2026-10-06 - Community & Public Safety Committee

10:59>> GOOD MORNING. IT IS TUESDAY,

11:02OCTOBER 6TH, 2026 AT 9:34 A.M.

11:07I CALL THIS MEETING OF THE

11:08COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY

11:09COMMITTEE TO ORDER. COULD THE

11:11CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?

11:14>> ZIMMERMAN. SMITH. KANAL HERE.

11:20>> MORILLO HERE. VIRTUALLY.

11:24>> NOVICK.

11:24>> HERE. COULD WE HEAR THE

11:30STATEMENT OF CONDUCT?

11:32>> WELCOME TO THE MEETING OF

11:33THE COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY

11:35COMMITTEE. TO TESTIFY BEFORE

11:36THIS COMMITTEE IN PERSON OR

11:37VIRTUALLY. YOU MUST SIGN UP IN

11:39ADVANCE ON THE COMMITTEE AGENDA

11:50AT.

11:50WWW.PORTLAND.GOV/COUNCILOR/AGENE

11:51OR BY CALLING 311. INFORMATION

11:53ON ENGAGING WITH THE COMMITTEE

11:54CAN BE FOUND AT THIS LINK.

11:55REGISTRATION FOR VIRTUAL

11:57TESTIMONY CLOSES ONE HOUR PRIOR

11:59TO THE MEETING IN PERSON,

12:01TESTIFIERS MUST SIGN UP BEFORE

12:02THE AGENDA ITEM IS HEARD FOR

12:03PUBLIC TESTIMONY. DURING

12:05TODAY'S MEETING, INDIVIDUALS

12:06MAY TESTIFY FOR 90S UNLESS THE

12:08CHAIR STATES OTHERWISE, YOUR

12:10MICROPHONE WILL BE MUTED. WHEN

12:11YOUR TIME IS OVER, THE CHAIR

12:13PRESERVES ORDER DISRUPTIVE

12:15CONDUCT SUCH AS SHOUTING,

12:16REFUSING TO CONCLUDE YOUR

12:17TESTIMONY WHEN YOUR TIME IS UP,

12:19OR INTERRUPTING OTHERS

12:20TESTIMONY OR COMMITTEE

12:21DELIBERATIONS WILL NOT BE

12:22ALLOWED. IF YOU CAUSE A

12:23DISRUPTION, A WARNING WILL BE

12:25GIVEN. FURTHER DISRUPTION WILL

12:26RESULT IN EJECTION FROM THE

12:28MEETING. ANYONE WHO FAILS TO

12:29LEAVE ONCE EJECTED IS SUBJECT

12:30TO ARREST FOR TRESPASS.

12:32ADDITIONALLY, THE COMMITTEE MAY

12:33TAKE A SHORT RECESS AND

12:34RECONVENE VIRTUALLY. YOUR

12:36TESTIMONY SHOULD ADDRESS THE

12:37MATTER BEING CONSIDERED WHEN

12:39TESTIFYING. STATE YOUR NAME FOR

12:40THE RECORD. IF YOU ARE A

12:41LOBBYIST, IDENTIFY THE

12:42ORGANIZATION YOU REPRESENT.

12:44VIRTUAL TESTIFIER SHOULD UNMUTE

12:46THEMSELVES WHEN THE CLERK CALLS

12:47YOUR NAME. THANK YOU.

12:49>> THANK YOU. SO WE'RE WE HAVE

12:54A REORDERING THE AGENDA THIS

12:55MORNING BECAUSE DUE TO TRAFFIC

12:59JAMS, SAY, PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING

13:01TO BE PART OF THE PRESENTATIONS

13:03ON THE FIREWORKS AND ON THE

13:06GREAT SHAKEOUT HAVE BEEN

13:07DELAYED. SO INSTEAD WE'RE GOING

13:10TO START WITH, YOU KNOW, THE

13:12GLOBAL STATE BUDGETING FOR

13:12PUBLIC SAFETY. THEN MOVE ON TO

13:14THE SECOND HAND DEALERS

13:17AMENDMENTS, THEN GREAT SHAKEOUT,

13:18THEN FIREWORKS. AND ACTUALLY,

13:21I'M I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT THE

13:25OTHER TWO COUNCILORS AREN'T

13:26HERE BECAUSE THE FIRST ITEM IS

13:30ACTUALLY THE CLERK CALL THE

13:32FIRST ITEM. SORRY.

13:34>> YES. ITEM NUMBER ONE.

13:37DOCUMENT NUMBER 2026-351.

13:39DISCUSSION OF GLOBAL STATE

13:40BUDGETING FOR PUBLIC SAFETY

13:43CONCEPT.

13:43>> THANK YOU. SO THIS ITEM IS

13:47HERE IN. THIS IS BASICALLY A

13:49HEADS UP THAT I WANTED TO GIVE

13:51MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ABOUT

13:52SOMETHING I'M WORKING ON THAT

13:54IS IS PUBLIC SAFETY, BUT IS FAR

13:55BEYOND THE CITY. THE CRIMINAL

13:59JUSTICE SYSTEM. AND I THINK I

14:01MIGHT HAVE TALKED I CERTAINLY

14:02TALKED TO COUNCILOR KANAL. I

14:03THINK I'VE TALKED TO COUNCILOR

14:05AYE, MORILLO ABOUT THIS BEFORE,

14:06BUT THE CONCEPT IS THE CRIMINAL

14:07JUSTICE SYSTEM HAS A KIND OF A

14:09BIZARRE FEATURE THAT DOESN'T

14:10EXIST IN ANY OTHER AREA OF

14:12PUBLIC POLICY. THERE'S A GROUP

14:13OF PEOPLE, NAMELY PROSECUTORS,

14:15THAT HAVE AN UNLIMITED BUDGET,

14:16FOR ONE THING, NAMELY PRISONS.

14:18WHEN PROSECUTORS AND JUDGES

14:21SEND PEOPLE TO PRISON, THE

14:22STATE HAS TO PAY FOR IT.

14:24THERE'S NO DISCUSSION OF

14:25BUDGETARY TRADE OFFS. THERE'S

14:26NO INCENTIVES TO USE PRISON

14:28LESS. IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S

14:30AS IF PRISON IS FREE. AND SINCE

14:34ANY FREE GOOD TENDS TO BE

14:37OVERUSED, AND SINCE MOST PEOPLE

14:39WHO STUDY CRIMINAL JUSTICE

14:40CAREFULLY RECOGNIZE THAT PRISON,

14:42BY AND LARGE, IS A RATHER

14:44INEFFECTIVE WAY OF PREVENTING

14:45CRIME, THE CONCEPT THAT I'VE

14:48BEEN FLOATING WITH COUNTY

14:52COMMISSIONERS AND WITH AN

14:53ASSORTMENT OF LEGISLATORS IS.

14:55AND THIS IS SOMETHING WE TAKE A

14:56LONG TIME TO ACHIEVE, IS. WHAT

15:00IF THE STATE WENT TO A SYSTEM

15:02OF GIVING EACH COUNTY AN

15:04OVERALL PUBLIC SAFETY BUDGET

15:06AND SAID THEY GIVE SCHOOL

15:08DISTRICTS AN OVERALL BUDGET AND

15:09SAID, YOU CAN SPEND THIS ON

15:11WHATEVER PUBLIC SAFETY THINGS

15:12YOU WANT. WHEN YOU SEND PEOPLE

15:14TO PRISON, THE COST OF THAT

15:16COMES OUT OF YOUR BUDGET. SO

15:19WHAT THE HOPE FOR RESULT IS

15:21THAT COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WOULD

15:22THEN SIT DOWN WITH THEIR DAS

15:25AND WITH ALL THEIR EXPERTS AND

15:27SAY, OKAY, WE HAVE THIS BIG POT

15:29OF MONEY. HOW MUCH OF IT DO WE

15:30THINK SHOULD GO TO SUPERVISION?

15:32HOW MUCH TO JAILS, HOW MUCH TO

15:35REENTRY PROGRAMS, HOW MUCH TO

15:36ALCOHOL AND DRUG TREATMENT

15:38PROGRAMS, HOW MUCH TO

15:39RESTORATIVE JUSTICE, MAYBE

15:42REALLOCATE SOME OF IT TO THE

15:44SHERIFFS, TO THE SHERIFF,

15:45DEPUTIES OR POLICE AND COME UP

15:49WITH A RATIONAL ALLOCATION OF

15:51RESOURCES, WHICH WHERE PRISON

15:54IS RECOGNIZED AS A COST AND

15:57PEOPLE HAVE A DECISION AND

15:58DECISIONS ARE MADE ABOUT, OKAY,

16:00IF WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO

16:02SEND, WE COULD SEND SOMEBODY TO

16:03PRISON FOR FOUR YEARS OR SEND

16:04THEM FOR TWO YEARS, AND WE

16:06COULD USE THAT SAVINGS TO DO

16:07SOMETHING ELSE. SO I'VE BEEN

16:10DISCUSSING THIS TOPIC WITH SOME

16:11OF THE KEY LEGISLATORS IN

16:12PUBLIC SAFETY. VINCE JONES

16:14DIXON OF MULTNOMAH COUNTY IS

16:15REALLY INTERESTED, AND WE'RE

16:17ACTUALLY HAVING A MEETING OF

16:19LIPSTICK, THE LOCAL PUBLIC

16:20SAFETY COORDINATING COMMITTEE,

16:21WHERE THIS IS GOING TO BE

16:22DISCUSSED ON OCTOBER 26TH AT

16:24130. SO IF ANYBODY'S INTERESTED

16:26IN THAT DISCUSSION, I ENCOURAGE

16:27YOU TO COME AND AND WE'RE ALSO

16:29GOING TO HAVE AN ACADEMIC FROM

16:31THE WHO'S AFFILIATED WITH THE

16:32UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, WHO'S

16:33ONE OF THE BIG NATIONAL BRAINS

16:36ON PUBLIC SAFETY, WHO'S

16:38INTRIGUED WITH THIS IDEA. AND

16:39HE'S GOING TO PRESENT AS WELL.

16:41SO AGAIN, I JUST WANTED TO GIVE

16:42YOU A HEADS UP ON THAT. IT'S

16:44CONCEIVABLE THAT IN SOME FUTURE

16:46LEGISLATIVE SESSION, SUPPORT OF

16:47THIS IDEA MIGHT BE SUGGESTED

16:49FOR THE FOR, FOR OUR

16:52LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, BUT MOSTLY

16:55BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING WE'RE

16:56WORKING ON AND THERE'S A PUBLIC

16:58DISCUSSION OF IT IN A FEW WEEKS,

16:59I WANT TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE HERE

17:01WERE AWARE OF IT. SO THAT'S ANY

17:05ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILOR.

17:07COUNCILOR KANAL. THANK YOU,

17:09CHAIR.

17:09>> NOVICK. I APPRECIATE THE

17:10UPDATE ON THIS AND I THINK I

17:12GUESS I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS. ONE

17:13IS JUST A PURE OVERARCHING

17:15PROCESS QUESTION. THE CITY ROLE

17:17IN THIS CONVERSATION IS

17:18EFFECTIVELY LIMITED TO, ARE WE

17:20ADVOCATING FOR THIS.

17:23>> RIGHT NOW THAT RIGHT NOW

17:24STEVE NOVICK IS. I THINK THAT

17:28ULTIMATELY THE QUESTION WOULD

17:29BE, WOULD WE ON A IN A IN A

17:32LEGISLATIVE AGENDA, SUPPORT IT?

17:34AT THIS POINT? I THINK THAT

17:37THERE WILL I'M HOPING THERE

17:38WILL BE PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS

17:39OF THE ISSUE AMONG LEGISLATORS.

17:41I DON'T THINK THERE'S GOING TO

17:42BE A BILL THIS SESSION. WHAT

17:44I'M HOPING IS THAT BY NEXT

17:46SESSION, PEOPLE WILL ACTUALLY

17:47BE HAVE SOMETHING TO FORWARD.

17:50OKAY, SO THOSE OF US WHO HAPPEN

17:51TO BE HERE, THE NEXT

17:54LEGISLATIVE SESSION MIGHT BE

17:55ASKED TO WEIGH IN ON WHETHER IT

17:58SHOULD BE PART OF OUR AGENDA.

17:59>> YEAH, I GUESS THE QUESTION

18:01THEN THAT'S THANK YOU FOR THAT.

18:03THE OTHER PIECE IS YOU

18:04MENTIONED. SO YOU SAID YOU CAN

18:08SPEND THIS ON WHATEVER PUBLIC

18:09SAFETY THINGS YOU WANT. WHEN

18:10YOU SEND PEOPLE TO PRISON THAT

18:12COMES OUT OF THIS BUDGET. AND

18:13THEN MY QUESTION IS, I GUESS,

18:16HOW BROADLY ARE WE DEFINING

18:19PUBLIC SAFETY IN TERMS OF THE

18:21UNIVERSE, OF WHAT WHAT BUDGETS

18:22ARE BEING COMBINED?

18:24>> I'M NOT PROPOSING A SPECIFIC

18:26DEFINITION. I THINK THAT, BUT

18:27IT WOULD INCLUDE WHATEVER THE

18:30STATE IS CURRENTLY GIVING MONEY

18:32TO THE COUNTIES FOR LIKE

18:34COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS. OKAY.

18:36RESTORATIVE JUSTICE GRANTS.

18:37OKAY.

18:37>> SO THAT'S THE FIRST PART,

18:39THE RESTORATIVE JUSTICE YOU

18:40MENTIONED. YOU ALSO MENTIONED

18:41DRUG TREATMENT AND REENTRY

18:43PROGRAMS.

18:44>> WELL, I MEAN, THERE IS THERE

18:47IS MONEY FOR THOSE THROUGH

18:49MEDICAID, THROUGH THE HEALTH

18:50DEPARTMENT, ETCETERA. WHAT I'M

18:53ENVISIONING IS THAT THE REASON

18:55I BRING THAT UP IS THAT TO THE

18:57EXTENT THAT THOSE PROGRAMS ARE

18:59UNDERFUNDED THROUGH THE CURRENT

19:00HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, MAYBE IF

19:02YOU HAD A LUMP SUM BUDGET, YOU

19:03COULD USE SOME OF THE MONEY

19:04THAT YOU MIGHT BE SAVING ON

19:06PRISONS TO TOP UP THOSE

19:07SERVICES. BUT THAT'S JUST I

19:09MEAN, AGAIN, THIS IS VERY

19:11GENERAL CONCEPT THAT MIGHT NOT

19:12MAKE SENSE, BUT THAT'S WHY I

19:14PUT THAT IN THERE.

19:15>> I APPRECIATE THAT THE I

19:16GUESS THE THING THAT I WOULD

19:18WANT TO MAKE SURE IS THAT WE'RE

19:20BEING CLEAR WITH THE

19:21LEGISLATURE THAT IT DOESN'T

19:22ALLOW FOR THE REBALANCING TO GO

19:24THE OTHER DIRECTION, BECAUSE I

19:25CAN IMAGINE IN THE COUNTIES UP

19:28HERE THAT THE DIRECTION THAT

19:30THE MONEY MIGHT SHIFT OVER TIME

19:33WOULD PROBABLY BE A DIRECTION

19:34THAT WE AGREED ON. BUT I DON'T

19:36KNOW IF THAT'S THE CASE FOR ALL

19:37THE OTHER COUNTIES IN THE STATE.

19:39SO I'D BE CURIOUS ABOUT JUST

19:41WHATEVER PROTECTIONS THERE. I

19:42DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO HAVE

19:43THAT ANSWER RIGHT NOW. AND I

19:44DON'T MEAN TO PUT I'M NOT

19:46TRYING TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT

19:48WITH IT.

19:48>> BUT AND I MEAN, I SHOULD

19:50TELL YOU THAT THE SHERIFF'S

19:52REACTION TO THIS IDEA WAS, I

19:53DON'T WANT THE LEGISLATURE AT

19:54BEING. I'M AFRAID THE

19:55LEGISLATURE WOULD JUST CUT THE

19:56GLOBAL PUBLIC SAFETY BUDGET

19:57EVERY YEAR. SO I DON'T THINK

20:00THAT SHE'S PARTICULARLY EXCITED

20:01ABOUT ABOUT PRISONS, BUT I

20:02THINK SHE KIND OF THINKS, WELL,

20:04AT LEAST THERE'S ONE BUDGET

20:05THEY CAN'T CUT. SO THAT'S GOING

20:06TO BE PART OF THE DISCUSSION.

20:08>> WELL, AS WE ALL KNOW, THE

20:09LEGISLATURE LOVES TO PUT MONEY

20:11TOWARDS TRANSIT AND HEALTH CARE

20:12AND EDUCATION. SO I GUESS

20:13THAT'S A FEAR THAT WE ALL.

