[0:00] Good job.

[0:02] >> All right, Sylvia, roll call.

[0:04] >> Mayor Rosner

[0:05] >> here.

[0:06] >> Council President Young is absent.

[0:08] Councelor Brow

[0:08] >> here.

[0:09] >> Councelor Stani

[0:10] >> here.

[0:10] >> Councelor Mays

[0:11] >> here.

[0:12] >> Councelor Scott

[0:12] >> present.

[0:13] >> Councelor Giles

[0:14] >> here.

[0:14] >> Thank you.

[0:15] >> All right. Thank you, Sylvia. Um, do I

[0:17] have a motion for approval of the

[0:19] agenda?

[0:20] >> Second.

[0:21] >> Got a motion, a second. All those in

[0:22] favor of approving the agenda say I.

[0:25] >> All those opposed, same.

[0:28] >> Motion passes. Thank you, council. On

[0:30] the consent agenda tonight, we have four

[0:32] items. Item A, approval of the July 1st,

[0:34] July 21st, 2026 city council meeting

[0:36] minutes. Item B, resolution 2026

[0:40] 052 reappointing Jane

[0:43] Perez Mosher to the Sherwood Cultural

[0:45] Arts Commission. Resolution 2026-053

[0:48] reappointing Lester Nish Nisha Umura I

[0:53] guess hopefully I got that right. Uh to

[0:55] the Sherwood Cultural Arts Commission

[0:57] and resolution 26-054

[1:00] reing Elizabeth Flores to the Shore

[1:02] Cultural Arts Commission.

[1:05] >> Consent.

[1:08] >> I have a motion

[1:09] >> second

[1:10] >> and a second. All those in favor of

[1:12] approving the consent agenda say I. I.

[1:14] All those opposed, same. Motion passes.

[1:17] Thank you, councel.

[1:19] >> All right. Citizen comments. Sie, do we

[1:21] have anything?

[1:21] >> I have nothing.

[1:22] >> All right, let me look.

[1:25] Double check online.

[1:28] pressure.

[1:30] We have no attendees

[1:33] online. I know we have attendees here.

[1:35] Um so no attendees.

[1:38] >> Yes. Um so we will go ahead and move on

[1:41] to public public hearings.

[1:44] Sylvia, we got four items on the agenda

[1:46] tonight. You want to read us in?

[1:47] >> Um I will. So mayor and council for item

[1:50] number A, ordinance 2026004.

[1:52] I'll read one statement for that item

[1:54] and then a following statement for the

[1:56] remainder of the other three items.

[1:59] The Sherwood City Council will hold the

[2:00] public hearing this evening to receive

[2:02] testimony on ordinance 2026-004

[2:06] amending Sherwood Municipal Code Chapter

[2:08] 1.01

[2:10] public contracting rules. This is the

[2:12] second hearing on this item. The public

[2:14] hearing this evening will be conducted

[2:15] as follows. Staff will present a staff

[2:18] report questions if any by the council

[2:20] of four staff. We will then receive

[2:22] written testimony. We will then open the

[2:24] public hearing for testimony and the

[2:25] time will be limited to four minutes per

[2:27] person. Any interested person may

[2:29] present testimony. We will then close

[2:31] the public hearing. No other comments

[2:33] will be heard from the public. Final

[2:35] comments by staff. Questions of staff if

[2:37] any by the council followed by council

[2:39] discussion. This is the second hearing

[2:41] before the city council on this item. A

[2:43] decision may be made by the council at

[2:45] the close of this hearing or the matter

[2:47] may be continued to a time and date

[2:49] certain. If the matter is continued to a

[2:51] date certain, this is the only notice of

[2:53] that date you will receive. If you wish

[2:55] to speak, please fill out a request to

[2:57] speak form and submit it to the city

[2:58] recorder prior to the time the public

[3:00] hearing is open for testimony. The mayor

[3:02] will recognize people who wish to speak

[3:04] and any comments must be addressed

[3:06] through the mayor. When you come

[3:07] forward, please state your name and

[3:09] place of residence for the record as

[3:11] this hearing will be recorded.

[3:13] >> Thank you, Sylvia. Um, so I'm going to

[3:15] go ahead and turn it over to Ryan for a

[3:17] staff report.

[3:28] Thank you, Mayor Council. Good evening.

[3:30] So, this is our second second.

[3:39] As you can see,

[3:41] the city procurement code

[3:44] changes

[3:47] last council meeting through those small

[3:56] questions

[3:58] updates the city code with our current

[4:01] state

[4:11] of the proposed changes would be

[4:15] previously small procurements $10,000

[4:17] procurement

[4:27] there's no competition that staff

[4:29] selects

[4:36] intermediate procurements

[4:40] for those

[4:42] previously $150,000 up $250,000

[4:47] And there

[4:51] are

[4:54] things like

[4:58] $250,000.

[5:00] So also allows

[5:08] staff remain

[5:14] questions.

[5:17] Thank you, Ryan. Any questions for Ryan?

[5:21] Any written testimony?

[5:22] >> I don't.

[5:23] >> Okay, great. Um, yeah, go ahead.

[5:26] >> A point of clarification. Uh, last

[5:29] meeting we had on the consent agenda

[5:32] contract for water treatment plants. The

[5:34] Sherwood share was like $216,000,

[5:38] but the total was 650. that because of

[5:42] it being our share under the 250 that

[5:44] would not need to come to city council.

[5:46] Is that correct?

[5:46] >> I think we would still bring that to

[5:48] council.

[6:06] That's how I was reading it as well.

[6:09] >> Yeah, I would bring that to you. Uh, one

[6:12] because of the total cost. Uh, two,

[6:15] because unbudgeted and we're going to be

[6:17] bringing a supplemental budget back

[6:18] anyway. So, I I wouldn't want you to see

[6:20] it in a supplemental if you didn't see

[6:22] beforehand.

