great stories. I didn't think I
[2:29:25] was going to be able to make it, but I'm
really glad that um things worked out
[2:29:29] that I could.
>> A lot of things coming up. Um volleyball
[2:29:35] week is um next week.
>> The week after, well, not this week, but
[2:29:41] next week. Yeah.
Um, I happen to be attending the OMA,
[2:29:46] the mayor's conference that week, so we
can all go and talk about our councils
[2:29:51] and our city managers and our staff.
Yeah. No, it's a great time for mayors
[2:29:57] just to go and and you know, everybody
you're talking to is another mayor and
[2:30:01] can uh share things with you that um are
sometimes a little easier when it's
[2:30:06] mayor. Uh but on the 7th uh our local
regional small cities meeting happens.
[2:30:14] Um so I'm hoping that somebody from
Seaside will be able to attend that.
[2:30:19] It'd be down in Bay City. I'll be giving
you homework for the last half of August
[2:30:24] when we don't have a meeting. Uh we need
to determine our top five priorities for
[2:30:29] the League of Oregon Cities uh lobbyists
for the 2027 session that's coming up.
[2:30:35] Uh this is one case while I will uh
actually I'll have Kim print the entire
[2:30:42] uh 20 pages or so out and give to you
because this is the kind of thing where
[2:30:47] you need to make notes and look at
everything on there. We will come back
[2:30:52] probably on the first meeting in
September and hold a vote and determine
[2:30:59] what Seaside thinks the LOC board should
support.
[2:31:05] Um, we know there's a ceremony on August
11th at uh Estuary Park. There's also
[2:31:12] going to be a ceremony on September
11th, which happens to be the 25th
[2:31:16] anniversary of the tragedies in uh on
the East Coast. Be at the American
[2:31:23] Legion. Um I forgot to write down the
time. I think it's 1:00, but uh it'll be
[2:31:28] honoring the first responders. Um, we
had a citizen just come forward and say
[2:31:33] he'd like to arrange it and uh worked
out at 4:00. 4:00. Okay. At the American
[2:31:41] Legion. So, um, we'll get information
out. The flyer was just created today, I
[2:31:47] think. So, you'll be able to get an
invitation to that. My quote for
[2:31:52] tonight, um, has to do with teamwork
again. Um, and kind of particularly
[2:31:57] because we're talking about city manager
when we get done after this and the city
[2:32:02] council. It's a quote from Alan Moly
who was a former CEO at Ford and he
[2:32:10] worked many years at Boeing as well. He
said leadership and this so this applies
[2:32:16] to not just Spencer leading the staff
but the council leading the citizenry
[2:32:22] and Spencer leadership is having a
compelling vision a comprehensive plan
[2:32:29] and a relentless
what happened to the rest of the quote
[2:32:43] Well,
[2:32:47] » the rest of the quote's gone.
>> Well, we need to bag of Skittles.
[2:32:52] » Um, I'm sure it's a relentless desire to
keep things going. So, I'll uh I'll give
[2:32:59] that to uh you all later. What we're
going to do now though is
[2:33:04] move into an executive session
in accordance with OS192.660
[2:33:12] 2I to review and evaluate the employment
related performance of the chief
[2:33:18] executive executive officer of any
public body a public officer employer
[2:33:24] staff member who does not request an
open hearing. Afterwards, we'll
[2:33:29] reconvene into regular session. And uh
you're welcome to stay if you want, but
[2:33:35] it may be a while. You're all free to
go. We will be back, though.
[3:09:57] We're back from executive session. I'm
going to read my quote over. I found the
[3:10:02] rest of it because the most important
part was left out. Leadership is having
[3:10:06] a compelling vision, a comprehensive
plan, relentless implementation, and
[3:10:12] talented people working together.
We uh are returning from our executive
[3:10:20] session and
pull up the right thing here.
[3:10:25] Um I have a statement to make regarding
um our city manager's performance. what
[3:10:30] we talked about.
Overall, the city council is very
[3:10:35] pleased with Spencer Kyle's performance
during the past year.
[3:10:41] We appreciate his professionalism,
thorough preparation, collaborative
[3:10:47] leadership style, and his ability to
present complex issues in a way that
[3:10:52] helps the council make informed
decisions. As we look ahead, we
[3:10:56] encourage Spencer to continue building
the leadership capacity of his
[3:11:01] department heads through greater
delegation, to streamline reports and
[3:11:06] presentations, to focus on the key
issues, to continue improving budget
[3:11:11] processes, and to help us strengthen
communication with residents that builds
[3:11:17] public confidence in city government. We
also look forward to continued progress
[3:11:22] determining the council's strategic
priorities particularly related to
[3:11:27] infrastructure planning and
implementation
[3:11:30] while maintaining our positive momentum
that has benefited the city of Seaside.