20:15SHOULD SHARE. THANKS.

20:16>> WELL, I MEAN, I MEAN, I WILL

20:18SAY THAT THE REACTION I GOT,

20:19AND I'M NOT GOING TO NAME NAMES,

20:21THE REACTION I GOT TO SOME OF

20:23THE KEY PUBLIC SAFETY

20:24LEGISLATORS WAS RATHER

20:26ENCOURAGING THAT THEY DID NOT

20:28DISMISS THIS IDEA. SOME OF THEM

20:30SAID THAT THERE ONE PARTICULAR

20:33ONE, I THINK I PROBABLY QUOTE

20:34HIM ON THIS, BUT I WON'T. HE

20:36SAID THAT HIS GOAL IS TO HAVE

20:38US BE THE SAFEST STATE WITH THE

20:40LEAST LEVEL OF INCARCERATION.

20:41SO THIS SORT OF FITS IN WITH

20:42THAT. SO AGAIN, GOOD GOAL. YEAH.

20:47THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

20:55WHOOPS. OKAY. I THOUGHT THAT

20:58MIGHT BE COUNSELOR ZIMMERMAN.

20:59BUT IT'S ANOTHER RANDOM BALD

21:00GUY. SO COULD THE CLERK PLEASE

21:05READ THE READ. THE SECOND ITEM.

21:08>> IS THE NEW ITEM NUMBER TWO,

21:10DOCUMENT NUMBER 2026-327. AMEND

21:14SECOND HAND DEALERS CODE TO

21:15STRENGTHEN COMPLIANCE

21:16REQUIREMENTS AND UPDATE PROGRAM

21:18FEES. AMEND CODE CHAPTER 14 B

21:23.90.

21:29>> THANK YOU. THIS ITEM WAS

21:31REFERRED TO COMMITTEE TO ALLOW

21:33SOME ADDITIONAL WORKSHOPPING

21:33TIME BY MY OFFICE AND THE

21:35REVENUE TEAM. FOLLOWING SOME

21:36QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILOR KANAL

21:38ON BACKGROUND CHECKS, WE TOOK

21:40THAT TIME TO PUT IN LANGUAGE

21:43CLARIFYING THAT THE ONLY ONLY

21:44PEOPLE DIRECTLY ENGAGED IN

21:46MANAGEMENT AND OWNERSHIP OF THE

21:48BUSINESS AND THOSE WHO ARE

21:49AUTHORIZED BY THE BUSINESS TO

21:51ACTUALLY BUY AND RECEIVE

21:52REGULATED PROPERTY, REQUIRE

21:54CHECKS SO AS TO WHAT COUNCILOR

21:56KANAL QUESTIONS. A SECURITY

21:57GUARD WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO

21:59HAVE A BACKGROUND CHECK, FOR

22:01EXAMPLE. THE CHANGES ARE MADE

22:02AT NOVICK TWO, WHICH IS POSTED

22:04YESTERDAY AND WHICH I'D NOW

22:07LIKE TO MOVE AND ASK FOR A

22:10SECOND AND THEN BRING THE

22:11REVENUE TEAM UP FOR FURTHER

22:12DISCUSSION. SO I HEREBY MOVE

22:14NOVICK TWO. I'LL SECOND.

22:19COUNCILOR MOVES COUNCILOR KANAL

22:21SECONDS. AND NOW I'D LIKE TO

22:26ASK THE TEAM UP TO SORT OF

22:28REFRESH US ON WHAT THE ORIGINAL

22:31AMENDMENTS AMENDMENTS WERE,

22:33WHICH INCLUDE ELIMINATING THE

22:37DISTINCTION FOR FEE PURPOSES

22:39BETWEEN OCCASIONAL AND NON

22:41OCCASIONAL DEALERS. BUT I'LL

22:44LET I'LL LET THEM TAKE IT AWAY.

22:46REMIND US THAT WHAT THE

22:48ORIGINAL AMENDMENTS WERE ON

22:49SECOND HAND DEALERS AND ADD

22:51ANYTHING YOU THINK NEEDS TO BE

22:53ADDED TO MY DISCUSSION OF WHAT

22:54WE'RE CHANGING. PROPOSING TO

22:56CHANGE IN NOVICK TWO.

22:58>> GOOD MORNING, TIM MERCER.

23:01TAX DIVISION MANAGER FOR

23:03REVENUE. THANKS FOR THE TIME

23:05THIS MORNING. SO REMINDER ON

23:07THIS PACKAGE THIS WAS THIS WAS

23:11INCLUDED IN A PACKAGE RATHER.

23:13SO THIS IS ONE PIECE OF A

23:15PACKAGE LOOKING AT KIND OF ALL

23:17OF THE REGULATORY PROGRAMS THAT

23:19REVENUE ADMINISTERS. FOUR OF

23:22THOSE PIECES OF THIS PACKAGE

23:26ARE HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, MOVED

23:29TO COUNCIL. AND THIS ONE WAS

23:30HELD BACK. SO WE TOOK A

23:33HOLISTIC LOOK AT ALL OF THE

23:35REGULATORY PROGRAMS WE

23:37ADMINISTER. WE WANTED TO GET

23:40RID OF ONE OF THOSE PROGRAMS,

23:42AS WELL AS UPDATE FEE SCHEDULES

23:45FOR ALL OF THE PROGRAMS, MOST

23:48OF WHICH HADN'T BEEN UPDATED IN

23:50QUITE A LONG TIME, IF EVER. SO

23:55SPECIFICALLY HERE FOR SECOND

23:56HAND DEALERS, THE THE MAJOR

24:01CHANGES. THE POINT OF THESE

24:02CHANGES WAS AROUND UPDATING THE

24:04FEE SCHEDULE, ELIMINATING THE

24:08OCCASIONAL OR OCCASIONAL DEALER

24:12CLASSIFICATION. AND THAT'S

24:14SIMPLY BECAUSE IT TAKES THE

24:16SAME AMOUNT OF TIME FOR US TO

24:18ADMINISTER AN OCCASIONAL DEALER

24:20PERMIT, AS IT DOES THE FULL

24:23PERMIT. SO IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE

24:25FROM A COST RECOVERY STANDPOINT

24:26TO HAVE TWO FEE STRUCTURES AND

24:30THEN JUST KIND OF TWEAKING SOME

24:33OF THE LANGUAGE IN THE PROGRAM

24:38TO HOPEFULLY IMPROVE THE

24:40ADMINISTRATION OF THE PROGRAM.

24:42SO THAT'S KIND OF THE HIGH

24:44LEVEL BACKGROUND ON ON WHAT'S

24:47GOING ON HERE.

24:50>> THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR

24:52THE TEAM?

24:54>> ARE WE ON JUST THE AMENDMENT

24:56OR ON THE JUST. YEAH. ALL RIGHT.

25:04THANKS. I GUESS I JUST WANT TO

25:06UNDERSTAND BECAUSE THE

25:07AMENDMENT ITSELF ADDS AND IT'S

25:08IT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING BECAUSE

25:12THE TRACK CHANGES IS ALL

25:13SHOWING. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING

25:14IS THE AMENDMENT IS JUST THE.

25:16EIGHT SORRY. 20 POINT I WANT TO

25:21MAKE SURE I GET THIS RIGHT. 14

25:23B DOT 90 DOT 40 PART B EIGHT,

25:26WHICH IS AT THE SORT OF BOTTOM

25:28OF PAGE TEN. AND I JUST WANTED

25:31TO, TO, TO, TO CLARIFY WITH YOU

25:34IN TERMS OF. WHAT HAS CHANGED

25:38HERE, WHAT THIS WOULD DO IS, IS

25:41BASICALLY CURRENTLY IT'S FOR

25:42PEOPLE WHO CAN BUY. AND THIS

25:44WOULD TAKE IT TO ALSO BE THE

25:46PRINCIPALS OF THE COMPANY. IS

25:47THAT CORRECT?

25:49>> ACTUALLY, WHAT THE LANGUAGE

25:51REFERRED TO AS PEOPLE WHO

25:52ACQUIRE. AND I ACTUALLY THOUGHT

25:54THAT THAT WAS RATHER VAGUE,

25:56BECAUSE THAT MIGHT SUGGEST THAT

25:57SOMEBODY WHO ACTUALLY TAKES AN

25:58OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN SOMETHING.

26:00SO WE WANTED TO I WANTED TO

26:01MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IT'S PEOPLE

26:03WHO ARE AUTHORIZED TO LIKE

26:04SPEND THE BUSINESS MONEY TO BUY

26:06THINGS.

26:06>> OKAY. SO THE CLARITY, BUT IN

26:08TERMS OF THE, THE, THE ORIGINAL

26:11INTENT WAS PEOPLE WHO PAY FOR

26:13IT SEEMS. RIGHT.

26:14>> RIGHT.

26:14>> SO THIS MAKES IT CLEAR. BUT

26:16THEN IT ALSO ADDS THE

26:17PRINCIPLES. RIGHT. AND, BUT IT

26:20DOESN'T IT DOESN'T INCLUDE

26:22EVERYBODY WHO SELLS. IT DOESN'T

26:23INCLUDE EVERYBODY WHO'S A

26:24SECURITY GUARD, RIGHT? LIKE SO,

26:27OKAY, JUST MAKING SURE WE GET

26:28THAT ON THE, ON THE RECORD. AND

26:30THEN I DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW IF

26:32IT DEFINES VERIFY THIS. YEAH.

26:40SO MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION,

26:41INCLUDING ANY OWNERS IS THE

26:43PRINCIPAL THERE. AND I'M SORRY,

26:44I'M LIKE SCROLLING AROUND HERE

26:46BECAUSE THE TRACK CHANGES A

26:47LITTLE. CAN I GET A

26:48CLARIFICATION ON WHAT PART D

26:50MEANS? THIS IS THE FIRST

26:51SECTION ON THE TOP OF PAGE 11.

26:53I'M BROADLY SUPPORTIVE.

26:55OBVIOUSLY I SECONDED IT FOR.

26:59EIGHT, THE HEADER A, B, C, BUT

27:01I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHAT WOULD

27:04CONSTITUTE A CHANGE. LIKE IS

27:05THIS IF THEY MOVE, IS IT WHAT

27:07ARE THE SORTS OF THINGS THAT

27:08WOULD HAPPEN. OH NO. CAUSE A

27:10CHANGE.

27:10>> YEAH. I THINK WHAT WE'RE

27:12WE'RE INTENDING THERE IS IF

27:14SOMEBODY HAD AN ARREST AFTER

27:17THEIR BACKGROUND CHECK, FOR

27:18INSTANCE, THEY SHOULD THAT

27:21WOULD CONSTITUTE A CHANGE OF

27:23THEIR PERSONAL HISTORY FORM.

27:26AND THEY THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO

27:27NOTIFY US OF THAT.

27:29>> AND SO WOULD THAT BE THE,

27:31BASICALLY THE CONTENT THAT'S IN

27:36B ONE THROUGH SEVEN, THE SORT

27:40OF IMMEDIATELY ABOVE SEVEN

27:43SECTIONS.

27:48>> THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. THAT'S

27:49THE THAT'S THE SECTION THAT

27:51REFERS TO THE PERSONAL HISTORY

27:53FORM. SO IF IF SOMETHING THAT'S

27:57LAID OUT ON THAT PERSONAL

27:58HISTORY FORM CHANGES LIKE AN

28:01ARREST OR SOME OTHER. LARGE

28:06PIECE OF THAT, WE WOULD BE

28:08EXPECTING THAT THEY WOULD FILE

28:09ANOTHER PERSONAL HISTORY FORM

28:10WITH US, WHICH WOULD ALLOW PPB

28:12TO MAKE THE DECISION ABOUT

28:14WHETHER TO DO ANOTHER

28:16BACKGROUND CHECK OR CHANGE

28:17THEIR STATUS OR SOMETHING ALONG

28:19THOSE LINES.

28:20>> OKAY, THEN MY QUESTION FOR

28:23CHAIR NOVICK IS WHY DID YOU

28:26CHOOSE TO HAVE THE BACKGROUND

28:28CHECK BE PERFORMED BY PPB, AS

28:30OPPOSED TO ONE OF THE OTHER

28:31POTENTIAL BACKGROUND CHECKERS

28:33WITHIN THE CITY OR PEOPLE WE

28:34HAVE CONTRACTS WITH?

28:37>> WELL, ACTUALLY, HISTORICALLY

28:39THE BACKGROUND CHECKS HAVE

28:40ALREADY BEEN PERFORMED BY PPB,

28:42SO THAT'S SORT OF JUST A

28:43CONTINUATION OF EXISTING

28:45PRACTICE. OKAY. THANKS. ANY

28:52FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE

28:54AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENTS? IN

28:59THAT CASE, COULD THE CLERK

29:00PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON NOVICK

29:02TWO?

29:03>> YES. THANK YOU. ZIMMERMAN

29:07ABSENT. SMITH ABSENT.

29:12>> KANAL TO THE AMENDMENT.

29:14>> I MORILLO. I NOVICK I. THE

29:21AMENDMENT IS APPROVED WITH

29:22THREE VOTES AND TWO ABSENT.

29:27>> ALL RIGHT. NOW, ANY

29:30DISCUSSION OF THE. AND ACTUALLY,

29:31I WOULD ASK YOU GUYS TO STAY UP

29:33JUST IN CASE PEOPLE HAVE

29:34QUESTIONS ABOUT THE UNDERLYING

29:35THE UNDERLYING ORIGINAL

29:36AMENDMENT. ANY DISCUSSION OF

29:39THE ORIGINAL AMENDMENT,

29:41INCLUDING THE ELIMINATION OF

29:42THE CATEGORY OF. SECOND OF

29:44OCCASIONAL DEALERS, ETC.

29:48COUNCILOR KANAL.

29:49>> THANKS. SO I HAVE NO CONCERN

29:52ABOUT THE IDEA OF ELIMINATING

29:54THE CATEGORY. I THINK THE

29:58PRESENTATION LAST TIME WAS

29:59REALLY HELPFUL IN THAT REGARD.

30:01I'M NOT. MY CONCERNS HAVE

30:03GENERALLY BEEN AROUND THIS SAME

30:05SECTION OF. OF THE B SECTION. I

30:08WILL NOTE, I GUESS. LET ME

30:09START WITH THE QUESTION, HOW

30:12HAS THE. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT

30:13CAME UP WHEN WE REFERRED IT

30:15BACK TO THE CAPS COMMITTEE IS

30:17ENGAGEMENT WITH THE FOLKS THAT

30:18WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THIS, AND

30:20I JUST WAS CURIOUS IF THERE HAD

30:22BEEN MORE DONE ON THAT SINCE

30:23THE TIME THAT BY EITHER YOUR

30:26OFFICE OR BY THE STAFF, SINCE

30:28THE TIME THAT WE TALKED ABOUT

30:30IT LAST?

30:31>> NO, NO FURTHER ENGAGEMENT

30:32HAS BEEN DONE.

30:34>> OKAY. ON YOUR END AT ALL?

30:36>> NO.

30:36>> OKAY. SO I, I PERSONALLY

30:38WENT INTO A. PAWN SHOP THAT HAS

30:44SEVERAL LOCATIONS AROUND THE

30:46COUNTRY, INCLUDING HERE IN

30:48PORTLAND, AND TALKED TO THE

30:49MANAGER THERE. IT'S NOT A

30:53REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE BECAUSE

30:54THERE ARE PLENTY OF PAWN SHOPS

30:56THAT ARE NOT PART OF LARGE

30:57NATIONAL OR REGIONAL CHAINS.

31:02AND BUT I WILL SAY THAT THAT

31:04THERE THERE WAS IMMEDIATELY NO

31:06CONCERN BECAUSE THEIR THEIR

31:10COMMENT WAS EFFECTIVELY LIKE

31:11THE COMPANY ALREADY REQUIRES

31:12ALL THIS ANYWAY, BECAUSE IT'S

31:14PART OF A LARGER COMPANY, I

31:17HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO GET TO

31:18A COUPLE OTHER PLACES I'VE

31:20IDENTIFIED TO LOOK INTO AS A.