[6:23] >> Well, yes, I know that the process would

[6:25] I curious like

[6:28] answered technically. Thank you.

[6:32] >> No, it's it's a great question. I'm just

[6:35] letting the public know that there's a

[6:36] process because without a budget line

[6:38] item, you can't approve it anyways and

[6:40] there will be there'll be a separate

[6:41] supplemental budget process on this. So,

[6:45] good question. Um,

[6:47] so I guess if there's no more questions,

[6:49] go ahead and open the public hearing.

[6:51] Sia, do we have anybody?

[6:53] >> And I see nobody online. Anyone from the

[6:55] audience?

[7:02] Um, we'll go ahead and close the public

[7:04] hearing at this point. Any additional

[7:07] discussion?

[7:11] » It's our second reading. So, I'll take a

[7:13] motion.

[7:18] » I move we recaption adopt ordinance

[7:19] 2026-4

[7:21] amendments chapter 1.01 public

[7:24] contracting rules. Right. We have a

[7:28] motion and a second

[7:34] amending the Sherwood Municipal Code

[7:36] Chapter 1.10 public contracting rules.

[7:39] Councelor Giles, how do you vote?

[7:42] >> Councelor Scott.

[7:43] >> Hi,

[7:44] >> Councelor Mays.

[7:45] >> Hi,

[7:45] >> Councelor Stankey.

[7:46] >> Hi,

[7:47] >> Councelor Brow. Hi,

[7:48] >> Mayor Rosner. Hi.

[7:50] >> Thank you.

[7:52] We have a new ordinance

[7:54] actually will go into effect in

[7:57] 30 days.

[7:59] All right, Silia, I'm gonna go ahead and

[8:02] have you read us into the next ones. I

[8:04] understand they'll be slightly different

[8:05] process.

[8:06] >> The Sherwood City Council will hold

[8:08] public hearings this evening on three

[8:10] items on the agenda. Ordinance 2026-005

[8:15] amending chapter 3.30 of the Sherwood

[8:18] Municipal Code to increase the city

[8:20] transient lodging tax. Ordinance

[8:23] 2026-006

[8:25] amending chapter 2.08.095

[8:29] of the Sherwood Municipal Code Youth

[8:31] Advisory Board. Ordinance 2026-007

[8:35] establishing a commercial public safety

[8:37] fee and adding section 350

[8:41] to the Sherwood Municipal Code. The

[8:43] public hearings this evening will be

[8:45] conducted as follows. Staff will present

[8:47] a staff report questions if any by the

[8:49] city council for staff. We will then

[8:51] receive written testimony. We will then

[8:53] open the public hearing for testimony

[8:55] and the time will be limited to four

[8:56] minutes per person. Any interested

[8:58] person may present testimony. We will

[9:00] then close the public hearing. No other

[9:02] comments will be heard from the public.

[9:04] Final comments by staff. Questions of

[9:06] staff, if any, by the council, followed

[9:08] by council discussion. This is the first

[9:10] hearing before the city council on these

[9:12] items. Generally, the council will hold

[9:14] two hearings prior to making a decision.

[9:17] A second hearing on these three

[9:18] ordinances is currently for the

[9:21] September 1st meeting. However, in

[9:23] accordance with the city charter, the

[9:24] council reserves the right to make a

[9:26] decision at the close of this hearing by

[9:28] a unanimous vote of all city and council

[9:30] members.

[9:32] If you wish to speak, please fill out a

[9:34] request to speak form and submit it to

[9:35] city recorder prior to the time the

[9:37] public hearing is open for testimony.

[9:39] The mayor will recognize people who wish

[9:41] to speak and any comments must be

[9:42] addressed through the mayor. When you

[9:44] come forward, please state your name and

[9:45] place of residence for the for the

[9:48] record as this hearing will be recorded.

[9:50] Thank you, Silia. And for the first

[9:52] ordinance 2026-5,

[9:55] we have our finance director, David.

[9:57] >> Thank you, mayor. As Sylvia said, this

[10:00] is the first reading of ordinance

[10:02] 2026-005

[10:04] amending chapter 3.30 of the Sherwood

[10:07] Municipal Code to increase the transit

[10:09] lod.

[10:12] OS 320 permits local jurisdictions to

[10:14] assess transit lodging taxes. The city

[10:16] of Sherwood in 2019 adopted the transit

[10:20] lodge tax of the city at a rate of 3%.

[10:24] Visitors who stay in transit lodging

[10:25] benefit from a variety of city services

[10:27] and public investments including

[10:29] transportation, police services, parks,

[10:31] public art. Uh the proposed increase

[10:34] would allow a greater share of these

[10:35] costs to be supported by visitors rather

[10:38] than Sherwood residents and businesses.

[10:41] The city's transient lodging tax has

[10:43] remained unchanged, as I've said, since

[10:45] 2019. The proposed ordinance increases

[10:48] the rate in two phases to provide uh

[10:51] lodging providers and visitors adequate

[10:53] notice of time to adjust to new. Under

[10:56] this uh proposed ordinance, the the

[10:58] local transit lodging tax would increase

[11:01] from 3% to 5% on October 1st, 2026.

[11:06] a year later increasing from five to

[11:08] six% on October 1st, 2027

[11:12] with

[11:15] All right. Thank you, David. Any

[11:16] questions?

[11:21] I may be misremembering, but did we

[11:24] decide to do it in two steps last time?

[11:26] >> Okay. All right.

[11:31] Any other questions?

[11:37] We didn't

[11:41] there was consensus that that was the

[11:42] direction

[11:44] tonight.

[11:45] >> Yes,

[11:45] >> correct. I misspoke. Thank you.