[3:11:37] We'll move from that into uh determining
uh what changes we may want to make to
[3:11:44] his um annual salary.
Uh you have seen uh the letter he wrote
[3:11:50] to us, but uh the overall compensation
that find my glasses here that um the
[3:12:00] cost of living increase this year was um
2.8%.
[3:12:06] And so I would uh propose that we move
the base pay for city manager Spencer
[3:12:12] Cow by 2.8% to 186,41
per year.
[3:12:17] retroactively effective 71 of 2026.
>> I'll second that.
[3:12:26] » Uh the mayor made the motion and
councelor T. Monttero seconded it. Any
[3:12:31] discussion?
Feel free. I mean I'm I rarely make a
[3:12:37] motion. So,
>> right, you know, um I think we want to
[3:12:42] also make it clear this is the uh cost
of living raise and it was um Spencer
[3:12:50] who uh indicated not to give him a merit
side. And I want to make sure that from
[3:12:58] a historical perspective, nobody looks
at zero merit and sees it as a demerit,
[3:13:05] as a negative, because it is not a
negative. It is something that we're
[3:13:10] doing to fulfill another request of um
of uh the city managers. And so I want
[3:13:16] to make sure we make that point.
[3:13:22] » Any other comments?
All those in favor say I. I.
[3:13:28] » Any opposed? Motion carries.
The um next step is to u possibly uh and
[3:13:38] we don't have to decide this tonight,
but um make the um proposal to move some
[3:13:46] of Spencer's or put some u money into
Spencer's deferred income. there's no
[3:13:53] provision for that in his current
contract
[3:13:56] and um you saw with the surveys that
we've done that that is one area that um
[3:14:05] he is kind of lacking in as far as
overall compensation.
[3:14:10] So um what we are proposing is to change
the language to allow deferred
[3:14:18] compensate compensation.
Uh what we're talking about for the
[3:14:22] first year is 2% which is pretty
minimal. Um
[3:14:28] so that's that's a fairly simple change
straightforward.
[3:14:33] And what we would do would have uh
Spencer go back and u we will I will
[3:14:38] work with him and create a new amendment
to his contract and bring it back to the
[3:14:44] council for approval.
Comments, questions?
[3:14:52] » Sounds like a good plan,
>> huh?
[3:14:54] » Sounds like a good plan.
>> Yeah.
[3:14:56] » Yeah.
>> Your mic on? Yeah. Okay.
[3:14:59] » Mayor, is uh what is the term of the
contract? Is there a a definitive term
[3:15:06] or just open?
>> No term for there until you don't want
[3:15:10] me here. [laughter]
>> Thank you.
[3:15:13] » And Dad, what the mayor said, I think
coming back with that at a different
[3:15:16] meeting would allow it to, you know, be
in the packet and everything like that.
[3:15:21] So, like any other item, there's the
public has an opportunity to have some
[3:15:25] eyes on it and rather than
a time like this. So
[3:15:32] » would when it when it comes back would
we be talking in general about the
[3:15:37] program the administration the cost of
the program are any other s employees
[3:15:44] going to be eligible like is that what
you're saying bringing back? No, we
[3:15:47] already we already have the program. Um
>> uh when I got here, that was one of the
[3:15:53] things that we were missing. And so
we've implemented we all employees have
[3:15:57] an opportunity themselves to contribute
to the um it's basically through PERS,
[3:16:03] but it's their their 457 plan. And so
it's all voluntary contributions. And so
[3:16:09] the request I put in there is for a 2%
city contribution on my behalf. But the
[3:16:15] program's already there. It's already in
payroll and employees already use it.
[3:16:18] » I understand now. Thank you. No city
match currently,
[3:16:22] » right?
>> Got it.
[3:16:26] » Is that generally acceptable to
everybody? Sounds okay. Okay.
[3:16:30] » So, yeah.
>> The second one that is going to engender
[3:16:33] more conversation, uh, he has asked um,
well,
[3:16:39] you wrote this in an email, right?
Everybody sent it. Okay. So, everybody
[3:16:43] knows about it.
um why don't you explain it first and
[3:16:47] then we'll talk about it.
>> Sure.
[3:16:50] » From your standpoint and what you've
learned from other city managers.
[3:16:55] » So this is so the request is at a
provision that the uh city manager um
[3:17:02] may not be terminated within 6 months of
a new counselor taking office.