31:24SORT OF REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE,

31:28YOU KNOW, COMBINING IT WITH

31:30THIS IN TERMS OF A SMALLER

31:32LOCATION, IN TERMS OF A SECOND

31:34HAND MUSIC SHOP SPECIFICALLY,

31:36MY CONCERN HAS LARGELY BEEN

31:37AROUND ANYTHING WE DO THAT

31:38MAKES IT HARDER TO BUY USED

31:40MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS WILL MAKE

31:41IT HARDER FOR PEOPLE TO GET

31:42INTO THAT, AND I THINK THAT'S A

31:46CONCERN I STILL HAVE. BUT I

31:48JUST WANTED TO KIND OF GET THAT

31:50ON THE RECORD. WE HAVE

31:53CONTRACTS WITH A FEW DIFFERENT

31:54COMPANIES TO DO BACKGROUND

31:56CHECKS AS WELL. I AM CONCERNED

31:59ABOUT THE IDEA THAT THIS SORT

32:01OF. THE ORIGINAL PRESENTATION

32:07IMPLIED THAT THERE WAS SORT OF

32:09A NOT AN ASSUMPTION OF THERE

32:11BEING SOMETHING SKETCHY GOING

32:12ON AT ALL THESE SORTS OF

32:14ESTABLISHMENTS, BUT THAT THERE

32:15WAS A HIGH ENOUGH RISK THAT

32:16THIS THAT THE IDEA OF IMPOSING

32:18THE BURDEN OF A HIGHER LEVEL OF

32:21DATA BEING FORCIBLY SHARED WITH

32:24PPB IN ORDER TO TO WORK THERE

32:25WAS JUSTIFIED. THAT CASE HAS

32:27STILL NOT BEEN MADE TO ME FULLY.

32:29I DO THINK THAT THE AMENDMENT

32:30IMPROVES IT BY MAKING IT

32:32CLEARER WHO IS IS SUBJECT TO

32:33THIS AND WHO'S NOT. BUT I'M

32:34STILL NOT 100% CERTAIN ABOUT

32:36THAT PIECE. SO I GUESS THE

32:38OTHER QUESTION, I KNOW THE

32:39ANSWER BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S NOT

32:41FULLY STAFFED UP YET, BUT, YOU

32:42KNOW, THE DATA AND PRIVACY

32:43OFFICE HAS NOT BEEN PART OF

32:45THIS CONVERSATION YET. AND I AM

32:47INTERESTED IN THAT SORT OF

32:49EVALUATION OF LEGISLATION LIKE

32:50THIS IN THE FUTURE. THANKS.

32:53>> UNDERSTOOD. AND I THINK THAT

32:55WE DID I MEAN, THE THE

32:57CATEGORIES EXIST BECAUSE THERE

32:59IS A HISTORY OF TRAFFICKING IN

33:01STOLEN GOODS IN THESE VARIOUS

33:03AND MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS.

33:05APPARENTLY, THERE IS SUCH A

33:07HISTORY.

33:07>> YOU WERE I SHOULD. YEAH,

33:09THAT IS CORRECT, I THINK. BUT

33:13I'M NOT 100% CERTAIN I'M GOING

33:15TO. I'M NOT 100% CERTAIN IF

33:18IT'S THE BEST PLACE TO GO. IF

33:19ONE HAS STOLEN A MUSICAL

33:21INSTRUMENT BECAUSE OF THE THE

33:22SORT OF SOCIAL MEDIA GROUPS AND

33:24THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT YOU CAN,

33:26YOU KNOW, CONNECT WITH PEOPLE

33:27AND SELL SOMETHING QUICKER. ON

33:30HAVING SAID THAT, THE THING

33:31THAT DOES MAKE OBVIOUS SENSE,

33:33IN WHICH WE'VE HEARD FROM SOME

33:34OF THE FOLKS I'VE TALKED TO AS

33:36WELL, IS THAT THE WHEN IT WOULD

33:37MAKE SENSE TO GO TO A STORE, A

33:40REGULATED ESTABLISHMENT IS IF

33:41THERE WAS SOME SORT OF

33:43CONNECTION TO AN EMPLOYEE THERE.

33:45THAT IS THE THING THAT WOULD

33:46MAKE IT RELEVANT. SO I I'M NOT

33:49DISPUTING YOUR UNDERLYING POINT

33:50THERE, BUT IT IS CERTAINLY A

33:51CONCERN. I'M JUST TRYING TO

33:54UNDERSTAND THE, THE, THE RATIO,

33:56THE, THE RELATIVE COMPARATIVE

33:58LEVEL OF, OF CONCERN ABOUT TWO

34:01DIFFERENT RISKS.

34:03>> THANK YOU. I SHOULD NOTE

34:06THAT I'VE BEEN READING COLSON

34:09WHITEHEAD'S HARLEM TRILOGY,

34:10WHICH FOCUSES ON A FENCE WHO IS

34:12ALSO THE OWNER OF A FURNITURE

34:14STORE. SO THE, THE IDEA OF

34:17FENCES ACTUALLY HAS A CERTAIN

34:18LEVEL OF ROMANCE FOR ME,

34:19ALTHOUGH OF COURSE I'M OPPOSED

34:20TO IT. SO ANY COUNCILOR MORILLO.

34:26>> YEAH, I WAS JUST CURIOUS,

34:27DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY RESPONSES

34:29TO WHAT COUNCILOR KANAL SAID? I

34:31KNOW HE DIDN'T PHRASE IT AS A

34:33QUESTION, BUT I THINK THOSE ARE

34:34SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I'VE

34:36BEEN THINKING ABOUT AS WELL.

34:37AND I MEAN, TO BE FRANK WITH

34:39YOU, THERE'S ONLY THREE OF US

34:40HERE TODAY, SO I WANT TO MAKE

34:42SURE THAT WE GET THINGS

34:44ANSWERED SO WE CAN. IF IT IS,

34:45IT DOES FEEL GOOD, THEN WE CAN

34:47MOVE IT THROUGH.

34:51>> COUNCILOR MORILLO WOULD YOU

34:52MIND RESTATING THE SPECIFIC

34:53QUESTION YOU'RE REFERRING TO?

34:57>> I MEAN, I THINK THE THINGS

34:58THAT I REALLY HAVE QUESTIONS ON

35:00ETERNALLY, UNTIL THE DATA

35:01PRIVACY OFFICE GETS REALLY

35:02ESTABLISHED IS WHAT, YOU KNOW,

35:05THINGS WE KEEP APPROVING AS A

35:07COUNCIL AND MOVING THROUGH

35:09BEFORE BEFORE THAT IS

35:11ESTABLISHED. AND I THINK THAT'S

35:12PART OF WHAT COUNCILOR KANAL

35:14TOUCHED ON.

35:19>> WELL, I THINK THAT I MEAN,

35:20OTHER THAN CLARIFYING EXACTLY

35:22WHO IS SUBJECT TO THE

35:25BACKGROUND CHECK, I MEAN, I

35:27THINK THAT WE'RE JUST TALKING

35:28ABOUT CONTINUING INFORMATION

35:30GATHERING THAT WE'RE ALREADY

35:31DOING. IS THAT CORRECT, TEAM?

35:34>> YEAH. THAT'S CORRECT.

35:38>> SO IF THE AMENDMENTS WERE

35:39NOT APPROVED, WE WOULD CONTINUE

35:40GATHERING INFORMATION. WE JUST

35:42HAVE SOME, IN MY VIEW,

35:44AMBIGUITY IN THE LANGUAGE AS TO

35:45WHO IS SUBJECT TO THE

35:47REQUIREMENT.

35:49>> RIGHT. THE CHANGES ARE SOME

35:52CLARIFICATION ON WHO IS SUBJECT

35:54TO THAT REQUIREMENT. AS, AS AS

35:58YOU JUST STATED, THE ADDITION

36:00OF THE BACKGROUND CHECK FEE,

36:02WHICH HASN'T BEEN THERE BEFORE.

36:04SO IN REGARDS TO BACKGROUND

36:06CHECKS, THOSE ARE THOSE ARE THE

36:08SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES. WE ARE

36:09ALREADY DOING THESE BACKGROUND

36:12CHECKS WITHOUT A FEE.

36:14>> I APOLOGIZE AND BRINGING UP

36:16THE FEE BEFORE AND THE THE

36:17AMOUNT OF THE FEE IS.

36:20>> 20.

36:20>> LELAND TAYLOR, REGULATORY

36:22PROGRAM COORDINATOR THE

36:23BACKGROUND CHECK FEE WOULD BE

36:25$25.

36:25>> KEEP FORGETTING.

36:28>> THAT IS ANOTHER ADDITION.

36:32>> COUNCILOR KANAL CAN I ASK?

36:35SO OKAY, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH

36:37THE IDEA OF COST RECOVERY. $25

36:40MAKES SENSE IF THAT'S WHAT IT

36:41COSTS. I UNDERSTAND IF YOU DO

36:42PRIVATE BACKGROUND CHECK,

36:44THERE'S THERE'S COSTS AS WELL.

36:45SO THIS IS A COMPARABLE I GUESS

36:47I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS. ONE IS

36:50THEN THIS IS D TWO, WHICH IS

36:52LIKE TEN LINES LOWER THAN THE

36:54SECTION WE WERE JUST TALKING

36:55ABOUT ON PAGE TEN. IT SAYS IT

36:59WILL BE ASSESSED TO ANY

37:01PRINCIPLES AND ANY EMPLOYEES.

37:03SO THE EXPECTATION IS THAT THE

37:04PERSON THEMSELF IS PAYING FOR

37:06IT, NOT THE COMPANY. IS THAT

37:08CAN WE SPEAK TO CAN YOU SPEAK

37:10TO HOW THAT DECISION WAS

37:11ARRIVED AT?

37:13>> I DON'T ACTUALLY THINK

37:14THAT'S OUR EXPECTATION. SO I

37:16THINK TYPICALLY, AND LILA CAN

37:19CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG HERE,

37:20BUT I THINK IT'S VERY TYPICAL

37:22FOR THE EMPLOYER TO PAY THE FEE.

37:25AND THAT WOULD BE OUR GENERAL

37:27EXPECTATION. BUT WE'RE NOT

37:29EXPLICITLY SAYING WHO NEEDS TO

37:31PAY THE FEE. THERE'S JUST A FEE

37:35APPLIED TO BACKGROUND CHECKS,

37:36WHICH ARE DONE ON THE SUBSET OF

37:40INDIVIDUALS THAT YOU JUST

37:41MENTIONED. SO FOLKS ACQUIRING

37:43PROPERTY AND PRINCIPALS.

37:46>> SO I WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT

37:48MAKES SENSE WHAT YOUR YOUR

37:50EXPLANATION MAKES SENSE. THE

37:52TEXT SAYS EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1ST,

37:542027, A BACKGROUND CHECK FEE OF

37:57$25 WILL BE ASSESSED TO ANY

37:59PRINCIPALS AND ANY EMPLOYEES

38:01OPERATING IN THE CITY OF

38:02PORTLAND THAT WOULD REQUIRE

38:03REGULATED PROPERTY, WOULDN'T IT?

38:07I MEAN, ASSESSED FOR EACH

38:08BACKGROUND CHECK WOULD MAKE

38:09THAT INTENTION CLEAR THAT YOU

38:11WANT IT FOR EACH ONE AND NOT

38:13ONE PER COMPANY, BUT NOT

38:15NECESSARILY SAY WHO'S PAYING IT.

38:17I THINK IT'S A AM I WRONG IN

38:19READING THAT AS SAYING IT'S ON

38:20THE THE PERSON THEMSELVES.

38:24>> THAT'S NOT THE INTENT OF

38:25THAT LANGUAGE. BUT I SEE I SEE

38:27HOW YOU COULD GET THERE. YEAH.

38:29>> COUNCILOR FOR SOME REASON

38:30I'M NOT LOOKING AT THE RIGHT

38:32PAGE.

38:34>> ONE MORE PAGE. TWO. THIS IS

38:41IT'S IT'S HERE. SO I DON'T KNOW

38:43WHY I HAVE IT ON MY VERSION.

38:47>> I BELIEVE THAT TEXT WAS

38:48REMOVED FROM THE MOST RECENT

38:50AMENDMENT. WHAT I BELIEVE THAT

38:51TEXT WAS REMOVED FROM THE MOST

38:53RECENT AMENDMENT.

38:55>> OKAY.

38:55>> OH, OKAY.

38:56>> SO THEN, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE

39:00RIGHT. I HAD THE, THE OLD AND

39:03THE NEW VERSION OPEN. CAN WE

39:05GET A OKAY, NOW I'M CONFUSED.

39:07CAN WE GET A TRACK CHANGES

39:08VERSION? BECAUSE IF THAT'S IN

39:10THE VERSION THAT WAS REFERRED

39:12TO US AND THEN IT'S IN THE

39:14AMENDMENT, IT'S REMOVED, BUT

39:15IT'S NOT MARKED AS REMOVED.

39:16DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?

39:17>> LIKE, YEAH, I HEAR YOU. I

39:18HEAR YOUR CONCERN.

39:20>> I THAT'S A, LET'S SEE,

39:24THAT'S A REASONABLE REQUEST.

39:25>> WE AND I HAVE A DIFFERENT

39:29QUESTION WHILE THAT'S GOING ON,

39:30IF YOU.

39:30>> WANT TO. LET'S SEE. WELL,

39:32THE QUESTION IS, CAN WE. CAN WE

39:35PUT TOGETHER A TRACK CHANGES

39:37VERSION, WHICH WE SHOULD HAVE

39:38HAD ALREADY OVER THE NEXT FEW

39:41MINUTES.

39:43>> THAT'S WE'RE WORKING ON IT.

39:46>> WE PONDER THAT. COUNCILOR GO

39:48AHEAD AND ASK YOUR FURTHER

39:49QUESTION.

39:50>> YEAH, IT'S REGARDING AND I'M

39:53GOING TO MAKE SURE IT'S IN HERE

39:54NOW. YEAH. THE IT'S PART SEVEN

40:00OF. 14 B .90.040 B SEVEN. AND

40:07THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE CITY

40:09ADMINISTRATOR. I UNDERSTAND

40:10THAT THE IDEA HERE OF ANY OTHER

40:13INFORMATION THAT THE CITY

40:14ADMINISTRATOR MAY REASONABLY

40:15FEEL IS NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH

40:16THE GOALS OF THIS CHAPTER IS

40:18SORT OF IN LINE WITH HOW WE'RE

40:20WRITING CODE NOW OF NOT

40:21SPECIFYING NECESSARILY SPECIFIC

40:22BUREAUS, BUT INSTEAD PUTTING

40:23THIS INTO THE SORT OF HANDS OF

40:25THE ADMINISTRATIVE RULES TO

40:27DETERMINE. AND THAT'S WITHIN

40:28THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S ROLE.

40:32WHAT SORT OF THINGS, WHAT WOULD

40:35BE THE PROCESS SHOULD THIS,

40:36THIS ORDINANCE PASS, WILL BE

40:37THE PROCESS FOR FIGURING OUT

40:39WHAT WOULD GO INTO THOSE

40:42REQUIREMENTS.

40:44>> I WOULD SIT DOWN WITH

40:45VARIOUS BUREAU LEADERSHIP AND

40:47REALLY OUTLINE THAT AND REALLY

40:49HAVE THEM PROVIDE ME SOME

40:51RECOMMENDATIONS WITH OPTIONS AS

40:52IT RELATES TO HOW THIS THING

40:54COULD TRULY FUNCTION AND FLOW

40:56FROM THERE AND FROM THERE. FROM

40:59A PROCESS STANDPOINT, I WOULD

41:01MORE THAN LIKELY MAKE A

41:02DECISION ON THAT.

41:03>> COUNCILOR OKAY, WOULD IT

41:07WOULD ENGAGEMENT BE A PART OF

41:09THAT ROLE WITH THE, THE PEOPLE

41:13THAT ARE BEING REGULATED? AND I

41:14DON'T JUST MEAN THE COMPANIES.

41:15>> I THINK ENGAGEMENT AND

41:17EQUITY WOULD HAVE TO BE A

41:19COMPONENT OF THAT. AND THAT'S

41:20SOME OF THE CONVERSATION PIECE

41:21THAT WE WOULD HAVE.

41:23>> OKAY. I, I WILL SAY I

41:26APPRECIATE THAT CLARITY, AND I

41:28LIKE THAT ANSWER IN TERMS OF

41:30ANSWERING THE QUESTION. IT

41:31GIVES ME PAUSE IN THE SENSE OF

41:33ANY OTHER INFORMATION, SEEMS TO

41:35ME TO BE SORT OF A FIGURE IT

41:37OUT ADMINISTRATION. AND I, I'M,

41:40I HAVEN'T I'M GENERALLY NOT

41:41SUPPORTIVE OF THOSE IN ANY

41:43CONTEXT. SO I'M TRYING TO JUST

41:45UNDERSTAND HERE IN TERMS OF THE

41:46LEVEL OF DATA THAT WOULD BE

41:48ASKED FOR, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE

41:49IF THE STARTING POINT OF THE

41:50PROCESS, WHICH MAKES SENSE,

41:51WOULD BE GOING AND TALKING TO

41:53THE BUREAU THAT'S RECEIVING THE

41:54DATA. SO I JUST WANTED TO GET

41:56THAT ON THE RECORD TOO. AND I

41:58MIGHT ASK ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT

41:59WE CAN REMOVE PART SEVEN THERE.