[11:47] >> There were several voices advocating for

[11:56] » um if there's any other questions.

[12:01] All right. Um, do we have any uh written

[12:04] testimony?

[12:05] >> I do not.

[12:06] >> Okay, great. So, at this point, I'll

[12:07] open the public hearing. Silia, do we

[12:09] have anybody sign up?

[12:10] >> I do not.

[12:11] >> Anybody from the audience? No.

[12:14] And we don't have anyone online, so go

[12:16] ahead and close the public hearing. Uh,

[12:19] any This is the first reading. We don't

[12:22] have whole council tonight, but is there

[12:24] any additional discussion before we

[12:25] close out?

[12:29] » I'll just say that

[12:32] interested

[12:34] about this couple meetings ago.

[12:46] » Thank you. I I would just add to I'm

[12:50] supportive and uh you know it's it's one

[12:52] of the ways um cities can raise taxes on

[12:56] tourism basically because we don't not

[12:59] like other states like Washington

[13:01] doesn't have tax, but they have sales

[13:03] tax. It's helpful.

[13:05] All right,

[13:08] good. So, we'll go ahead and move on to

[13:10] ordinance 2026-006

[13:13] amending the chapter 2.08095,

[13:17] Sherwood Municipal Code Youth Advisory

[13:19] Board.

[13:21] Kristen, where's

[13:21] >> Kristen?

[13:23] I am on her name is on the agenda.

[13:30] Ryan, are you gonna be speaking on this

[13:31] one?

[13:32] >> I am.

[13:34] >> Awesome. Thank you.

[13:41] » Previously, we had seven.

[13:51] So what the proposal is to up that

[13:54] number to maximum 12

[14:04] does change

[14:06] and terms

[14:12] after graduation.

[14:30] language.

[14:40] Awesome. Thank you.

[14:45] So if I'm correctly changed

[14:53] their sophomore year

[14:55] without having to be

[14:58] but it wouldn't preclude

[15:00] upper classmen from from being

[15:02] appointed. Their term would just end up

[15:03] being shorter.

[15:10] not required.

[15:15] » And this was a specific request from the

[15:18] advisory board. It also is a thought

[15:21] process to enable

[15:24] underassmen.

[15:48] » We had

[15:50] applicants around

[15:55] us.

[16:15] So, I'm I'm definitely for, you know,

[16:18] improving the numbers on this. I would love the advisory board, the

[16:24] youth advisory board to um

[16:28] also propose maybe a way that we're

[16:30] going to

[16:32] avoid bias a little bit in terms of

[16:34] getting I know it's easy to recruit

[16:38] your friends or people who are in your

[16:40] same social circles or things like that.

[16:42] And so, um trying to figure out, okay,

[16:46] looking at our board, what groups are

[16:48] not here and specifically try to recruit

[16:54] that so that we don't um end up in a

[16:57] spot, you know, and I'm not saying

[16:58] that's now, but down the road it could

[17:01] be a spot where we've got the exact same

[17:04] voices being heard over and over again.

[17:06] So, um, they don't have to do it now. I

[17:09] think that this is a great step to

[17:11] getting us in the right direction. And

[17:13] if they If they feel like it would help

[17:15] them do their job better and be a more

[17:17] effective board, then I support them

[17:19] that

[17:23] council hearing.

[17:26] >> I am not. It's more of encouragement to

[17:30] because you know Rene just said they did

[17:32] a great job recruiting. Um I and I just

[17:35] want to

[17:37] you know I know that they hang on every

[17:39] word that they watch these meetings in

[17:42] full. I'm sure. Right. No, just kidding.

[17:47] But if they could if they can just be

[17:50] aware of that to be able to reach out

[17:51] and and uh recruit from groups that are

[17:55] underrepresented.

[17:57] >> Just for the record, there was some

[17:59] pretty good diversity this last go

[18:01] round.

[18:01] >> Yeah. And I but by the way, it's one of

[18:03] those things where if we're aware of it,

[18:06] most of the time that solves a lot of

[18:08] the problem. So,

[18:13] I agree with everything you said and I

[18:14] say this in a joking

[18:17] way, but I disagree with one thing. I

[18:19] already think we're on a great path and

[18:21] I don't think we need to get on a a

[18:23] better path, but um I'm not saying it

[18:25] well. I'm making a joke.

[18:26] >> Okay.

[18:29] >> It's an amazing joke. Thank you.

[18:31] >> Yes. Yeah. Uh, so the blunder

[18:35] >> members who are on the board already who

[18:38] had agreed to a one or two-year term

[18:41] that are now eligible for three, does

[18:43] there need to be language to grandfather

[18:45] them in if that is allowed?

[18:58] » Just want to make sure that the people

[18:59] who are already on then either serve

[19:02] their term and then reapply or

[19:06] however that needs to happen.

[19:08] >> Simply reappoint them and then they're

[19:09] covered.

[19:11] >> Okay.

[19:26] All right. So, we're gonna

[19:29] completely lost track where we were.

[19:33] >> Open. I'm sorry. Or not. I'll go ahead

[19:35] and open the public hearing. Sie, do we

[19:37] have anybody?

[19:40] >> No. You want to come up? Awesome.

[19:46] I was hoping we get you at least one

[19:47] time.

[19:49] >> Yeah. Go ahead and uh just uh state your

[19:52] name. You don't have to state your

[19:53] address. And uh

[19:55] >> yeah, take away.

[19:56] >> My name is M and I live on Lat Road. Um

[19:59] I didn't really write anything out. I

[20:01] wasn't expecting to give any sort of

[20:02] public hearing. But I think this is a

[20:04] great change especially uh in regards to

[20:07] broadening the board to be 12 members

[20:09] because I think that allows for more

[20:11] sort of diversified perspective and

[20:13] allows for more groups to be heard and

[20:15] sort of

[20:17] like

[20:19] the effect of

[20:21] places

[20:26] because I think if it's if it's like a

[20:28] small group like seven people

[20:31] are going to want to be around friends

[20:35] groups.