[3:17:08] um it isn't um it was something I just
didn't worry about negotiating when I
[3:17:14] came here and um hopefully it never
needs to be used. Um I will say there
[3:17:21] was a discussion there was a at the city
manager conference this summer there was
[3:17:26] a um a session on city managers
contracts. So there was a discussion
[3:17:30] about this and I don't say that to think
make you think city managers go to these
[3:17:35] conferences to figure out how we can
amend our contracts. Um but there was
[3:17:39] some good discussion about this clause
in particular and I think it is a common
[3:17:44] clause
uh in what I would call for lack of a
[3:17:49] better word some of the more
sophisticated cities and agreements. Um,
[3:17:53] they have other cities where the
managers are like contract, you know,
[3:17:59] uh, or some of them are pretty basic,
but I would say it's probably 50/50 on
[3:18:04] something like this being included. Um
and the reason for it is um there are
[3:18:12] oftent times especially after elections
you have a full change over and there is
[3:18:18] an immediate rush to make a change with
the city manager which often is not in
[3:18:24] the best interest of the city. Um
especially where the city manager and
[3:18:30] staff sometimes can be constant. And so
the idea there is that when new people
[3:18:36] take office, they need to kind of work
with staff um develop that relationship
[3:18:43] and actually assess them based on
working with them rather than kind of
[3:18:48] the campaign trail. And um so uh I think
this time more than any other would be
[3:18:56] appropriate.
We don't have people rushing in to fill
[3:19:01] vacancies, but it is conceivable that
there are six different peop, seven
[3:19:06] different people sitting here a year
from now. And um it would be good, let's
[3:19:13] say they all took office in January,
that there is some time for us to work
[3:19:19] together um to see if it's a a good fit.
And so I think um it's not a cost to the
[3:19:26] city, but I think it adds some stability
um when it there can be um rougher or
[3:19:34] more contentious patches. And you
sometimes see
[3:19:38] higher volume of turnover
um with councils with with managers
[3:19:44] coming and going every two years and
whatnot. It's I think a bit of a um
[3:19:50] in uh opportunity to avoid some of that
and add some stability. And I don't and
[3:19:57] I don't um I don't want to say that that
obviously it benefits the city manager
[3:20:02] as well in terms of um some uh added
protection. Um but it it still allows
[3:20:09] the council to ultimately make the same
uh separation decisions that the
[3:20:14] contract currently allows. it just uh
maybe a bit of a a waiting period or
[3:20:19] cooling off period after an election or
um for that to happen. And so I think if
[3:20:25] there was ever a time to um put it on, I
think this would be a good time. That
[3:20:30] being said, I hope it's never needed to
be used, but um uh not, you know, I've
[3:20:37] seen cities change on the you know, on
the with one election and things go a
[3:20:42] completely different direction. And so
you never know. Uh, I don't feel like
[3:20:46] there's any concern with that today, but
I can't always say for sure in the
[3:20:50] future. And so I think there's a a
benefit to the community um as well as
[3:20:56] to the city manager by putting something
like that in place.
[3:21:00] » I have um addressed we've chatted a bit
about it too. Um, we actually changed or
[3:21:08] discussed changing the original wording
from just elected to appointed as well
[3:21:13] because this can come up kind of all of
a sudden any time. Uh again, one of the
[3:21:19] things I do when I talk to mayors, I
find out what's happening and I follow a
[3:21:24] lot of the news stories and there was a
city on the coast here that uh basically
[3:21:30] the one counselor quit and then the
mayor quit and the remaining city
[3:21:36] councilors um kicked out the city
manager and you know they had to pay a a
[3:21:42] severance for doing that. But um he was
I thought a pretty good city manager and
[3:21:50] was leading him the right direction and
they just refused it. So I'm uh I'm I
[3:21:57] don't know what's going to happen there.
the um I don't know if this I I just
[3:22:03] realized it that a city council that's
elected um or appointed I suppose I I
[3:22:11] didn't think of that actually can't be
recalled for 6 months
[3:22:16] » so it's kind of the same thing you when
you get into office you can't
[3:22:21] immediately recall the city manager you
have to wait 6 months just like people
[3:22:26] have to wait six months for you
my only uh question was whether it
[3:22:31] should be based on one counselor or more
than that and uh I
[3:22:38] because the flexibility is already there
if the remaining counselors want him to
[3:22:43] go all they have to do is make an
agreement a severance agreement and he's
[3:22:47] gone if they can make him agree to it he
him or her so I don't think it really
[3:22:53] changes anything but the the idea is
there and so I'm I think I'm fine with
[3:22:59] it being just one counselor either is
appointed or changed and that you know
[3:23:04] all of a sudden that changes something.