42:04>> COUNCILOR KANAL CAN I

42:05ADDRESS THE DRAFTING CONCERN

42:07WITH THE RED LINE OF THAT

42:10SPECIFIC D2 LANGUAGE? SO SORRY,

42:13CHAIR, CAN I DO THAT? YES YOU

42:14MAY. THANK YOU. SPENCER NILS,

42:17CHIEF OF STAFF FOR COUNCILOR

42:18STEVE NOVICK. I BELIEVE THE

42:20GUIDANCE IN DRAFTING FROM THE

42:22CLERK IS TO NOT REDLINE

42:25AMENDMENT LANGUAGE AND INSTEAD

42:28REFLECT IT AS IT'S AS IT WOULD

42:31RESULT WHEN AMENDED. AND SO

42:33THAT D2 WAS SOMETHING THAT HAD

42:35BEEN ADDED IN THE INITIAL

42:37AMENDMENT. AND SO YOU WOULDN'T

42:41REDLINE THAT PIECE, YOU WOULD

42:42JUST NOW REFLECT THAT IT'S NO

42:44LONGER THERE IN THE IN THE

42:48SUBSEQUENT NOVICK TWO AMENDMENT.

42:50SO IT'S KIND OF CONFUSING AND

42:51THAT IT'S GETTING LOST IN THE

42:53NEW AMENDMENT, THE SUPERSEDING

42:55AMENDMENT. BUT THAT'S THE

42:58THAT'S THE REASON IT'S FALLING

42:59FOLLOWING THE DRAFTING

43:00GUIDELINES, WHICH CAN KIND OF

43:02GET CONFUSING SOMETIMES. SO NOT

43:05INTENTIONALLY TRYING TO HIDE,

43:08TAKING THAT OUT OR ANYTHING.

43:09>> YEAH. NO, I APPRECIATE THE

43:11CLARITY. NOT TRYING TO IMPLY

43:12THERE WAS ANY BAD INTENT THERE.

43:15I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT

43:17IF THAT'S THE DRAFTING

43:17GUIDELINES, WE SHOULD PROBABLY

43:18ASK THE CLERK TO, TO UPDATE

43:20THOSE IN SOME WAY, BECAUSE IT

43:22IS THAT SEEMS AS THOUGH IT

43:24CANNOT BUT CREATE THIS PROBLEM

43:27IN THE FUTURE. IF SOMETHING IS

43:28BEING PROPOSED TO BE ADDED OR

43:30REMOVED, AND THEN AN AMENDMENT

43:31TO IT WOULD EITHER RESTORE

43:32DELETED TEXT OR REMOVE ADDED

43:35TEXT. BUT IT DOESN'T HELP ME

43:38RIGHT THIS SECOND WITH WHAT

43:39ELSE? SO DO YOU HAVE A VERSION?

43:43THESE ARE ALL PDFS ONLINE, SO

43:45MAYBE IF I GET THE THE VERSIONS

43:46TO DO A COMPARE VERSIONS ON IT.

43:48BUT WHAT ELSE HAS CHANGED IN

43:50NOVICK TWO? BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK

43:51AT THE EXPLANATION UP AT THE

43:53TOP, IT TALKS ABOUT JUST ADDING

43:57B EIGHT. AND IT DOES TALK ABOUT

43:59REMOVING D TWO. BUT I JUST WANT

44:01TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S ANY.

44:03ANYTHING ELSE THAT I'M MISSING.

44:04>> AS FAR AS MY RECOLLECTION

44:06THAT IS ALL WE'RE CHANGING. IT

44:08WAS REALLY JUST TO PROVIDE THAT

44:10CLARITY AROUND WHO THE

44:12BACKGROUND CHECK APPLIES TO. SO

44:14IT'S VERY SMALL CHANGE. BUT

44:18YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S ALL I

44:20RECALL US CHANGING.

44:22>> OKAY.

44:24>> ALL RIGHT. SO THAT ADDRESSES

44:25THE QUESTION THAT I'D ASKED

44:26EARLIER ABOUT IMPOSED UPON. AND

44:28I APPRECIATE THE CLARITY THERE

44:30STILL HAVE THE OTHER CONCERN

44:31REGARDING THE THE PART SEVEN.

44:33THANKS.

44:37>> THAT'S A COUNCILOR. ARE YOU

44:38SATISFIED WITH THAT? AND WE CAN

44:40WE DON'T NEED TO CREATE A TRACK

44:42CHANGES VERSION.

44:43>> NO, I DO THINK, YOU KNOW,

44:44I'LL PROBABLY FOLLOW UP WITH

44:45THE CLERK ABOUT. IT WOULD BE

44:47HELPFUL TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE

44:48WORD VERSIONS. ALSO, IF ONE

44:50WANTS TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO

44:51IT, IT'S ALSO HELPFUL. LIKE IF

44:53I WANTED TO REMOVE PART SEVEN

44:54RIGHT NOW, IT'S KIND OF LIKE,

44:55WHERE WOULD THAT, YOU KNOW,

44:58RIGHT. SO.

45:02>> ON ITEM SEVEN, ANY OTHER

45:05INFORMATION THE CITY

45:06ADMINISTRATOR MAY REASONABLY

45:06FEEL IS NECESSARY? I WANT TO

45:10ASK THE TEAM, DO YOU THINK THAT

45:13DO YOU THINK THAT THAT'S

45:14ESSENTIAL? I MEAN, COUNCILOR

45:15KANAL SUGGESTED HE MIGHT WANT

45:16TO REMOVE IT. I MEAN, HOW MUCH

45:18HEARTBURN WOULD THAT CAUSE US?

45:22>> I DON'T I DON'T THINK THAT

45:24IT'S NECESSARY. I'VE NOT YET

45:26HAD TO UTILIZE THAT PORTION OF

45:28THE TEXT OR ANYTHING CLOSE TO

45:30IT. SO I THINK THAT THAT IS

45:31OKAY TO TO WITHDRAW.

45:34>> CITY ADMINISTRATOR, ANY

45:35FURTHER THOUGHTS?

45:37>> THE ONLY THING I WOULD SAY

45:39IN SITUATIONS LIKE THIS, HAVING

45:41TEXTS LIKE THAT DOES GIVE SOME

45:43FLEXIBILITY IN THE STANDPOINT

45:45OF LOOKING AT INTENT AND HOW WE

45:46ARE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD,

45:48INTENT OF ANY POLICY. SO HAVING

45:51THAT FLEXIBILITY WITHIN ANY

45:53ORDINANCE GIVES THE ABILITY FOR

45:55US TO WORK THROUGH ANY THINGS

45:57THAT WE MAY LATER FIND OUT THAT

45:59NEED TO BE ADDED TO IT.

46:03>> AND I RECOGNIZE THAT. I

46:04THINK WE HAVE I JUST WANT TO

46:06POINT OUT, YOU KNOW, IN

46:08PARALLEL TO THIS WHOLE THING,

46:09AND I'M GOING TO GET YOU THE

46:11EXACT THERE IS A THERE IS A

46:15CONTEXT PIECE THAT I WANTED TO

46:16ADD HERE, WHICH IS THAT THERE'S

46:18A DIRECTIVE REVIEW PROCESS

46:19GOING ON AT PPB RIGHT NOW THAT

46:21WOULD TAKE MORE OF THE, THE

46:24PRIVACY QUESTION OUTSIDE OF

46:25PUBLIC VIEW ON PROCUREMENT. AND

46:28SO I HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE

46:30IDEA THAT THE THE ENTITY THAT'S

46:32RECEIVING THE INFORMATION IN

46:35THIS COULD DEMAND MORE OF A

46:38POPULATION THAT IS GENERALLY,

46:39YOU KNOW, THESE ARE NOT WELL

46:40PAID JOBS. RIGHT. ON THE WHOLE,

46:44I IMAGINE THERE ARE A FEW FOLKS

46:45WHO ARE DOING OKAY. BUT SO I

46:48PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY

46:49IN A POSITION TO PUSH BACK. SO

46:51THAT'S MY MY BROADER CONCERN

46:52THERE IS THAT I THINK THAT IT'S

46:56VALUABLE TO HAVE IT COME BACK

46:58AS A PROCESS AND AS A

47:00TRANSPARENCY PIECE AND GIVE

47:01FOLKS THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY,

47:03ACTUALLY, WHY DO WE NEED THAT

47:05INFORMATION? I UNDERSTAND AN

47:07ARREST THAT'S THAT'S OBVIOUSLY

47:08RELEVANT. BUT IF YOU GO THROUGH

47:11THE OTHER SEVEN PARTS, THERE'S

47:12OTHER THINGS IN THERE I'LL FLAG

47:15AND I APOLOGIZE. I'M GOING BACK

47:16AND FORTH BETWEEN SEVERAL

47:17DIFFERENT TABS NOW SO THAT

47:21THAT'S SORT OF MY MY CONCERN

47:23THERE. I DON'T HAVE THIS

47:25CONCERN, BY THE WAY, WITH PART

47:26SEVEN OF 14B9040A, WHICH ALSO

47:31HAPPENS TO BE PART SEVEN OF

47:32THAT ONE THAT TALKS ABOUT ANY

47:34OTHER INFORMATION. THE CITY

47:36ADMINISTRATOR MAY REASONABLY

47:37FEEL. IT'S THE SAME TEXT, BUT

47:38IT'S IT'S AS APPLIED TO THE THE

47:40DEALER ITSELF. SO I JUST WANT

47:42TO CLARIFY THAT FOR FOR

47:44PURPOSES OF. NOT NOT MAKING IT

47:48SEEM LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO TAKE

47:49SOMETHING ELSE OUT.

47:55>> COUNCILOR ARE YOU INTENDING

47:57TO MOVE TO ELIMINATE THAT ITEM?

47:59>> SEVEN YEAH, I'M TRYING TO

48:00MAKE A WRITTEN VERSION OF IT.

48:02>> OKAY.

48:02>> AS RAPIDLY AS I CAN HERE.

48:07BUT IT IS. AND WHILE WE'RE AT

48:11IT, WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT LINE

48:12NUMBERS BECAUSE IT MAKES IT A

48:14LOT EASIER TO, TO DO THIS

48:15QUICKLY. BUT YEAH, IT WOULD BE

48:18ON THE TOP. IF YOU LOOK AT THE

48:19THE VERSION IN NOVICK TWO, JUST

48:21TO. SINCE THAT'S THE VERSION

48:24WE'RE CURRENTLY OPERATING OFF

48:26OF, IT'S IN THE MIDDLE OF. PAGE

48:28TEN NEAR THE BOTTOM, ACTUALLY,

48:31PART SEVEN THERE OF 14 B

48:35.90.040 B SEVEN. AND I'LL GET

48:38THIS OVER TO THE CLERK AS

48:39QUICKLY AS I CAN. IT WOULD JUST

48:41STRIKE PART SEVEN IN ITS

48:42ENTIRETY.

48:51>> SORRY, CAN YOU SAY THE SUB

48:53SECTION AGAIN?

48:57>> 14.90.040 B AS IN BOY SEVEN.

49:14>> DO I NOT HAVE.

49:15>> SAMEER? AND ALSO WITH THE

49:19APPLICATION.

49:50>> CAN YOU. AND THEN WHAT ARE

49:56WE ASKING?

50:33PRINCIPLES IN PLACE WITH MY FINGERTIPS.

52:01>> OKAY, SPIDER-MAN. AS THE

52:05CLERK RECEIVED THE LANGUAGE

52:07FROM COUNCILOR KANAL.

52:13>> NOT AT THIS MOMENT. WITH THE

52:15COMMITTEE. LIKE TO TAKE A

52:16RECESS.

52:18>> WHAT?

52:18>> A RECESS IS AN OPTION.

52:22>> SURE. LET'S RECESS FOR TEN

52:25MINUTES AND RECONVENE AT 1025.

1:02:34>> REMEMBER THE NAME OF THE

1:02:35PLACE.

1:02:37>> I CAN'T.

1:02:38>> GET THE.

1:02:42>> ALL RIGHT. WE ARE

1:02:44RECONVENING. AND DOES THE CLERK

1:02:45HAVE THE TEXT OF COUNCILOR

1:02:47KANAL AMENDMENT?

1:02:48>> YES, IT'S BEEN IN CODE

1:02:50REVIEW. NO.

1:02:51>> IT'S. WHAT?

1:02:52>> YES, WE HAVE IT.

1:02:53>> OKAY. COUNCILOR KANAL.

1:02:58>> YEAH, I GUESS I'LL FORMALLY

1:03:00MOVE AMENDMENT KANAL ONE TO

1:03:01STRIKE 14 B .0.90.040 B SEVEN.

1:03:07>> DO I HEAR A SECOND?

1:03:10>> SECOND.

1:03:11>> SECOND COUNCILOR KANAL MOVES.

1:03:14COUNSELOR ZIMMERMAN NARROWLY

1:03:15BEAT OUT COUNCILOR MORILLO TO

1:03:16SECOND. COUNCILOR MORILLO.

1:03:19>> IT'S NOT A CONTEST.

1:03:25>> COUNCILOR NOVICK. WHILE IT'S

1:03:26GOING THROUGH CODE REVIEW, I DO

1:03:27HAVE A FEW MORE QUESTIONS IF

1:03:29THAT'S HELPFUL TO BY THE CLERK

1:03:30SOME TIME.

1:03:33>> I THINK THAT THE TIME HAS

1:03:36BEEN BROUGHT.

1:03:38>> OKAY, I DO ACTUALLY JUST

1:03:39HAVE MORE QUESTIONS THEN, BUT

1:03:41WE CAN DO THIS AMENDMENT FIRST

1:03:42AND THEN I'LL GO INTO THAT.

1:03:44>> OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANY

1:03:47DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT.

1:03:48COULD WE CALL THE ROLL ON THE

1:03:49AMENDMENT?

1:03:52>> KANAL ONE MOVED BY KANAL,

1:03:54SECONDED BY ZIMMERMAN.

1:03:57ZIMMERMAN, I SMITH ABSENT KANAL.

1:04:03I MORILLO. I NOVICK I. THE

1:04:10AMENDMENT IS APPROVED WITH FOUR

1:04:12EYES AND ONE ABSENT.

1:04:16>> ALL RIGHT. RETURNING TO

1:04:18COUNCILOR MORILLO.

1:04:23>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I CANNOT

1:04:25SEE WHO'S UP FRONT, BUT WHOEVER

1:04:27WANTS TO ANSWER THIS, I WAS

1:04:29JUST CURIOUS A LITTLE BIT MORE

1:04:31ON THE PROCESS PART OF THIS. SO

1:04:32OUR EMPLOYEE PERSONNEL HISTORY

1:04:35FORMS, INCLUDING ARREST RECORDS,

1:04:37ARE THOSE DISCLOSABLE PUBLIC

1:04:39RECORDS AND HOW LONG ARE THEY

1:04:42KEPT?

1:04:45>> I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO

1:04:47EITHER, I DON'T.

1:04:50>> YEAH, SO AS FAR AS WE

1:04:54UNDERSTAND, THEY'RE KEPT BY

1:04:55BOTH REVENUE AND PPB ONCE

1:04:58THEY'RE SUBMITTED. SO THAT THE

1:04:59LIST OF STUFF THAT'S THAT'S IN

1:05:01CODE THAT IS SUBMITTED AS PART

1:05:03OF THE PERSONAL HISTORY WOULD

1:05:04BE KEPT BY BOTH DEPARTMENTS. I

1:05:06CAN'T SPEAK FOR PPB ABOUT HOW

1:05:08LONG THEY KEEP THEM, BUT WE'RE

1:05:10KEEPING THOSE RECORDS. WE'VE

1:05:13BEEN KEEPING THEM SINCE THE

1:05:14START OF THE PROGRAM. WE. HAVE

1:05:16WE DONE ANY PURGING?

1:05:18>> I HAVE NOT DONE ANY PURGING.

1:05:20>> IN TERMS OF WHETHER OR NOT

1:05:22THEY'RE. DISCLOSABLE AS A

1:05:26PUBLIC RECORD, I. I WOULD

1:05:28ASSUME NOT, BUT I WOULD HAVE TO

1:05:30ASK AN ATTORNEY ON THAT

1:05:31QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW FOR SURE.

1:05:33AND WE'VE NEVER AS, AS FAR AS I

1:05:35KNOW, HAD A PUBLIC RECORDS

1:05:37REQUEST THAT INCLUDED THAT

1:05:40INFORMATION.