[20:44] » Awesome. Thank you. And thank you for

[20:46] serving on our our board.

[20:52] All right. Um, so I'll go ahead andbody

[20:56] check my go ahead and close the public

[20:59] hearing. Do we have any additional

[21:00] discussion before we move on? Yes,

[21:02] another question. I know when we were

[21:04] first passing debating the language of

[21:06] the original

[21:08] discussion

[21:16] or not

[21:26] have

[21:33] I think the intent was

[21:40] the physical district. Anyone

[21:44] my thought here is we're going to

[21:55] minimum that doesn't go

[21:58] to get some representation.

[22:01] school.

[22:02] >> Yeah, it could be any

[22:09] language does allow for that.

[22:10] >> I will look and see.

[22:11] >> I'm saying required

[22:14] 11 to 12, you want at least one reserve

[22:15] for somebody who doesn't

[22:19] but yeah. So, but if nobody applies,

[22:22] does that mean you don't have a quorum?

[22:24] If you have nobody from a home school

[22:28] assuming they apply

[22:34] » I like

[22:36] concept

[22:39] one is for sure attendee

[22:44] and it's not filter

[22:48] » we can absolutely consider that change

[22:51] the language says it shallist

[22:54] up to 12 members who are enrolled in

[22:57] grades through 12 and are either

[23:00] Sherwood residents or attend

[23:12] a

[23:23] Is it is it attends a school within Sher School District or lives

[23:28] within

[23:31] >> That's not what that said.

[23:32] >> Live or

[23:35] » so either resendary,

[23:39] » but there's a group of people that

[23:44] group that could live in.

[23:46] So, I'm not I'm not saying I'm saying at

[23:50] least one person.

[23:57] » Just to put a fine point on it, we're

[23:59] not saying we're requiring it. We're

[24:01] just saying one spot is held out. So, if

[24:03] no one applies, obviously, we can't fill

[24:05] it.

[24:07] >> Yeah. Yeah. Exactly.

[24:10] >> 100%. 100%. I think uh I I can get

[24:13] behind that idea, too. I think it also

[24:15] reminds us that we got to expand our

[24:17] recruitment beyond just within the

[24:20] public school system. And to me also it

[24:22] drives the distinction

[24:30] overap

[24:43] has Sure.

[24:50] I

[24:52] would not

[24:54] choose that personally, but that's

[25:06] not against it. I am not

[25:09] currently

[25:17] there.

[25:28] » Yeah, my my thought was it it makes it a

[25:31] little more complicated, however, and I

[25:32] wouldn't want it to stay empty. Now,

[25:34] that's probably an unrealistic fe. I

[25:36] think we had several that were not in

[25:39] the traditional school district this

[25:41] last time. So, I don't know that that's

[25:43] something, but it also

[25:45] um and I I don't think it's a problem

[25:48] when I think of worst case scenario that

[25:50] we have an empty slot and we only have

[25:52] 11. That's still better than where we're

[25:55] at now with getting to a variety of

[25:57] voices. So, if I can live with the worst

[25:59] case scenario and it's actually fine,

[26:02] then I don't then I don't have a problem

[26:04] with it. So, Councelor

[26:07] Young's

[26:14] consensus to draft that

[26:32] » one night because we're going to be

[26:34] delayed now.

[26:35] days.

[26:39] » I know. I get it.

[26:47] » All right. So, we will go ahead and

[26:50] table that that. So, that'll be in our

[26:51] next When's our next meeting?

[26:53] >> September.

[26:54] That's right. We're skipping.

[26:55] That's double check. So, uh first

[26:58] meeting in September. So, we'll go ahead

[27:00] and move on then to ordinance 2026-7

[27:03] establishing a commercial public safety

[27:05] fee and adding section 3.5 to the

[27:08] Sherwood Municipal Code. And David,

[27:10] looks like you're up again. I'm up

[27:12] again.

[27:13] >> So, thank you, mayor. This is the first

[27:15] reading of ordinance 2026

[27:18] establishing a commercial safety and

[27:22] adding section 2.50 to the Sherwood

[27:24] Municipal Code.

[27:29] Like many municipalities, you know, we

[27:32] continually face ongoing challenges

[27:35] public safety services due to

[27:38] limitations on property tax revenue

[27:40] service costs continue to rise equipment

[27:44] operational. While the city's ability to

[27:47] increase property tax

[27:50] now we've held a few work sessions on

[27:52] this topic was July 7th and the previous

[27:55] one was

[27:57] 21

[28:00] discussion on this topic

[28:03] numerous cities have adopted a public

[28:05] safety fee often build on utility

[28:08] accounts as a lawful mechanism to

[28:10] provide stable dedicated funding.

[28:17] City of Kaiser is one we kind of modeled

[28:19] a little bit of potential ordinance off

[28:22] of it's based off equivalent service

[28:25] units or ESUs

[28:29] and staff recommends the short adopt a

[28:31] similar enabling ordinance limited to

[28:33] commercial and I stress that commercial

[28:36] nonresidential properties only this

[28:38] approach focuses the new on generates

[28:42] significant demand for police services

[28:44] while avoiding additional charge on

[28:47] resil

[29:10] street fees and sidewalk fees. So it

[29:13] will be an easier

[29:17] and one thing I did want to cover it

[29:19] provides funding for the police but it

[29:22] doesn't address I just want to make that

[29:25] clear

[29:36] if the ordinance is adopted staff will

[29:39] bring

[29:41] additional resolution Estology.