I I just can't see that happening
[3:23:09] particularly with our city manager but
you never know.
[3:23:15] So comments
>> well I can't either. That's maybe why
[3:23:18] I'm having a hard time crystallizing
this. Um but if we look at the last two
[3:23:25] years let's say or almost two years
since I was appointed
[3:23:30] » that would be there would there would be
the whole time the whole two years this
[3:23:35] would be in place.
>> So is that
[3:23:41] » but again you still have the option to
come up with an agreement. So you know
[3:23:46] if you really want him out you're going
to pay to to get him out. I I guess what
[3:23:51] I'm thinking though is is one counselor
going to make a difference and get the
[3:23:59] whole council to fire this person. So
I'm I'm I'm thinking you have to have,
[3:24:04] you know, a majority
>> and one new counselor on the council is
[3:24:10] going to create that majority. Um and
that kind of goes along with what Chris
[3:24:15] is saying.
in general if it's
[3:24:19] best practice for
>> city manager you know contracts I'm
[3:24:25] » I would say I'd say it's not uncommon I
I don't know if there if this would be
[3:24:30] in the best practice category
um
[3:24:35] not uncommon
uh for those who have taken up and
[3:24:38] discussed it uh but not a I wouldn't say
it's standard or anything like that
[3:24:44] » okay well better to be proactive active
than reactive. [clears throat]
[3:24:50] » I think six months I think that's if I'm
understanding this I [clears throat]
[3:24:55] think that that's totally acceptable. I
mean um you got to have an opportunity
[3:25:01] to know somebody before you go onto the
path of removing them. Uh my wife's got
[3:25:07] a contract with me for 6 months that I
do a moratorum on any remodeling that I
[3:25:14] do on a new house. She says absolutely
not. You have to wait six months and
[3:25:19] then after that you know the gloves are
off, the hammer comes out and the drill
[3:25:24] goes.
So I think that uh I like this idea of
[3:25:30] six months at the very least. You know,
you get a chance to know the person that
[3:25:34] you're going to be spending time with
and understand them. I guess my concern
[3:25:39] is what councelor Benker brought up is
where you could have a situation where
[3:25:43] you have so much transition in
counselors that there would never be an
[3:25:47] opportunity. So I I I'm not ready to
make a decision on this tonight. I'd
[3:25:51] like to give it more thought and kind of
think about it and
[3:25:54] » it would be something that would be
brought back for the next time anyways.
[3:25:58] And
>> I mean maybe I would be open to a lower
[3:25:59] threshold, but I I could see a situation
where we would need to potentially
[3:26:03] remove a city manager. wouldn't be able
to because if there was constant
[3:26:06] turnover and that's what I'd be
concerned about.
[3:26:09] » I'll see if I can if there are some
other options that would could serve the
[3:26:15] same purpose
but not be so restrictive
[3:26:20] in light of the last few years that
there could never be an opportunity
[3:26:25] because it's not in the city's interest
to not be able to let go of a city man.
[3:26:30] » And that's part of our main power we
have is the city. Let me give it some
[3:26:35] thought and uh as we come back at the
next meeting um I can give you a couple
[3:26:41] of different options to discuss and
>> I could potentially see if the majority
[3:26:44] of the council changed maybe there's a
higher threshold but one I I I just
[3:26:48] think that could be an issue.
>> Spencer, did you say that there is
[3:26:54] precedent for implementing this?
>> Yeah, I think I think there are quite a
[3:26:59] few cities that do this. Um
can't remember if it was Ashland or
[3:27:06] Corvalis. One of them there were there
was a panel discussion. One of them said
[3:27:09] that theirs didn't have a timeline, but
it said uh if the city council
[3:27:15] terminates the city manager within 6
months of someone taking office, um the
[3:27:20] city pays out double the severance that
the contract currently calls for.
[3:27:28] that might look too good that someone
might try to get [laughter]
[3:27:34] off.
>> So, um like I said, um
[3:27:38] uh some I would say many cities have it
of of the cities that are more
[3:27:43] sophisticated probably 50/50. That's
just a total guess. And so, by no means
[3:27:48] is it a standard thing. By no means
[clears throat] is it uncommon.
[3:27:51] » Thank you.
[3:27:56] uh just reiterate that I have seen um
this transpire and it's not pretty and
[3:28:02] it's definitely not good for the city.
Um you know that city's struggling. I
[3:28:08] think they finally appointed an interim
but I don't know how long she'll last
[3:28:12] with
the council situation.
[3:28:16] We'll see. I hope they succeed.
[3:28:21] Okay.
Thank you very much and we are
[3:28:26] adjourned.