1:05:44>> OKAY.

1:05:45>> IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO CAN

1:05:47HELP ANSWER THAT? BECAUSE I

1:05:49THINK THAT MIGHT SORT OF SWAY,

1:05:52BECAUSE I THINK I JUST HAVE A

1:05:56LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT SOME OF

1:05:57THE DATA COLLECTION STUFF. AND

1:05:59WE HAVE THE DATA PRIVACY OFFICE

1:06:00THAT'S CURRENTLY BEING

1:06:01ESTABLISHED, BUT WE KEEP MOVING

1:06:03FORWARD WITH DIFFERENT POLICIES

1:06:04AND TECH WITHOUT GOING THROUGH

1:06:06THAT BECAUSE IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW,

1:06:08THEY'RE STILL IN THE HIRING

1:06:10PROCESS AND ALL OF THAT RIGHT

1:06:11NOW. SO IT'S JUST SOMETHING

1:06:12THAT'S ON MY MIND. AND WHILE I

1:06:16APPRECIATE THAT NO PUBLIC

1:06:17RECORD HAS EVER BEEN DONE, THAT

1:06:19DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT WOULDN'T

1:06:20BE DONE IN THE FUTURE. RIGHT.

1:06:21AND I THINK WE LIVE IN A

1:06:23DIFFERENT TIME POLITICALLY NOW

1:06:25WITH WITH HOW THINGS ARE GOING.

1:06:26SO I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT THAT.

1:06:27AND LIKE THE LONG TERM IMPACTS

1:06:29ON SOMEONE. HOW MANY DOES

1:06:32SOMEONE KNOW HOW MANY EMPLOYEES

1:06:36PPB HAS REJECTED UNDER THE

1:06:38CURRENT REVIEW IN RECENT YEARS,

1:06:40AND HOW MUCH THAT CHECK

1:06:41ACTUALLY COSTS THE CITY?

1:06:46>> CAN YOU SPEAK TO HOW MANY?

1:06:48>> I DON'T HAVE EXACT DATA ON

1:06:50HOW MANY PERSONAL HISTORY FORMS

1:06:52HAVE BEEN REJECTED BY THE

1:06:54PORTLAND POLICE BUREAU, AND

1:06:56THERE ARE NOT A LOT, BUT THERE

1:06:58ARE HAVE THERE HAVE BEEN A FEW.

1:07:01>> IN TERMS OF THE COST, PPB

1:07:03WAS THE ONE THAT SORT OF TOLD

1:07:06US WHAT THEY WOULD WANT TO

1:07:07CHARGE FOR THIS WORK. AND OUR

1:07:10UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, YOU KNOW,

1:07:12THE BACKGROUND CHECK PROCESS

1:07:15CAN BE DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT

1:07:17IN TERMS OF THE LENGTH OF TIME

1:07:19THAT IT TAKES, DEPENDING ON THE

1:07:21PERSON BEING CHECKED. SO, FOR

1:07:23INSTANCE, SOMEONE WHO HAS LIVED

1:07:27IN PORTLAND THEIR ENTIRE LIFE

1:07:29IS PROBABLY A LOT EASIER

1:07:30BACKGROUND CHECK THAN SOMEONE

1:07:31WHO HAS LIVED IN NUMEROUS

1:07:33STATES IN THE LAST FEW YEARS.

1:07:35SO THERE'S KIND OF A WIDE RANGE,

1:07:38AND I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY

1:07:39THAT THEY SORT OF PICKED A

1:07:41NUMBER THAT COVERED A LARGE

1:07:43MAJORITY OF THE BACKGROUND

1:07:46CHECKS.

1:07:47>> OKAY, THAT MAKES SENSE. AND

1:07:50HOW LONG DO THE REVIEWS? IT

1:07:52SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF

1:07:53VARIANCE, BUT HOW LONG DO THE

1:07:54REVIEWS USUALLY TAKE, AND CAN

1:07:58EMPLOYEES STILL BUY

1:07:59PROVISIONALLY WHILE THEY'RE

1:08:00WAITING FOR THIS CHECK TO BE

1:08:02DONE? IF IT DOES END UP TAKING

1:08:04AN EXTENDED AMOUNT OF TIME.

1:08:05>> SO EMPLOYEES CAN'T ACQUIRE

1:08:07OR BUY REGULATED PROPERTY UNTIL

1:08:09THEY'VE BEEN APPROVED BY PPB, I

1:08:11SEE THAT THE STANDARD

1:08:12PROCESSING TIME IS 2 TO 4 WEEKS.

1:08:14TYPICALLY. SOMETIMES THEY COME

1:08:15BACK FASTER, SOMETIMES IT TAKES

1:08:16LONGER, PARTICULARLY IF THERE'S

1:08:19A CRIMINAL HISTORY IN STATES

1:08:20THAT DON'T HAVE DIGITAL RECORDS.

1:08:24>> OKAY.

1:08:25>> AND, AND I, WE DO. I DID A

1:08:30DIVE INTO OUR CODE REALLY QUICK.

1:08:33AND IT'S 14 B .9.040. CURRENTLY,

1:08:41SUBSECTION D OF ALL OF THE

1:08:44PERSONAL INFORMATION IS SUBJECT

1:08:45TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE

1:08:46OREGON PUBLIC RECORDS LAW, OR S

1:08:50192.311 THROUGH 192.405. SO WE

1:08:54WOULD FOLLOW THOSE EXPECTATIONS

1:08:55IF WE RECEIVED A PUBLIC RECORDS

1:08:58REQUEST.

1:09:01>> OKAY, SO I'M ASSUMING THAT

1:09:02MEANS I DON'T HAVE THAT CODE IN

1:09:05FRONT OF ME. SO I DON'T KNOW

1:09:06EXACTLY WHAT THAT OUTLINES. I'M

1:09:08ASSUMING THAT JUST MEANS IT'S

1:09:09ALL A PUBLIC RECORD.

1:09:10>> I WOULD ASSUME IT MEANS IT'S

1:09:12A PUBLIC RECORD WITH REDACTION,

1:09:14BUT I DON'T HAVE THAT CODE IN

1:09:15FRONT OF ME EITHER.

1:09:18>> COUNCILOR MORILLO SPENCER IS

1:09:19TRYING TO GET GET INFORMATION

1:09:21FROM KEVIN MAGUIRE OF THE CITY

1:09:22ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ON THIS. SO I

1:09:25DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT'LL TAKE.

1:09:27I THINK IT'S A VERY GOOD

1:09:28QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG

1:09:30IT'LL TAKE FOR US TO GET AN

1:09:31ANSWER AS TO WHETHER IT'S THE

1:09:33PUBLIC RECORD, DISCLOSES

1:09:34DISCLOSABLE.

1:09:34>> OKAY. THANKS, SPENCER.

1:09:49>> I MEAN, GIVEN THAT THE

1:09:50ISSUES ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW

1:09:52LONG WE MAINTAIN THE

1:09:53INFORMATION, WHETHER IT'S

1:09:55DISCLOSABLE OR SORT OF DON'T

1:09:57RELATE PARTICULARLY TO THE

1:09:58AMENDMENTS, BUT TO SORT OF THE

1:09:59UNDERLYING LAW, AND I AGREE

1:10:00THAT THERE'S QUESTIONS THAT

1:10:01NEED TO BE ANSWERED, BUT I

1:10:03DON'T KNOW THAT THEY'RE

1:10:04ESSENTIAL TO ANSWER THEM BEFORE

1:10:06WE TAKE A VOTE HERE TODAY. OH,

1:10:07COUNCILOR KANAL.

1:10:09>> YEAH, THREE THINGS FIRST,

1:10:11JUST TO CLARIFY, I REFERENCED A

1:10:14PPB PROCESS BEFORE, AND YOU CAN

1:10:16LEARN MORE ABOUT THAT AT

1:10:18PORTLAND.GOV/DIRECTIVES. AND I

1:10:18WAS REFERRING TO THE

1:10:19REPLACEMENT OF 1205.00 WITH

1:10:231050.00. JUST WANT TO GET THAT

1:10:24ON THE RECORD. SECONDLY, TO

1:10:26COUNCILOR NOVICK POINT, I THINK

1:10:28THIS IS KIND OF SIMILAR TO A

1:10:29PREVIOUS ORDINANCE YOU HAD AS

1:10:30WELL, WHERE THERE'S CODE THAT'S

1:10:32NOT REALLY BEING UTILIZED. BUT

1:10:33ONE OF THE NET EFFECTS OF THE

1:10:35CHANGE IS TO HAVE IT BE

1:10:36UTILIZED MORE, OR TO HAVE IT BE

1:10:39UTILIZED MORE CLEARLY, MAYBE AS

1:10:41A BETTER WAY OF FRAMING IT IN

1:10:42THIS CASE. AND SO I THINK

1:10:43THAT'S THAT'S FAIR. I THINK

1:10:45YOUR POINT IS FAIR THAT YOU

1:10:46WERE JUST MAKING I JUST I ALSO

1:10:49KNOW THAT THAT IT'S HELPFUL TO

1:10:52UNDERSTAND WHAT THE. I'LL FRAME

1:10:54IT AS A QUESTION. WE'VE SET UP

1:10:57THIS OFFICE. IT'S NOT FULLY

1:10:59STAFFED YET. THERE HAVE BEEN

1:11:01THERE'S THERE'S AN ORDINANCE.

1:11:03THERE'S 15 OTHER THINGS THAT

1:11:04ARE HAPPENING THAT RELATE TO

1:11:06DATA AND PRIVACY AROUND THE

1:11:07CITY RIGHT NOW, RANGING FROM

1:11:10AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES, DATA

1:11:12CENTERS, AMAZON DRONES ALL OVER

1:11:14THE CITY. WHAT IS THE PLAN? BIG

1:11:17PICTURE, AS A CITY FOR WHEN

1:11:20WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS THING

1:11:21THAT YOU AND COUNCILOR MORILLO

1:11:22PROPOSED AND COUNCIL AGREED TO

1:11:25SET UP TO ACTUALLY BE THE

1:11:27FILTER BETWEEN IDEAS, YOU KNOW,

1:11:29EVALUATING THESE IDEAS. WHAT IS

1:11:31THE WHAT IS THE TIMELINE?

1:11:33WHAT'S THE EXPECTATION HERE?

1:11:34BECAUSE THIS HAS COME UP IN A

1:11:36FEW DIFFERENT PLACES NOW THAT

1:11:38WE DON'T, WE HAVE THIS SYSTEM

1:11:41IN THEORY, BUT NOT IN PRACTICE

1:11:42YET. AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT

1:11:44THE WHAT THE WHAT'S A REALISTIC

1:11:46EXPECTATION ANYMORE?

1:11:49>> WELL, I'M GOING TO ASK THE

1:11:50CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO ANSWER

1:11:51THAT. BUT I THINK THAT THERE IS

1:11:53A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THIS CASE

1:11:55AND LIKE CHRONIC NUISANCE

1:11:57PROPOSAL, BECAUSE THAT WAS

1:11:58INDEED A SITUATION WHERE

1:12:00SOMETHING WASN'T BEING USED AND

1:12:01WE WERE THINKING IT MIGHT BE

1:12:03USED MORE, WHEREAS WE ALREADY

1:12:04ARE DOING THESE BACKGROUND

1:12:05CHECKS. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO

1:12:07CLARIFY WHO EXACTLY IS SUBJECT

1:12:09TO THEM, BUT I'LL ASK THE CITY

1:12:11ADMINISTRATOR TO RESPOND TO THE

1:12:12QUESTION ABOUT WHAT THE

1:12:14PROGNOSIS IS FOR SETTING UP THE

1:12:16OFFICE AND HAVING IT

1:12:18OPERATIONAL.

1:12:20>> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE.

1:12:21>> DATA PRIVACY OFFICE?

1:12:23>> ONCE WE HAVE THE POSITION

1:12:25OFFICE IS ALREADY IN THE

1:12:26PROCESS OF BEING SET UP FROM A

1:12:27STAFFING. THE QUESTION IS

1:12:29REGARDING. WE'RE OUT RIGHT NOW

1:12:30DOING AN EXECUTIVE SEARCH FOR

1:12:33THE ACTUAL BUREAU LEAD FOR THAT

1:12:37OFFICE. ONCE WE HAVE THAT, AND

1:12:40I'M THINKING WE WANT TO HAVE

1:12:41ALL THESE THINGS IN PLACE THIS

1:12:44WINTER. SO I WANT TO HAVE

1:12:46MAJORITY OF ALL OUR EXECUTIVE

1:12:47ROLES FINISHED BY THE CLOSE OF

1:12:49DECEMBER ABOUT ALL NECESSARY.

1:12:52SO IF WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING

1:12:54THROUGH, I THINK THE

1:12:55ADVERTISEMENTS SHOULD BE CLOSED

1:12:56THIS MONTH AND WE'RE

1:12:59INTERVIEWING IN THE MONTH OF

1:13:00NOVEMBER. WE SHOULD HAVE

1:13:01SOMEONE ON IN DECEMBER FOR THIS

1:13:03OFFICE.

1:13:04>> OKAY. AND I APPRECIATE THE

1:13:06THE DELIBERATE NATURE OF THAT

1:13:08SEARCH. I'M NOT TRYING TO ASK

1:13:09YOU TO CUT CORNERS HERE OR

1:13:11ANYTHING LIKE THAT, SO I

1:13:12APPRECIATE THAT. AT WHAT POINT

1:13:15DO WE EXPECT THAT? I THINK PART

1:13:17OF THE IDEA, AND CORRECT ME IF

1:13:19I'M WRONG, IN PARTICULAR.

1:13:20COUNCILOR. MORILLO. AND NOVICK,

1:13:21BECAUSE YOU WROTE THE

1:13:22LEGISLATION THAT SET THIS ALL

1:13:24UP. BUT I THINK PART OF THE

1:13:25IDEA IS THAT IF THERE'S A

1:13:27PROPOSED, YOU KNOW,

1:13:28ADMINISTRATIVE RULE, PPB

1:13:28DIRECTIVE OR COUNCIL PIECE OF

1:13:31LEGISLATION, MAYOR'S EXECUTIVE

1:13:32ORDER, WHATEVER, SOMETHING THAT

1:13:33IS A NEW PROPOSAL THAT THIS

1:13:36WOULD GET BEFORE A FINAL

1:13:38APPROVAL WOULD GET EVALUATED BY

1:13:40THE DATA PRIVACY OFFICE. AND AT

1:13:43WHAT POINT DO YOU EXPECT THAT

1:13:45THAT WILL BE A REGULAR

1:13:46OCCURRENCE OR A POSSIBLE

1:13:48OCCURRENCE?

1:13:50>> HOPEFULLY, WE CURRENTLY NOW

1:13:51HAVE PRACTICES WHERE WE GO

1:13:53THROUGH DATA PRIVACY THROUGH

1:13:54OUR BTS BUREAU IN REVIEWING

1:13:57THAT TYPE OF INFORMATION,

1:13:59HAVING THAT INDEPENDENT OFFICE,

1:14:00I THINK YOU'LL REALLY BE

1:14:02LOOKING AT THAT. I'M THINKING

1:14:04POTENTIALLY KIND OF THE START

1:14:05OF THE NEW YEAR OF HAVING

1:14:07SOMETHING LIKE THAT WHERE YOU

1:14:08IT'S NOT A PART OF THE BTS

1:14:11CRITERIA AND THE WORK THAT THEY

1:14:12DO, BUT IT'S SOMETHING TOTALLY

1:14:13SET ASIDE FROM THAT INDEPENDENT

1:14:16OFFICE. BUT THAT IS STILL

1:14:18CONTINGENT ON MAKING SURE THAT

1:14:19WE GET THE RIGHT PERSON ON

1:14:21BOARD TO HELP LEAD THAT WORK.

1:14:23WE'D HAVE TO FIGURE OUT KIND OF

1:14:25KIND OF A STOPGAP IF WE WEREN'T

1:14:27ABLE TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT, TO

1:14:29KIND OF FIGURE OUT WHAT COULD

1:14:31WE DO IN THAT INTERIM PIECE TO

1:14:33BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT PERSON ON

1:14:34BOARD. BUT I DON'T WANT ANY

1:14:36ASSUMPTION THAT WE'RE NOT DOING

1:14:37THIS TYPE OF WORK CURRENTLY.