[30:01] » All right. Thank you, David. Any

[30:02] questions?

[30:06] » Yes. I noticed that we had not received

[30:09] any comments through outreach.

[30:13] How robust was that?

[30:20] There hasn't been a lot of outreach on

[30:22] this per se and but there will be once

[30:24] it gets passed want to find the

[30:26] businesses but we haven't seen anything

[30:28] to the business saying you were holding

[30:29] a hearing tonight.

[30:31] >> Okay. And one thing we discussed during

[30:32] the work session

[30:39] January so we have time to get that

[30:41] outach

[30:46] see where you're going there because I

[30:47] think what the businesses are going to

[30:49] be interested is in the rates.

[30:51] >> Correct.

[30:51] >> And this this does not set rates. just

[30:54] to your point, it just creates a

[30:55] structure that the council could um set

[30:59] through resolution pass a rate

[31:01] structure. Um and I I agree I think with

[31:04] where you're going on this definitely

[31:06] want to talk to our businesses so they

[31:08] understand what we're thinking about.

[31:10] >> Right. Well, and this is the ordinance

[31:11] and the rates is just a resolution. And

[31:13] so I'm like I want to make sure that

[31:16] we're sharing enough through this

[31:19] process about what we've discussed in

[31:21] the work sessions for what the rate

[31:23] structure

[31:24] might look like for these businesses

[31:26] that don't really have a say besides

[31:28] coming to this meeting that they don't

[31:29] know about

[31:33] is it

[31:41] make a suggestion if staff

[31:43] outber.

[32:20] And then my other question was, is there

[32:22] I I didn't read any like sunset clause

[32:25] in this. Will this ever be discussed

[32:28] again or is this a one and done for this

[32:30] type of fee?

[32:32] >> There is no sunset clause in this

[32:37] charge.

[32:40] The entire

[32:42] to create a structure whereby

[33:10] possible

[33:21] Even the resolution process for the fees

[33:24] require

[33:33] questions.

[33:38] » All right. Um

[33:40] I would I would just add too that

[33:43] David you talked to this a little bit

[33:45] and I would encourage everyone to go

[33:47] watch our work sessions on this because

[33:49] it is a public safety fee and it's the

[33:52] reason we structured around commercials.

[33:55] We do see a lot of police activity in

[33:57] our commercial districts dealing with

[33:59] shoplifting.

[34:04] So that's we're trying to be thoughtful

[34:06] about where we're generating revenue

[34:10] based on the need. And some people might

[34:12] say why are you using ESUs for this? And

[34:15] um which is an is a not well understood

[34:19] mechanism for ev valuating wastewater or storm storm water consumption for a

[34:25] lot. And it's basically because it's the

[34:27] closest thing we had. You know logic

[34:29] would say well we go based on square

[34:31] foot. We don't have that kind of data,

[34:34] you know. So, this was the closest data

[34:37] unit we could get that kind of matches

[34:38] what we're trying to accomplish. I get

[34:40] that right. Okay. Awesome. Thank you.

[34:45] >> Sorry, mayor. Have one. Yeah. Question.

[34:48] Um reading in this it looked like um

[34:51] because this is going to be part of the

[34:52] utility bill with water that

[34:56] my understanding is that the water bill

[34:58] portion is paid first with whatever

[35:01] um they pay towards their bill and that

[35:04] if the um in this instance the

[35:06] commercial fee is not paid public safety

[35:08] fee that the water would not be shut off

[35:10] but the language didn't specifically say

[35:13] that the water bill is paid first with

[35:16] the first portion of people are not able

[35:18] to pay. Is that true?

[35:31] » Okay, that's how I understood it as

[35:32] well, but I didn't see specific language

[35:34] for that.

[35:36] >> We have some other accounts like that.

[35:38] >> Okay.

[35:49] questions.

[35:53] Okay. Um,

[35:56] we'll go ahead and do we have any

[35:57] written testimony?

[35:59] >> Okay. And go ahead and open the public

[36:01] hearing. Not seeing anyone online.

[36:11] » All right. I'll go ahead and close the

[36:13] public hearing. And uh, this is the

[36:16] you have something discussion

[36:18] >> just um I'm appreciative of the

[36:20] conversation council and staff had on

[36:23] this topic on the approach that is

[36:27] proposed in this ordinance with a

[36:29] potential fee um

[36:32] I'm very supportive of it I think it's a

[36:35] really smart approach

[36:38] and it

[36:40] is adopt some structure

[36:46] I'm very happy with uh with that

[36:48] approach versus we've we've

[36:52] looked at what other communities, other

[36:54] cities have done. Um near near to us and

[36:58] further away within Oregon. Um there's

[37:00] definitely some models out there that

[37:03] not supportive of mimicking. Um

[37:08] really nice.

[37:14] Yeah,

[37:15] that

[37:17] budget compression is a very real thing

[37:19] here in Oregon

[37:23] tools to raise

[37:29] and our costs across all

[37:32] quite a bit more than that.

[37:39] means that

[37:42] right costs go up twice as high

[37:48] grow

[37:52] don't want to cut

[37:57] this

[38:00] and reasonable

[38:02] time. That's really what we're

[38:07] usreing

[38:12] a little bit.

[38:27] And for anyone that is watching this

[38:29] clear this is 100% commercial

[38:33] zero residential there's no impact to

[38:35] resal

[38:51] I think you mentioned the dates we had

[38:52] work sessions on this

[38:55] dates of the work session April 21st

[38:58] July.

[38:59] >> Thank you. And I would just anyone

[39:01] listening or anyone who listens to this

[39:03] later on YouTube, I encourage you to go

[39:05] watch those um work sessions because if

[39:08] you're a business owner, you're probably

[39:09] thinking how much is this rate going to

[39:11] be. We had a lot of conversations in

[39:13] those meetings about what this could

[39:15] look like and make sure that it's it's

[39:17] fair and not a burden for say a very

[39:21] small, you know, merkantile shop versus

[39:24] a a large footprint box retailer. I

[39:28] won't name who they are that drives a

[39:31] lot of activity for police department.

[39:33] So, a lot of the structures that we

[39:35] talked about I thought were pretty fair,

[39:38] but I encourage people if you have

[39:39] questions about at least what we're

[39:40] thinking at this point, go watch those.

[39:45] All right. Anything else?

[39:49] All right. Well, we will uh go bring

[39:51] this back. First meeting in September.

[39:54] Awesome. Thank you everyone. Thank you

[39:56] Sylvia help on that. And we will move

[39:58] right to city manager report.

[40:01] >> Evening. Just a couple things. Uh, I

[40:03] just want to talk just about Music on

[40:05] the Green tomorrow night. It's looking

[40:06] like we'll probably have it at the art

[40:08] center. So, a notice will go out

[40:10] tomorrow. We'll probably have to limit

[40:12] the number of people that we bring into

[40:14] the arts center, but we've got to pay

[40:16] for the band and stuff, so we may as

[40:17] well use the space we have. Shanda and

[40:20] her team have done a great job at the

[40:22] last minute putting this together. So,

[40:24] just to let you know that, I know I send

[40:26] an email to you guys and make a decision

[40:27] later in the morning, but I think

[40:29] everything we're seeing is going to be

[40:31] make announcement.

[40:33] Uh, movies in the park Friday night. I

[40:36] think it's cars this week.

[40:39] So, and then I just want to remind

[40:41] everybody Washington Street over here on

[40:43] the hills going to have some closures

[40:45] this week. They'll be open in the

[40:46] evenings, but uh for paving for that

[40:49] project. So, that's all I have tonight

[40:51] unless you have questions for myself or

[40:53] any of the directors.

[40:55] >> Follow

[40:58] that.

[41:00] It's looking like the stuff that we've

[41:02] seen so far, it looks like it'll clear

[41:04] out, but we'll make that decision as we

[41:06] get.

[41:08] >> I don't know if they have I think they

[41:10] have might be an event going on Friday

[41:12] night.

[41:13] >> Is there any chance we could reach out

[41:14] to the high school, see if their

[41:16] auditorium's open,

[41:18] >> I'm sure.

[41:20] >> Okay, great. Happy to do that.

[41:21] >> They've got a nice theater there.

[41:23] >> Craig, this stuff that's going on in

[41:25] Washington Street, how will it or will it affect

[41:30] what's happening on Saturday.

[41:35] » I think they're supposed to be they

[41:36] should be done by the end of the week if

[41:38] everything goes as planned. So should

[41:41] not

[41:44] » look at

[41:53] » um on the Washington Street project. Um,

[41:58] kudos to the staff and contractor. Um, I

[42:01] think the final result is going to be

[42:03] great. A definite improvement,

[42:06] addressing a urgent need um on

[42:11] underground utilities, but then helping

[42:13] to better manage the storm uh runoff

[42:17] that section of the hill.

[42:20] It's great. So kudos to the design and

[42:24] the approach.

[42:26] >> Thank you.

[42:30] » Could you just do a quick update on the

[42:32] water leak we had on ice? So um Rich, do

[42:37] you have any more details from what we

[42:38] talked about?

[42:40] So uh it sounds like the water treatment

[42:43] plant that went into water supply

[42:47] 16inch pipe first on their side of ice

[42:51] which

[42:53] are part of the ice drive projects.

[42:58] But not only that, we got subgrade.

[43:29] But I know the manufactur

[43:50] is a 12

[43:52] project

[43:55] the contractors.

[43:57] put that in that was not the city

[44:01] project

[44:09] emergency connect between us and the

[44:11] plan.

[44:12] >> So, and we're going to be I'm assuming

[44:15] going after them for compensation on

[44:18] that.

[44:18] >> I'm I'm sure that that uh those details

[44:22] will probably be uh being in discussed

[44:24] as we move forward. All

[44:29] right.

[44:34] » And and for those listening why we're

[44:36] concerned about that, that water is not

[44:37] free for us. It goes through our

[44:39] treatment plant for that water. So

[44:44] » if it delays the project, will that

[44:46] affect

[44:50] » those things? Most of that money has

[44:52] been spent already on the project.

[45:02] All right, we'll go ahead. Anything

[45:03] else, Chief? Anything?

[45:09] » No,

[45:12] actually just uh just bummed out we

[45:14] couldn't have a national night out. A

[45:16] lot of work was put into that from our

[45:19] foundation and volunteers, but uh

[45:21] unfortunately, as we know, the air

[45:23] quality just didn't want to cooperate.

[45:26] >> I'm assuming a lot of the cities around

[45:27] us were canceling too.

[45:28] >> Yeah.

[45:29] >> I saw that a number of the cities are

[45:31] rescheduling to a different day. Is that

[45:33] something we're considering as well?

[45:36] >> We have not had that discussion. U

[45:38] probably the biggest hurdle is just

[45:40] logistics.

[45:44] » All right. Um council announcements.

[45:49] » You want to go first?

[45:50] >> Me?

[45:51] >> Yeah. Mixing it up.

[45:55] parks board in li of their normal

[45:57] meeting met yesterday at Creek Trail to

[46:00] kind of walk the trail and look where

[46:03] they were going to place

[46:13] after that.

[46:23] Anyway, the third park over there

[46:42] process

[46:46] I think it was an education.