1:14:39IT'S JUST NOT THAT INDEPENDENT

1:14:41REVIEW. AS COUNCIL APPROVED

1:14:42THROUGH THEIR ORDINANCE, TO

1:14:44HAVE THAT KIND OF INDEPENDENT

1:14:45REVIEW OF THE WORK AND ENSURING

1:14:48THAT IT HAPPENS AT A CERTAIN

1:14:49STANDARD. SO WE'LL STILL BE

1:14:51WORKING THROUGH THAT PIECE OF

1:14:52IT. BUT I'M THINKING JANUARY

1:14:55TIMEFRAME FOR SHORT ANSWER. BUT

1:14:58WE STILL HAVE SOME COMPONENTS

1:14:59OF THAT BEING CONDUCTED

1:15:00THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

1:15:01>> APPRECIATE THAT. I GUESS

1:15:02THEN THE QUESTION WOULD BE, THE

1:15:03LAST QUESTION WOULD BE, WHAT

1:15:05DID BTS THINK OF THIS? OF THIS

1:15:10PROPOSAL THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING.

1:15:12>> WOULD HAVE TO GET SOMEBODY

1:15:14FROM BTS AND TO KIND OF ANSWER

1:15:16THAT QUESTION. IF WE DON'T HAVE

1:15:17IT.

1:15:17>> I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WOULD

1:15:19HAVE BEEN CONSULTED ON SORT OF

1:15:22A CLARIFICATION OF AN EXISTING

1:15:23PROCESS.

1:15:24>> PROBABLY NOT.

1:15:25>> YEAH.

1:15:26>> I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

1:15:29>> IT COUNCILOR MORILLO CORRECT

1:15:31ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I THINK

1:15:32THAT OUR ASSUMPTION IN CREATING

1:15:33THE DATA PRIVACY OFFICE WAS

1:15:35THAT IT WOULDN'T JUST LOOK AT

1:15:37NEW PROPOSALS, WOULD ALSO LOOK

1:15:39AT OUR EXISTING PROCESSES UNDER

1:15:41PREEXISTING LAWS AND RULES, TO

1:15:45SEE IF THERE'S WAYS IN WHICH WE

1:15:47COULD IMPROVE ON OUR PROTECTION

1:15:49OF PRIVACY OR OR, YOU KNOW, OUR

1:15:51DECISIONS ON STORAGE,

1:15:52COLLECTION, ETC.

1:15:57>> I THINK THAT THAT IS VERY

1:15:59CORRECT, I THINK. SO I

1:16:05>> I GET YOUR POINT. YOU KNOW,

1:16:07WE CAN APPROVE THE AMENDMENT,

1:16:08AND THEN MAYBE THE DATA PRIVACY

1:16:09OFFICE CAN REVIEW IT LATER. I

1:16:11THINK THE THING THAT I'M

1:16:12CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT LIKE A

1:16:13FEW WEEKS AGO, WE VOTED FOR AN

1:16:16APPROVAL OF A GRANT FOR PPB TO

1:16:18PURCHASE NEW SURVEILLANCE TECH.

1:16:21AND. I VOTED AGAINST THAT

1:16:25BECAUSE, AGAIN, THE DATA

1:16:26PRIVACY OFFICE HASN'T HAD A

1:16:27CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT. AND THE

1:16:29THING ABOUT DATA COLLECTION AND

1:16:31DATA GOVERNANCE IS THAT IT'S

1:16:33MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO CLAW

1:16:34THINGS BACK ONCE THEY HAVE BEEN

1:16:36APPROVED AND IMPLEMENTED THAN

1:16:37IT IS TO JUST START OFF SAYING,

1:16:39WE'RE NOT COLLECTING THIS DATA

1:16:41AND THEN AND THEN KEEP MOVING

1:16:43FORWARD THAT WAY. SO THAT'S ALL

1:16:45THAT I'M KIND OF CONCERNED

1:16:47ABOUT. BUT YEAH, I HEAR YOUR

1:16:49POINT. AND I KNOW THAT THE

1:16:52ADMINISTRATION IS WORKING

1:16:54DILIGENTLY TO HIRE SOMEONE AND

1:16:55SET UP THE DATA PRIVACY OFFICE.

1:16:57I KNOW KELLY HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW,

1:16:58TALKING WITH OUR OFFICE A LOT

1:17:00ABOUT THAT. SO. I GUESS I'M

1:17:03ALSO JUST KIND OF WONDERING,

1:17:04LIKE THE NUMBER OF THINGS

1:17:05COMING THROUGH THIS COMMITTEE,

1:17:07CAN THEY WAIT TILL THE DATA

1:17:08PRIVACY OFFICE IS ESTABLISHED

1:17:10SO WE CAN GET THAT LENS? OR IS

1:17:13THERE A SPECIFIC REASON WHY

1:17:14THERE'S URGENCY TO MOVE IT

1:17:16THROUGH NOW BEFORE IT GETS THAT

1:17:17DATA PRIVACY ASSESSMENT?

1:17:18BECAUSE IT'S PRETTY CLEAR. BTS

1:17:21FIRST OF ALL, BTS IS FANTASTIC.

1:17:22THEY DO AMAZING WORK. THEY

1:17:24DON'T HAVE DATA GOVERNANCE

1:17:27ANALYSIS IN THE SAME WAY THAT

1:17:28THE DATA PRIVACY OFFICE WILL.

1:17:29AND THAT'S JUST THAT'S PART OF

1:17:31WHY WE DID IT, RIGHT. IF THE

1:17:33CITY WAS ALREADY DOING

1:17:34SOMETHING SUFFICIENT IN THIS

1:17:35AREA, THEN WE WOULDN'T HAVE HAD

1:17:36TO MAKE A WHOLE SEPARATE OFFICE

1:17:38FOR IT. AND PORTLAND HAS BEEN

1:17:39VERY BEHIND. OTHER CITIES HAVE

1:17:41ALREADY HAD A DATA PRIVACY

1:17:42OFFICE, AND THIS IS STANDARD IN

1:17:45THEIR WORK. SO SO THAT'S THE

1:17:48HEARTBURN I HAVE ABOUT IT, I

1:17:49SUPPOSE.

1:17:50>> YEAH. AND WHAT I WOULD SAY

1:17:52IS THAT, I MEAN, WE'RE ALREADY

1:17:54DOING THE BACKGROUND CHECKS. SO

1:17:56THIS IS NOT APPROVING ANYTHING

1:17:58NEW. IT'S THE INTENT OF THE

1:18:00BACKGROUND CHECKS IS TO ADD

1:18:01THIS $25 FEE. BUT PRIMARILY TO

1:18:05CLARIFY EXACTLY WHO IS SUBJECT

1:18:07TO IT AND TO CLARIFY THAT IT'S

1:18:09ONLY PEOPLE WHO ARE AUTHORIZED

1:18:11TO ACTUALLY PURCHASE AND TAKE

1:18:14POSSESSION FOR THE BUSINESS OF

1:18:15THE REGULATED PROPERTY. SO I

1:18:19DON'T THINK THAT WE'RE OPENING.

1:18:20WE'RE NOT OPENING THE DOOR TO

1:18:21SOMETHING THAT WE WEREN'T DOING

1:18:24PREVIOUSLY. I ALSO WANT TO SAY

1:18:26THAT WE HAVE HEARD BACK FROM

1:18:27KEN MCGUIRE, AND HE BELIEVES

1:18:32THAT THE PERSONAL PRIVACY

1:18:35EXEMPTION TO THE PUBLIC RECORDS

1:18:36RULE WOULD COVER AT LEAST SOME

1:18:38OF THE INFORMATION ON THE ON

1:18:40THE FORM. HE SAYS THAT THERE

1:18:42MAY BE SOME PARTS OF THE FORM

1:18:44THAT AREN'T EXEMPT. HE'D HAVE

1:18:45TO HAVE TO LOOK AT IT MORE

1:18:47CLOSELY. BUT HE THINKS THAT

1:18:48SOME OF THE INFORMATION WOULD

1:18:50LIKELY BE PROTECTED BY THE

1:18:51PERSONAL PRIVACY EXEMPTION. ANY

1:19:01FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT.

1:19:07IN THAT CASE, THE CLERK CALL

1:19:08FOR A VOTE ON THE UNDERLYING

1:19:11AMENDMENT.

1:19:13>> THANK YOU. YES. AND I ALSO

1:19:14JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT NO

1:19:16ONE SIGNED UP TO TESTIFY ON

1:19:17THIS ITEM.

1:19:18>> THANK YOU. I FORGOT TO ASK.

1:19:20>> AND SO THIS IS THE MOTION

1:19:23FOR THE ORDINANCE AS AMENDED,

1:19:25MOVED BY NOVICK. WAS THERE A

1:19:27SECOND?

1:19:30>> I'LL SECOND IT. YEAH, I'LL

1:19:32SECOND IT.

1:19:34>> THANK YOU. ZIMMERMAN. I

1:19:38SMITH ABSENT KANAL.

1:19:41>> I RESERVE THE RIGHT TO

1:19:43CHANGE MY OPINION AT THE FULL

1:19:44COUNCIL, BUT I'LL VOTE I TODAY.

1:19:47>> AYE, MORILLO I.

1:19:50>> NOVICK I.

1:19:53>> THE MOTION TO REFER IS

1:19:54APPROVED.

1:19:58>> THANK YOU. COULD THE CLERK

1:20:01PLEASE CALL THE NEXT ITEM?

1:20:06>> ITEM NUMBER THREE. DOCUMENT

1:20:07NUMBER 2026-350. GREAT SHAKEOUT

1:20:11EARTHQUAKE DRILL PREPAREDNESS

1:20:13PRESENTATION.

1:20:18>> THANK YOU. TAKE IT AWAY,

1:20:20TEAM.

1:20:37>> ALL RIGHT. WELL, GOOD

1:20:38MORNING ALL. MY NAME IS MARISOL

1:20:41LOZANO PERALTA. I WORK WITH THE

1:20:44COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND

1:20:46OPERATIONS TEAM AT THE PORTLAND

1:20:47BUREAU OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.

1:20:49I HAVE BEEN WITH THE BUREAU

1:20:51SINCE JANUARY OF 2024, AND I

1:20:54ALSO HAVE MY COLLEAGUE HERE

1:20:55WITH ME.

1:20:56>> JEREMY VAN BUREN, AND THE

1:20:58COMMUNITY PREPAREDNESS MANAGER

1:20:59FOR THE PORTLAND BUREAU OF

1:21:00EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT.

1:21:03>> THANK YOU. CAN WE PLEASE GET

1:21:05THE NEXT SLIDE? THANK YOU. ONE

1:21:09OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES THAT I

1:21:10HAVE HERE AT THE BUREAU IS TO

1:21:13COORDINATE THE NEIGHBORHOOD

1:21:14EMERGENCY TEAMS. UNIDOS, WHICH

1:21:17IS ALSO PART OF THE

1:21:18NEIGHBORHOOD EMERGENCY TEAMS OF

1:21:20PORTLAND, OR NET FOR SHORT. IF

1:21:22YOU'RE WONDERING WHAT THE. NET

1:21:24PROGRAM IS, IT'S A GROUP OF

1:21:26PORTLANDERS THAT ARE TRAINED

1:21:28AND READY TO RESPOND DURING A

1:21:30DISASTER. AND WE OFTEN TALK

1:21:33ABOUT EARTHQUAKES WITH THE

1:21:34NEEDLE. SO THAT'S WHY WE ARE

1:21:36HERE TODAY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

1:21:43IN THIS PICTURE HERE IS JUST A

1:21:45REMINDER TO LET US KNOW THAT IT

1:21:48DOESN'T MATTER HOW LARGE AN

1:21:50EARTHQUAKE CAN BE, IT WILL

1:21:52STILL BE SOMEWHAT IMPACTFUL FOR

1:21:54US. JUST LAST WEEK WE HAD AN

1:21:58EARTHQUAKE OF 4.2 MAGNITUDE IN

1:22:01TACOMA AREA. AND AGAIN, THERE

1:22:03WERE NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS TO

1:22:05THAT. BUT AGAIN, IT'S JUST A

1:22:07CONSTANT REMINDER TO ALLOW US

1:22:09TO TO REMEMBER THAT WE ARE IN

1:22:11AN AREA THAT IS PRONE TO

1:22:13EARTHQUAKES. AND THAT'S WHY

1:22:14IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE KEEP OUR

1:22:15COMMUNITY PREPARED FOR THIS.

1:22:17NEXT, PLEASE. WE'RE GOING TO

1:22:21SKIP THAT ONE. THANK YOU. AND

1:22:24RIGHT HERE, AS YOU CAN SEE,

1:22:26THIS IS THE CASCADIA SUBDUCTION

1:22:28ZONE, WHICH ACTUALLY GOES ALONG

1:22:30THE OREGON COAST. AND IT'S

1:22:33EXACTLY WHERE TWO PARTS OF THE

1:22:35EARTH, THE EARTH, MEET. AND

1:22:38THAT IS ACTUALLY NOT A GOOD

1:22:41THING IN MY JUST CAUSE, A VERY

1:22:44LARGE EARTHQUAKE EVENTUALLY.

1:22:46AND AGAIN, THAT'S WHY THAT'S

1:22:48ANOTHER REASON WHY WE EMPHASIZE

1:22:51THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING

1:22:52PREPARED FOR EARTHQUAKES. NEXT

1:22:54SLIDE PLEASE. OKAY. AND

1:22:59CASCADIA EARTHQUAKES HAVE AN

1:23:01AVERAGE OF EVERY 246 YEARS WE

1:23:05HAD. WE HAVE DOCUMENTATION FROM

1:23:07OUR LAST ONE BEING BACK IN

1:23:09JANUARY OF THE 1700S, WHICH WAS

1:23:13APPROXIMATELY WHAT PUTS US LIKE

1:23:16327 YEARS. SO WE'RE A LITTLE

1:23:18BIT BEHIND ON THAT. AND THE

1:23:20GEOLOGISTS PREDICT THERE'S A

1:23:22CHANCE OF 30% THAT WE MIGHT

1:23:25HAVE AN 8.0 EARTHQUAKE WITHIN

1:23:27THE NEXT 50 YEARS. FORTUNATELY

1:23:33FOR US, WE HAVE A GREAT TEAM OF

1:23:36PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROFESSIONALS

1:23:38FROM THE CITY OF PORTLAND AND

1:23:39AROUND THE REGION THAT WORK

1:23:42TOGETHER TO PUT THIS PLATFORM

1:23:44THAT IT'S RESOURCES AND HOW TO

1:23:48BETTER PREPARE FOR AN

1:23:49EARTHQUAKE. AND IT ALSO COMES

1:23:51IN DIFFERENT LANGUAGES. AND YES,

1:23:55THANK YOU. NEXT SLIDE. PUBLIC

1:23:59ALERTS. YOU WILL NOT ONLY LEARN

1:24:01HOW TO PUT A KIT TOGETHER, BUT

1:24:03YOU WILL ALSO LEARN HOW TO

1:24:05CREATE A PLAN THAT WORKS BEST

1:24:08FOR YOUR FAMILY AND YOUR

1:24:09NEIGHBORS. NEXT SLIDE. WELL, IT

1:24:14IS IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THE

1:24:16RIGHT PLAN AND ALSO THE RIGHT

1:24:17SUPPLIES TO SURVIVE DURING AN

1:24:19EARTHQUAKE. IT IS ALSO

1:24:20IMPORTANT THAT WE PUT THESE

1:24:21STEPS INTO PRACTICE, WHICH IS

1:24:23WHY IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE

1:24:24REMEMBER THESE THREE STEPS,

1:24:26WHICH IS DROP, COVER AND HOLD

1:24:28ON DURING AND IF AND IF YOU

1:24:31HAPPEN TO BE IN A WHEELCHAIR OR

1:24:33ON A OR IN A MOBILITY DEVICE,

1:24:35YOU WILL LACK COVER AND HOLD ON.

1:24:38THANKFULLY, HERE IN OREGON, WE

1:24:39HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO

1:24:41PRACTICE THIS TOGETHER DURING

1:24:44THE GREAT OREGON SHAKEOUT. NOW

1:24:50YOU MAY BE WONDERING WHAT IS

1:24:51THE GREAT OREGON SHAKEOUT? WELL,

1:24:53THAT'S ACTUALLY A DRILL THAT

1:24:54WAS DESIGNED, AGAIN FOR US TO

1:24:57PRACTICE THE DROP, HOLD ON AND

1:25:00COVER AND HOLD ON. AND, AND IT

1:25:03ACTUALLY HAPPENS EVERY YEAR. IT

1:25:04TAKES PLACE ON OCTOBER 15TH AT

1:25:0910:15 A.M. SO WE'D LIKE TO

1:25:10INVITE YOU ALL TO PARTICIPATE

1:25:13FOR THIS UPCOMING THURSDAY,

1:25:16OCTOBER 15TH AT 10:15 A.M. SO

1:25:18PLEASE JOIN US FOR THIS DRILL.