[47:01] Uh the Sherwood School District uh board

[47:06] will not be meeting until the start of

[47:07] school year. So nothing to report for

[47:09] that. The library board has not met

[47:11] since last we met. U traffic safety

[47:14] board met a couple weeks ago and they

[47:17] were discussing

[47:19] um some type of process for community

[47:23] feedback for the mobile speed camera

[47:25] placement. Um they've been starting to

[47:28] receive

[47:30] essentially traffic safety concerns with

[47:32] a request of moving the cameras to that

[47:34] location. And so if we have a more

[47:36] formal process maybe for that that would

[47:37] be helpful for the traffic safety board

[47:39] and the community. Um something else

[47:42] that they discussed was lowering the

[47:44] residential speed limit from 25 to 20

[47:47] including the Oldtown area. Uh still

[47:50] under discussion there asked staff for

[47:52] some additional information to review at

[47:54] the next meeting.

[47:56] Um and then also changing the mobile

[48:00] speed camera uh upper limit to six miles

[48:04] over the speed limit for school zones

[48:06] instead of the 11 miles an hour right

[48:09] now. um non school zones. So all those

[48:12] things are being discussed uh traffic

[48:14] safety board and we should get some type

[48:16] of recommendation from them at something

[48:19] for that. Uh at the last meeting I

[48:23] mentioned the renaming of the cultural

[48:25] arts center. Um but that meeting will be

[48:28] held on the first Tuesday of September.

[48:30] That has been moved.

[48:33] >> I was I was just gonna say on that I was

[48:35] going to talk to you about after the

[48:36] meeting. Um, you're right. It's being

[48:39] moved, but I'm actually thinking about

[48:40] moving it back to a work session again

[48:42] for more conversations. So, um, I didn't

[48:45] want you to announce a date and have

[48:46] different.

[48:48] >> Okay.

[48:49] >> TBD.

[48:51] >> And that's all I have for today.

[48:53] >> Awesome.

[48:57] » The planning commission did not meet.

[48:59] However, I noticed out in the library

[49:03] they um advertising for the repair fair.

[49:07] on the 15th. If you have small

[49:08] appliances or if you like to fix things

[49:11] or tinker, sign up for that. That's

[49:13] always fun. And I'm excited to see

[49:16] people at Cruz and Sherwood. That's all

[49:19] for me.

[49:23] » It's nice to see you, Finn. Thanks for

[49:24] being here. I know you're off to college

[49:28] here pretty soon, but thank you for

[49:29] giving your input. super excited about

[49:31] the direction that we might be going

[49:33] with the youth advisory board and the

[49:36] fresh talent that we'll be appointing

[49:39] here soon and all the great things that

[49:40] will come from it. And as has already

[49:43] been mentioned, cruising Sherwood is

[49:45] this weekend, so downtown starts to shut

[49:48] down on Friday. This is going to be a

[49:50] big show. We're already close to 300

[49:52] cars pre-registered and we expect close

[49:55] to 400 to 450 cars in the oldtown

[49:57] corridor and lots of vendors and food

[50:00] booths and all the good things. We've

[50:02] got a air quality control plan that has

[50:04] been put together

[50:07] thanks to this wonderful smoke. But

[50:09] yeah, it's going to be a wonderful show

[50:11] and hope you all come out and see it.

[50:12] Thank you for those of you who have

[50:14] volunteered to support. And I think

[50:16] that's all I have.

[50:18] >> It won't be raining.

[50:19] >> It's not going to rain. Sunny and 82 I

[50:21] think is the last time I saw.

[50:28] » Yeah. Cruising this weekend. Um also

[50:31] >> also this weekend is the fourth annual

[50:34] >> birds and bruise or bruise and beer

[50:37] brew. Um it's friends of the refuge. Um

[50:40] beer event at Langers. Um it's

[50:43] unfortunate that it uh is at the same

[50:45] time as cruising. Um but uh hopefully

[50:49] the show big

[50:53] uh that uh there'll be even more stuff

[50:56] for thousands and thousands of folks

[50:58] that come into town to experience. So,

[51:02] um yeah,

[51:05] it'll be a great weekend.

[51:07] >> Awesome. Um I'm going to keep it very

[51:09] quick. Uh just say another plug for the

[51:13] music on the greens, which

[51:15] might be in the uh art center, but I

[51:19] wanted to mention that we have a cover

[51:20] band which a lot of fun people to show

[51:23] up it's in the art center I get there

[51:25] early

[51:27] even even down on the green you want to

[51:28] get there early because it's usually

[51:30] pretty packed and uh with that I'm good

[51:33] unless there's anything else for the

[51:34] good of the order

[51:37] we are adjourned and we will go right

[51:39] into our you are a board of directors

[51:41] meeting not

[51:44] >> says we are

[51:45] >> do we have a separate sheet

[51:49] Thank you. Usually

[52:10] » Yeah.

[52:20] All right. Um,

[52:24] » okay. I'm going to go ahead and call our

[52:26] URA board uh board meeting to order.

[52:30] Tuesday, August 4th, 2026 at 8 or no,

[52:35] 7:55.

[52:38] Roll call.

[52:41] >> Here. Vice Chair Young is absent. Member

[52:45] Browse

[52:45] >> here.

[52:46] >> Member Stani

[52:47] >> here.

[52:47] >> Member Maize

[52:48] >> here.

[52:49] >> Member Scott

[52:49] >> here.

[52:50] >> Member Giles

[52:51] >> here.

[52:51] >> Thank you.

[52:53] >> All right. Before the consent agenda, um

[52:55] I understand you might want to pull

[52:57] something.

[52:57] >> Yeah. I'd like to move item B off the

[52:58] consent agenda on item four.

[53:05] » So, we'll uh move that to a discussion.

[53:08] >> Second.

[53:09] >> Well,

[53:11] Second. So, all those in favor of

[53:13] amending the agenda say I.