1:25:22NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND MOST

1:25:26IMPORTANT, PLEASE TAKE A

1:25:27PICTURE OF IT. POST IT ONLINE.

1:25:28USE OUR HASHTAG THAT WE HAVE

1:25:312026 OR SHAKEOUT. THIS WILL

1:25:33HELP US BRING AWARENESS TO OUR

1:25:35COMMUNITY AND HOW TO BETTER

1:25:36PREPARE FOR THESE TYPES OF

1:25:38DISASTERS. NEXT SLIDE. AND WE

1:25:43ALSO LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT YOU

1:25:46DOWNLOAD THIS APP TO YOUR PHONE.

1:25:48THIS IS AN EARTHQUAKE.

1:25:50SHAKEALERT THAT BASICALLY WHAT

1:25:52THIS DOES IS THAT IT SENSES THE

1:25:55WAVES OF AN EARTHQUAKE, AND IF

1:25:57IT FITS THE RIGHT PROFILE, IT

1:25:59WILL QUICKLY SEND A MESSAGE OUT

1:26:01TO THE COMMUNITY. AND THIS APP

1:26:03ACTUALLY REACHES ABOUT 50

1:26:05MILLION RESIDENTS AND ALSO

1:26:07VISITORS IN THE AREA OF OREGON,

1:26:10WASHINGTON AND CALIFORNIA. AND

1:26:12AGAIN, THIS IS THIS IS

1:26:14SOMETHING TO, TO, TO PROTECT

1:26:16LIFE, SAFETY AND OUR VITAL

1:26:17SYSTEMS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND

1:26:22IF YOU ARE A GAMER, WE ALSO

1:26:25HAVE LEWIS AND CLARK COLLEGE

1:26:27AND A FEW OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD

1:26:29EMERGENCY TEAM VOLUNTEERS THAT

1:26:31HAD THE GREAT IDEA OF COME UP

1:26:33WITH THIS GAME CALLED CASCADIA

1:26:35NINE GAME. THAT IS ACTUALLY A

1:26:37PLACE WHERE YOU CAN PRACTICE AS

1:26:39WELL. YOUR EARTHQUAKE SKILLS,

1:26:42YOU KNOW, AND WHAT TO DO AFTER

1:26:43AN EARTHQUAKE. AND AGAIN, YOU

1:26:45CAN FIND THAT FOR FREE AT

1:26:46CASCADIA. NINE DOT AND IF YOU

1:26:52LIKE A LITTLE BIT MORE

1:26:54CHALLENGE AND A LITTLE BIT MORE

1:26:55HANDS ON WHEN IT COMES TO

1:26:57PRACTICING THE SKILLS, WE ALSO

1:26:58HAVE THE SHAKY GROUNDS CAFE

1:27:00THAT WAS ALSO CREATED FOR FROM

1:27:02ONE OF OUR NET VOLUNTEERS.

1:27:06AGAIN, THIS THIS IS VERY

1:27:07CHALLENGING. I KNOW JEREMY

1:27:08ALREADY TRIED IT AND DIDN'T DO

1:27:10TOO WELL. ONLY ABOUT 72% OF

1:27:13PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO COME UP WITH

1:27:15THE PUZZLES THAT THEY HAVE IN

1:27:17THERE, THAT EVERY TIME THAT YOU

1:27:19SOLVE THIS PUZZLES, YOU EARN A

1:27:21SUPPLY TO SURVIVE AFTER AN

1:27:22EARTHQUAKE. SO AGAIN, THIS IS

1:27:24LOCATED IN OAKS PARK, CLOSE TO

1:27:26THE SELLWOOD BRIDGE. AND THIS

1:27:29IS ALL FROM US. WELL, THANK YOU

1:27:31SO MUCH FOR ALLOWING US TO BE

1:27:32HERE AND TALK ABOUT EARTHQUAKE

1:27:34PREPAREDNESS. IF THERE ARE ANY

1:27:36QUESTIONS, JEREMY IS HERE TO

1:27:37ANSWER THOSE.

1:27:42>> THANK YOU. I ACTUALLY DO

1:27:44HAVE A QUESTION, BUT I DON'T

1:27:45KNOW IF THERE'S NO REASON FOR

1:27:47ME TO THINK THAT ANY OF YOU

1:27:49WOULD PARTICULARLY KNOW THE

1:27:50ANSWER. DO WE KNOW HOW MANY

1:27:53HOMES IN PORTLAND ARE BOLTED TO

1:27:54THEIR FOUNDATIONS?

1:27:56>> WE. EXCUSE ME. WE DON'T HAVE

1:27:59THAT INFORMATION. THAT IS

1:28:02INFORMATION, THOUGH, THAT WE

1:28:03ARE GOING TO BE SOON ASKING OUR

1:28:05NEIGHBORHOOD EMERGENCY TEAM

1:28:06VOLUNTEERS TO ASSESS. WE. WE DO

1:28:09ALSO KNOW WHEN HOUSES WERE

1:28:12BUILT. AND WE CAN KIND OF INFER

1:28:14FROM THAT WHAT SEISMIC CODES

1:28:17THEY WERE SUBJECT TO WHEN THEY

1:28:19WERE BUILT. SO THAT CAN GIVE US

1:28:21A SHADOW OF AN IDEA. YEAH.

1:28:23>> FOR ANYBODY. I CAN'T BELIEVE

1:28:25PEOPLE ACTUALLY WATCH CITY

1:28:26COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS, IF

1:28:28ANYBODY DOES. I MEAN, THAT'S

1:28:29SOMETHING THAT FOR A LOT OF

1:28:31HOUSES, IT CAN COST AS LITTLE

1:28:33AS 5 OR $6000 TO BOLT THE HOME

1:28:35TO ITS FOUNDATIONS. IT'LL

1:28:36ACTUALLY SURVIVE THE EARTHQUAKE.

1:28:37I THINK THAT IN SOME PLACES,

1:28:39THERE'S A REQUIREMENT THAT WHEN

1:28:41A HOUSE IS SOLD, IT NEEDS TO BE

1:28:42BOLTED DOWN. AND AT THAT MIGHT

1:28:45BE ACTUALLY AN IDEA THAT WE

1:28:46MIGHT CONSIDER AT CERTAIN POINT.

1:28:48BUT I JUST WANTED TO SORT OF

1:28:49PUT THAT I MEAN, THERE ARE SOME

1:28:51HOMES WHERE IT'S REALLY HARD. I

1:28:53THINK ACTUALLY ONE OF OUR

1:28:54PREVIOUS PBEM DIRECTORS TOOK

1:28:55COST HER $30,000 TO BUILD HER

1:28:58HOME TO ITS FOUNDATION. BUT

1:29:00IT'S, I MEAN, MY, I DID IT IN

1:29:03MY HOME IN MULTNOMAH VILLAGE,

1:29:04AND IT REALLY WAS LIKE 4 OR

1:29:07$5000. SO THAT'S JUST SOMETHING

1:29:09IN ADDITION TO REMEMBERING TO

1:29:11DROP, COVER AND HOLD, THAT'S

1:29:12SOMETHING THAT JUST WANTED TO

1:29:14PUT ON THE TABLE IS A GOOD IDEA.

1:29:16>> COUNCILOR KANAL FIRST,

1:29:18THANKS, EVERYBODY FOR BEING

1:29:20HERE. ANYTIME WE GET PBEM,

1:29:21HERE'S A GOOD DAY. AND I SEE, I

1:29:22THINK THAT'S JAMIE IN THE BACK

1:29:24AND DAN AS WELL. AND I

1:29:25APPRECIATE EVERYBODY BACK THERE

1:29:26FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO AS

1:29:29WELL. AND I GUESS THE TWO

1:29:33QUESTIONS I HAD FIRST, THE

1:29:35SHAKEOUT IS DURING A COMMITTEE

1:29:38THIS YEAR, IT IS DURING A

1:29:39COMMITTEE, THE WHOLE THAT I'LL

1:29:41BE CHAIRING. SO I WANTED TO

1:29:42FOLLOW UP WITH YOU ABOUT HOW

1:29:43YOU'D LIKE US TO, TO DRAW

1:29:45ATTENTION TO THAT IN THAT

1:29:46CONTEXT, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW

1:29:48ABOUT MAYBE MAYBE YOUR

1:29:49COMMITTEE IS NOT AS AS POPULAR,

1:29:50BUT PEOPLE DO WATCH OURS. I

1:29:52THINK PEOPLE WATCH THEM BOTH.

1:29:53BUT SO I JUST WANTED TO FLAG

1:29:56THAT. AND THEN DID YOU SAY 50

1:29:57MILLION PEOPLE HAVE THAT APP

1:29:59GET THE NOTIFICATIONS? THAT'S

1:30:04THAT'S MORE THAN I EXPECTED. SO

1:30:05I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I

1:30:07HEARD THAT RIGHT. SO THANKS.

1:30:08>> THANK YOU.

1:30:13>> ANY FURTHER THOUGHTS

1:30:15SUGGESTIONS? WELL, COUNCILOR

1:30:18KANAL, SINCE YOU HYPOTHESIZED

1:30:21THAT MAYBE SOME PEOPLE WATCH

1:30:22THIS COMMITTEE, I SUGGEST THAT

1:30:24WE ALL TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO

1:30:26TRAIN FOR OCTOBER 15TH BY

1:30:28DROPPING AND COVERING OURSELVES

1:30:29FOR JUST JUST A MINUTE.

1:30:32>> YEAH, YEAH.

1:30:39>> ONE.

1:30:48>> IS IT OVER? WE'RE COMING.

1:30:49>> UP ON THE TOP FLOOR OF THIS

1:30:52BUILDING ON TOP OF.

1:30:56>> ALL RIGHT. THANKS, EVERYBODY.

1:30:58>> JUST FYI, I WANT TO LET YOU

1:31:00KNOW WE DO HAVE ROOMS FOR THIS

1:31:02AS WELL IN THESE CHAMBERS. SO

1:31:03IF YOU JUST CAN'T MAKE IT

1:31:05UNDERNEATH YOUR DESK, YOU CAN

1:31:06GO INTO ONE OF THE ROOMS.

1:31:11>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY

1:31:13MUCH. THANK YOU. AND I'M GLAD

1:31:17TO KNOW THAT WE'LL BE, YOU KNOW,

1:31:19DOING THE DROP COVER HOLD IN

1:31:20THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON

1:31:22THE EXACT TIME. AND COULD THE

1:31:25CLERK PLEASE CALL THE NEXT ITEM?

1:31:27>> THANK YOU GUYS.

1:31:30>> THANK YOU. ITEM NUMBER FOUR.

1:31:32DOCUMENT NUMBER 2026-352. 2026.

1:31:36FIREWORKS SEASON RECAP AND

1:31:38ENFORCEMENT PRESENTATION.

1:31:41>> GOOD MORNING. I'M DAN

1:31:43DOUTHETT AND I'M THE PUBLIC

1:31:44INFORMATION OFFICER WITH

1:31:46PORTLAND'S PUBLIC SAFETY

1:31:47SERVICE AREA. THANK YOU FOR

1:31:50TALKING ABOUT FIREWORKS THIS

1:31:52MORNING. I'M JOINED ONLINE, I

1:31:54BELIEVE, BY DEPUTY CHIEF BRIAN

1:31:56HUGHES WITH PORTLAND POLICE

1:31:58BUREAU AND ALSO FIRE MARSHAL

1:32:01CARRIE SCHIMMEL IS AVAILABLE TO

1:32:03ANSWER QUESTIONS. I'LL GIVE YOU

1:32:05A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF WHAT THE

1:32:07CITY HAS DONE OVER THE PAST FEW

1:32:09YEARS TO REDUCE THE IMPACT OF

1:32:11FIREWORKS ON THE COMMUNITY, AND

1:32:13THEN GIVE TIME FOR CHIEF HUGHES

1:32:15TO DISCUSS ENFORCEMENT. NEXT

1:32:18SLIDE. FIREWORKS ARE A SEASONAL

1:32:21PROBLEM AROUND JULY 4TH AND

1:32:24SOMEWHAT AROUND NEW YEAR'S EVE.

1:32:26WHAT IS TYPICALLY CONSIDERED

1:32:28FIREWORKS SEASON BEGINS SEVERAL

1:32:30WEEKS BEFORE THE 4TH OF JULY,

1:32:33AND THEN CONTINUES INTO THE

1:32:34DAYS BEYOND THE HOLIDAY. WE

1:32:36KNOW FIREWORKS CAUSE FIRES AND

1:32:39INJURIES. THIS PAST JULY 4TH,

1:32:41ABOUT 30 FIRES WERE ATTRIBUTED

1:32:44TO FIREWORKS IN 2025, 27 FIRES

1:32:48WERE TIED TO FIREWORKS. THERE

1:32:51WEREN'T ANY INJURIES THAT WERE

1:32:52KNOWN IN PORTLAND THIS PAST

1:32:54YEAR, BUT THEY HAPPENED AROUND

1:32:56THE REGION AND WE KNOW IN MANY

1:32:59YEARS THEY DO CAUSE INJURIES.

1:33:01LOCALLY. THERE ARE SOMETIMES

1:33:03RESPONSIBLE FOR DEATHS. IN 2021,

1:33:06AN APARTMENT FIRE IN NORTHEAST

1:33:08PORTLAND KILLED THREE PEOPLE.

1:33:11FIREWORKS CAUSE AN INCREASE IN

1:33:14911 CALLS. JULY 4TH TENDS TO BE

1:33:16ONE OF THE BUSIEST, IF NOT THE

1:33:18BUSIEST DAYS OF THE YEAR AT THE

1:33:20911 CALL CENTER. THIS IS A

1:33:23PROBLEM BECAUSE IT INCREASES

1:33:25911 WAIT TIMES FOR PEOPLE THAT

1:33:27ARE IN URGENT NEED OF HELP AND

1:33:29CAN POTENTIALLY DELAY

1:33:30RESPONDERS. PORTLAND OFFICIALLY

1:33:33BANNED ALL FIREWORKS IN THE

1:33:35CITY IN 2022, INCLUDING THOSE

1:33:38THAT ARE CONSIDERED LEGAL IN

1:33:40OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE. NEXT

1:33:42SLIDE. SO FIREWORKS ARE ILLEGAL,

1:33:45WHY ARE THEY STILL A PROBLEM?

1:33:47WELL, DESPITE THE BAN,

1:33:48FIREWORKS REMAIN POPULAR

1:33:50THROUGHOUT THE REGION,

1:33:52INCLUDING THE ONES THAT ARE

1:33:53ILLEGAL THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

1:33:56POLICIES DIFFER IN THE REGION.

1:33:58ONLY A FEW PLACES HAVE SIMILAR

1:34:00BANS TO WHAT WE HAVE IN

1:34:02PORTLAND. THE LAST I CHECKED,

1:34:04VANCOUVER AND MILWAUKEE HAVE

1:34:06SIMILAR BANS, BUT IN

1:34:08NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS IT

1:34:09VARIES. THE CITY HAS LIMITED

1:34:12RESOURCES AVAILABLE, BOTH FOR

1:34:14PUBLIC EDUCATION AND

1:34:16ENFORCEMENT. ABOUT MORE THAN

1:34:19TEN YEARS AGO, PORTLAND FIRE

1:34:21AND RESCUE SPENT RESOURCES ON

1:34:25EDUCATION AND LEADING UP TO THE

1:34:274TH OF JULY, AND THIS IS

1:34:31BETWEEN 2012 AND 2014. SPENT

1:34:35BETWEEN 60,000 AND $80,000 ON

1:34:37ADVERTISING, AND IT HAD VERY

1:34:38LITTLE EFFECT ON THE ON

1:34:40CHANGING THE CULTURE OF

1:34:41FIREWORKS IN THE COMMUNITY.

1:34:42NEXT SLIDE. AWARE OF THESE

1:34:46CHALLENGES IN 2025, A TEAM OF

1:34:50REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE PUBLIC

1:34:51SAFETY SERVICE AREA AND 311

1:34:54CONSIDERED WAYS TO REDUCE THE

1:34:56IMPACT OF FIREWORKS ON THE

1:34:58COMMUNITY. WE TOOK A NARROW

1:35:00FOCUS AT LOOKING AT HOW DO WE

1:35:01REDUCE CALLS TO 911? AND BY

1:35:04WORKING WITH 311, WE DEVELOPED

1:35:06AN ONLINE REPORTING TOOL AND

1:35:09ALSO TEMPORARILY EXPANDED THREE

1:35:11ONE ONE HOURS ON THE 4TH OF

1:35:13JULY TO HELP THE PUBLIC ACCESS

1:35:15THE TOOL. THE ONLINE REPORTING

1:35:17WAS INTENDED AS AN OPTION OTHER

1:35:19THAN 911 TO TRACK FIREWORKS,

1:35:22WITH A LONG TERM GOAL OF

1:35:25IDENTIFYING HOTSPOTS IN THE

1:35:26COMMUNITY THAT COULD HELP WITH

1:35:27POSSIBLE EDUCATION AND

1:35:30ENFORCEMENT. THE INFORMATION

1:35:31COULD ALSO BE AVAILABLE TO

1:35:33INVESTIGATORS IF FIREWORKS

1:35:35CAUSED A FIRE. I CAN TELL YOU

1:35:38THIS PAST 4TH OF JULY, THERE

1:35:40WERE THREE FIRES INVESTIGATED,

1:35:43BUT NO FINES AS A RESULT OF A

1:35:45CONNECTION TO FIREWORKS. NEXT

1:35:47SLIDE. THE ONLINE TOOL HAS BEEN

1:35:49IN PLACE FOR TWO YEARS.