[53:16] >> I. Opposed.

[53:18] >> Motion passes. Now, um do I have a

[53:21] motion to approve the amended agenda?

[53:24] Item A, approval of February 3rd, 2026.

[53:27] Zero UR meeting minutes.

[53:31] >> Okay. Motion to second. All those in

[53:33] favor of approving those minutes say I.

[53:35] >> I.

[53:36] >> Opposed. Motion passes. Thank you,

[53:38] council. and we will go move on to a

[53:41] discussion about the UA resolution

[53:45] 2026002

[53:48] you wanted to pull it so I'll let you

[53:49] take off start

[53:50] >> yeah I just we we had discussion around

[53:54] these items

[53:58] I just want to vote no on it so I just

[54:00] want to

[54:04] discuss it

[54:07] not in favor of the

[54:09] design.

[54:19] » All right. Well, no, you got to pull it

[54:21] off. So, absolutely. All right. Anyone

[54:24] else want to comment on that? Otherwise,

[54:26] I'll motion.

[54:28] >> Move to approve

[54:30] resolution.

[54:32] 20262.

[54:36] » Refresh. What?

[54:45] Did you want to say

[54:48] >> I'm just available?

[54:49] >> I just have to ask her to come up just

[54:51] in case you had questions back to um

[54:53] there was several people that didn't

[54:55] like the S with the medallion design

[55:00] thinks it looks like a logo.

[55:02] >> Just to be clear, I like I like the

[55:03] artist designs that go inside all seven.

[55:07] Okay.

[55:08] >> Um, on the surrounding area, there's a

[55:10] template that's being used on all of

[55:11] them. It's the same. And

[55:14] >> my concern was that the S with the Robin

[55:17] Hood Lab Lab hat over it. Um, it's

[55:21] essentially a Deacto logo. And as we

[55:25] punt on the conversation about logos for

[55:27] the city, I feel like it's

[55:30] we're creating a logo.

[55:32] >> We don't want to talk about logos. So,

[55:34] thank you for

[55:35] >> Yeah. And I I mean, boy, I feel like a broken

[55:40] record at this time, but I I feel

[55:42] similarly that I would rather not have

[55:44] it and not just get a logo by accident

[55:49] um than then have it and um uh than do

[55:53] another logo separately, right? And so

[55:56] that's my

[55:58] feeling as well, but I don't I know that

[56:02] I'm sensitive to logo issues and so

[56:08] respond with the I mean discuss

[56:10] >> I was just gonna ask if you could let us

[56:12] know what the cultural arts

[56:13] >> commission so we had a lot of discussion

[56:16] about you know the use of logo and

[56:18] branding versus public art and um we

[56:22] realized that if we had even if we had a

[56:25] brand new logo the city logo would not

[56:29] be incorporated into a piece of public

[56:30] art um unless it was a commercial

[56:33] welcome sign or something like that but

[56:35] this is a very different medium. So we

[56:37] really feel strongly that it's a nod of

[56:40] whimsy like a monogram to this festival

[56:43] that the city is known for where it

[56:46] implies

[56:48] a whimsical Sherwood festival instead of

[56:51] explicitly having a Robin Hood based

[56:54] battalion. So

[56:56] yeah, I think the the consensus and the

[57:00] recommendation of the arts commission is

[57:01] just that it's completely different

[57:03] purposes and we would not ask an artist

[57:06] to incorporate

[57:08] a logo when we do rebrands.

[57:12] >> Yeah, 100%. I wouldn't ask an artist to

[57:14] put our logo on there. I think the point

[57:16] that I'm making and Dan's m or Doug's

[57:19] making is that

[57:21] if it feels like it's a logo, then it

[57:25] feels like

[57:27] kind of a deacto logo. You know what I

[57:30] mean? Like we're not saying that it's a

[57:31] logo, but

[57:34] you know, there's a lot of logos that

[57:36] have a stylized letter that is a little

[57:38] bit tweaked so they can trademark it and

[57:41] that is their logo, right? So, I know

[57:43] she's not saying it's a logo or you the

[57:45] artist's not saying it's a logo. The art

[57:47] commission is not saying it's a logo. It

[57:49] just looks

[57:52] >> Yes, it that's that's the only thing.

[57:55] We're not saying that you should include

[57:56] the city logo. We're just saying that it

[57:59] could be considered to be a city logo.

[58:02] So,

[58:02] >> and again, we're new to public art in

[58:04] the city. So,

[58:07] >> the shape of a bridge or a favorite duck

[58:10] or

[58:12] a dear like people are going to adopt

[58:15] what they are going to adopt

[58:18] I don't know as a beloved symbol but

[58:20] it's not the purpose of it

[58:29] » I just the more you talk about it not

[58:32] being a logo it sounds like you're

[58:34] wanting it to be the logo

[58:36] >> no I want us to have a discussion about

[58:38] the logo I understand that.

[58:40] >> Yes. No, I get what you're trying to do,

[58:42] but also like

[58:44] >> I don't know that anybody would have

[58:46] thought about it either. So

[58:49] >> that's kind of where I'm at. I when I

[58:50] looked at it never even

[59:03] » we had a motion.

[59:08] My motion was um I move to approve

[59:11] resolution 2026002

[59:14] accepting the cultural arts commission's

[59:15] recommendation for Western Bridge.

[59:19] >> Second motion to second. All those in

[59:21] favor of approving the resolution say I.

[59:24] >> I.

[59:25] >> All those opposed.

[59:27] >> All right. Motion passes. Thank you

[59:30] councel. Um do we have any citizen

[59:32] comments?

[59:32] >> I do not.

[59:33] >> And I don't see any online. So we are

[59:36] jermed. Thank you everybody.

Sherwood City Council - August 4, 2026

Transcript