1:35:51STARTING IN 2025, WE NOTICED

1:35:54IMPROVEMENTS IN BOTH THE 911

1:35:56WAIT TIMES AND IN A REDUCTION

1:35:58IN 911 CALLS. BETWEEN 2024 AND

1:36:042025, THE AVERAGE 911 WAIT TIME

1:36:06WENT FROM 26 SECONDS TO 8

1:36:10SECONDS ON JULY 4TH. THIS PAST

1:36:11YEAR, IT WENT UP SLIGHTLY, BUT

1:36:13WAS STILL SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER

1:36:15THAN IN PREVIOUS YEARS. THE

1:36:18ONLINE TOOL WASN'T THE ONLY

1:36:19FACTOR, BUT IT CERTAINLY HELPED.

1:36:21IN ADDITION TO HAVING MORE

1:36:23TRAINED 911 STAFF, THE SUPPORT

1:36:25FROM 311 PUBLIC EDUCATION AND A

1:36:29GREATER AWARENESS OF THE TOTAL

1:36:31FIREWORKS BAN NOW THAT IT'S

1:36:33BEEN IN PLACE FOR FOUR YEARS.

1:36:34NEXT SLIDE. WHAT'S NEXT? WELL,

1:36:38WE INTEND TO CONTINUE PROMOTING

1:36:40THE ONLINE TOOL LEADING UP TO

1:36:42JULY 4TH AND AROUND NEW YEAR'S

1:36:44EVE. WE NOW HAVE TWO YEARS OF

1:36:47HOTSPOT INFORMATION FROM THESE

1:36:49REPORTS. THIS DATA CAN BE

1:36:51PROVIDED TO POLICE AND FIRE IF

1:36:54RESOURCES ARE AVAILABLE. THAT

1:36:55COULD HELP WITH ENFORCEMENT

1:36:57EFFORTS. IF CHIEF HUGHES IS

1:37:00AVAILABLE ONLINE, LIKE TO GIVE

1:37:02HIM A MOMENT TO COMMENT ON

1:37:04ENFORCEMENT FROM PB'S

1:37:05PERSPECTIVE.

1:37:12>> THANK YOU EVERYBODY. HI, I'M

1:37:13DEPUTY CHIEF BRIAN HUGHES. FOR

1:37:14THE RECORD, PORTLAND POLICE

1:37:15BUREAU, I APOLOGIZE. I CAN'T BE

1:37:17THERE WITH YOU TODAY. I'M OFF

1:37:18SITE DOING SOME TRAINING, BUT

1:37:21WANTED JUST TO WEIGH IN ON SOME

1:37:23COMMENTS HERE REGARDING THE

1:37:24FIREWORKS AND ENFORCEMENT OF

1:37:25THE FIREWORKS BAN. OF COURSE,

1:37:29THE 4TH OF JULY TENDS TO BE ONE

1:37:31OF THE MORE BUSY DAYS OF THE

1:37:32YEAR FOR THE POLICE BUREAU, BUT

1:37:34I WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE HARM

1:37:36DONE TO THE COMMUNITY WITH

1:37:37REGARDS TO FIREWORKS. AS BEEN

1:37:39STATED, NUMEROUS FIRES, THE

1:37:41FIRE RISK AS WELL AS JUST

1:37:44OVERALL QUALITY OF LIFE. WE. WE

1:37:48SEE SO MANY ILLEGAL FIREWORKS

1:37:50BEING LIT OFF ON THAT DAY AND

1:37:53WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT DOING IS,

1:37:56IS REDIRECTING RESOURCES,

1:37:58POTENTIALLY CANCELING TIME OFF

1:38:01REQUESTS OR NOT ALLOWING TOO

1:38:05MANY PEOPLE TO HAVE THE DAY OFF

1:38:07THERE IN ORDER TO REALLY STAFF

1:38:09UP OUR NUMBERS, TO BE ABLE TO

1:38:11HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE

1:38:13IN SOME OF THIS WORK. SO THANK

1:38:15YOU FOR GIVING ME A CHANCE TO

1:38:16SPEAK ON THE MATTER.

1:38:20>> CHIEF HUGHES, THANKS FOR

1:38:21THANKS FOR BEING HERE THIS LAST

1:38:254TH OF JULY. WAS THERE ANY

1:38:26ENFORCEMENT? WAS ANYBODY CITED

1:38:28FOR ILLEGAL USE OF FIREWORKS?

1:38:32>> NO, NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF. I

1:38:34AM NOT AWARE OF ANY ANY

1:38:35HAPPENING THIS LAST 4TH OF JULY.

1:38:37>> I REALIZE THAT PEOPLE ARE

1:38:38REALLY BUSY, BUT HAS THERE BEEN

1:38:40ANY COMMUNICATION TO OFFICERS

1:38:42THAT IF THEY HAPPEN TO BE

1:38:44ACTUALLY DRIVING BY SOMEBODY

1:38:45USING ILLEGAL FIREWORKS AND

1:38:46THEY'RE NOT ON A TIME CRITICAL

1:38:48MISSION, THEY ACTUALLY SHOULD

1:38:49STOP AND ISSUE A CITATION?

1:38:53>> NO, NOT AT THIS POINT. THEY

1:38:54ALWAYS HAVE THE DISCRETION, OF

1:38:56COURSE, TO ENFORCE ANY LAWS IN

1:38:57THE STATE OF OREGON OR THE CITY

1:38:59OF PORTLAND, BUT NO, NO

1:39:01SPECIFIC DIRECTION. AND THAT

1:39:02WOULD BE SOMETHING WE WOULD

1:39:04LOOK TO INCORPORATE IN 4TH OF

1:39:06JULY GOING FORWARD.

1:39:07>> I THINK I ACTUALLY MENTIONED

1:39:09THAT IDEA TO CHIEF DAY, LIKE

1:39:12BEFORE THE LAST 4TH OF JULY IN

1:39:142025. I MEAN, I THINK AT THIS

1:39:16POINT, WHEN THERE'S NO

1:39:19ENFORCEMENT AT ALL AND PEOPLE

1:39:20KNOW THAT WE MIGHT AS WELL NOT

1:39:22HAVE THE LAW. SO I UNDERSTAND

1:39:24THAT RESOURCES ARE LIMITED, BUT

1:39:26I WOULD HOPE THAT EVERY YEAR WE

1:39:28COULD AT LEAST POINT TO LIKE 3

1:39:30OR 4 INSTANCES WHERE PEOPLE

1:39:32WERE CITED SO THAT THE PUBLIC

1:39:33WOULD KNOW THERE IS SOME CHANCE

1:39:35THAT YOU'LL GET CITED. AND IF

1:39:37WE DON'T START DOING THAT, AND

1:39:39IF I HAPPEN TO BE STILL HERE IN

1:39:41A COUPLE OF YEARS, I THINK I

1:39:42MIGHT SUGGEST WE JUST REPEAL

1:39:44THE BAN BECAUSE IT'S BECAUSE

1:39:45IT'S POINTLESS. AND I HAVE TO

1:39:46SAY THAT I AM DO HAVE SOME

1:39:50PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH THIS

1:39:51AND THAT MY DOG, LIKE MANY DOGS,

1:39:54COMPLETELY FREAKS OUT WHEN

1:39:55THERE ARE FIREWORKS IN MY

1:39:56NEIGHBORHOOD. THE FIREWORKS

1:39:57TEND TO GO FROM 7 P.M. TO 2

1:40:01A.M. SO IN ORDER TO AVOID SEVEN

1:40:02HOURS OF TERROR, I'VE BEEN

1:40:04SPENDING THE 4TH OF JULY AND

1:40:06NEW YEAR'S EVE OUT OF TOWN. I

1:40:09REALIZED THAT THERE'S A LOT

1:40:10MORE SERIOUS IMPACTS OF

1:40:12FIREWORKS THAN A SCARED DOG.

1:40:14BUT YOU MULTIPLY MY EXPERIENCE

1:40:16BY TENS OF THOUSANDS OF OTHER

1:40:18PORTLANDERS. AND IT IS, I THINK

1:40:19IT I MEAN, IT'S NOT AS BIG A

1:40:21DEAL AS, YOU KNOW, VIOLENT

1:40:24CRIME, BUT I WOULD HOPE THAT

1:40:25IT'S A BIG ENOUGH DEAL THAT WE

1:40:27COULD AT LEAST MAKE AN EFFORT

1:40:29TO CITE A FEW PEOPLE A YEAR.

1:40:32>> NO, I THINK YOU'RE SPOT ON

1:40:33THERE. COUNCILOR. NOVICK. I

1:40:35THINK IT'S INCREMENTAL CHANGE.

1:40:36THERE'S OF COURSE, THOSE THAT

1:40:39MAY BE HEARING ME SPEAK TODAY

1:40:41THAT WOULD SAY, WELL, THERE'S

1:40:42LIKE A THOUSAND PEOPLE THAT ARE

1:40:43DOING ILLEGAL FIREWORKS ALL

1:40:45OVER THE CITY. HOW ARE YOU

1:40:46GOING TO, YOU KNOW, SELECT AND

1:40:48DECIDE WHO TO ENFORCE THAT ON?

1:40:49AND THAT'S SOMETHING AS A

1:40:50POLICE BUREAU, WE HAVE TO BE

1:40:52VERY CAREFUL ABOUT BECAUSE, YOU

1:40:53KNOW, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT,

1:40:56YOU KNOW, AN OFFICER COMES

1:40:57ACROSS SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW, IF

1:40:58THEY'RE DRIVING IN A IN A

1:41:01SPECIFIC NEIGHBORHOOD OR THEY

1:41:02HAPPEN TO BE OUT THERE, LIKE,

1:41:03FOR EXAMPLE, WE'LL PUT MORE

1:41:05OFFICERS KIND OF IN THE

1:41:07DOWNTOWN CORE JUST FOR, YOU

1:41:09KNOW, DENSITY OF POPULATION

1:41:11THAN WE WOULD NECESSARILY IN

1:41:13SELLWOOD. SO YOU'LL HAVE MORE

1:41:15OFFICERS PATROLLING THE

1:41:16DOWNTOWN THAT THOSE SOME OF

1:41:18THOSE AREAS IN THE MIDDLE OF

1:41:19DOWNTOWN THAN YOU WOULD IN

1:41:20SELLWOOD. SO THEY'RE, YOU KNOW,

1:41:22THEY'RE DEPENDING ON WHERE THAT

1:41:24OFFICER IS IN SELLWOOD. IT'S

1:41:26IT'S A CHALLENGE. IT'LL BE A

1:41:27CHALLENGE TO, TO PROVIDE THAT

1:41:30KIND OF EQUITABLY AROUND THE

1:41:31CITY. AND I THINK THAT MIGHT BE

1:41:33SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK

1:41:34AT IS, IS, OKAY, WHO'S GETTING

1:41:36A TICKET, WHO'S NOT GETTING A

1:41:37TICKET? AND WHEN THOUSANDS OF

1:41:39PEOPLE ARE DOING IT, LIKE I

1:41:42SAID, IT'S JUST WE HAVE TO BE

1:41:43CAREFUL OF THAT. I THINK IT'S

1:41:45SOMETHING I WANT TO FLAG.

1:41:46>> BUT WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? I

1:41:48MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE CAN'T. THAT

1:41:50DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE CAN'T DO

1:41:51ANYTHING UNLESS WE CAN ARE ABLE

1:41:53TO CITE EVERYBODY WHO'S USING

1:41:54ILLEGAL FIREWORKS.

1:41:57>> WELL, IT'S INCREMENTAL RIGHT?

1:41:59YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T JUST THROW

1:42:00YOUR HANDS UP IN THE AIR, I

1:42:01THINK, AND JUST SAY, WELL,

1:42:02EVERYONE'S DOING IT. SO WE'RE

1:42:04GOING TO DO NOTHING ABOUT IT.

1:42:05WHEN YOU START MAKING SOME

1:42:06CHANGES INCREMENTALLY. AND, YOU

1:42:08KNOW, LIKE YOU SAID, PEOPLE

1:42:09UNDERSTAND THERE'S SOME

1:42:10CONSEQUENCES FOR FOR THAT. AND,

1:42:13YOU KNOW, WE WOULD, WE WOULD

1:42:15HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THE

1:42:16CONSEQUENCES. OF COURSE, THAT'S,

1:42:17YOU KNOW, WE WOULD JUST ISSUE A

1:42:19CITATION AND THEN IT WOULD BE

1:42:20THE COURTS TO DECIDE WHAT THE

1:42:22CONSEQUENCES WOULD BE. BUT IT'S

1:42:23THAT IMMEDIACY. YOU KNOW, THAT

1:42:26CHIEF DAY TALKS ABOUT THAT WHEN

1:42:28YOU GO OUT TO THE AIRPORT, FOR

1:42:30EXAMPLE, AND SEE THAT THE

1:42:31AIRPORT POLICE HAVE A POLICE

1:42:33CAR SITTING ON AIRPORT WAY NEAR

1:42:36CASCADE PARKWAY, THAT YOU SLOW

1:42:38DOWN, RIGHT? BECAUSE THERE'S

1:42:39POTENTIAL THAT YOU COULD BE

1:42:41ISSUED A CITATION IF YOU GO

1:42:42OVER THE SPEED LIMIT OUT THERE.

1:42:44AND SO I THINK THE SAME APPLIES

1:42:46HERE. YOU KNOW, WE START

1:42:47ISSUING SOME, SOME CITATIONS

1:42:48WHERE IT GETS AROUND AND WE

1:42:50START TO SLOWLY MAYBE CHANGE

1:42:51THINGS INCREMENTALLY. IT'S A

1:42:54IT'S, I THINK, I THINK IT'S

1:42:56WORTH TRYING.

1:42:58>> THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER

1:43:00QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION?

1:43:04COUNCILOR ZIMMERMAN.

1:43:05>> I GUESS I WOULD JUST IMAGINE

1:43:07THAT IN THOSE CATASTROPHIC

1:43:11STORIES WHERE WE, YOU KNOW,

1:43:14HEAR OF A OF A SINGLE FAMILY

1:43:15RESIDENCE FIRE, FOR INSTANCE,

1:43:17THAT THE LEVEL OF NEGLIGENCE

1:43:19GOES UP WHEN IN FACT THE

1:43:21FIREWORK WAS ILLEGAL TO START

1:43:22WITH VERSUS IN THE BEFORE ERA

1:43:25WHEN IT WAS ILLEGAL USE AND IT

1:43:27STILL HAPPENED. AND YOU CAN

1:43:29CLASSIFY THAT AS AN ACCIDENT, A

1:43:30REASONABLE ACCIDENT BEFORE WE

1:43:31HAD A BAN. AND I THINK THAT

1:43:33THAT IS A IS A DETERRENT FOR

1:43:36MOST WELL-MEANING PEOPLE, AS

1:43:37WELL AS LIKE THE CONSEQUENCES

1:43:39WHEN SOMETHING IS, IS ILLEGAL

1:43:42ON TOP OF, OF THE OTHER, YOU

1:43:45KNOW, CATASTROPHIC STUFF. IT'S

1:43:47NOT ACTUALLY THE TICKET, IT'S

1:43:48THE RESPONSIBILITY THEREAFTER,

1:43:50WHICH FOR ME, I THINK CARRIES

1:43:51SOME WEIGHT. I'VE ALWAYS

1:43:53THOUGHT THAT THE BAN WAS NOT

1:43:54VERY ENFORCEABLE. IF YOU JUST

1:43:56ANY DRONE FOOTAGE OVER THE CITY

1:43:58OF PORTLAND ON 4TH OF JULY. I

1:44:01MEAN, IT'S A WONDERFUL SHOW.

1:44:02IT'S ALL ILLEGAL, RIGHT? BUT

1:44:04THE THE RISK FOR THOSE WHO DO

1:44:06WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING, I

1:44:08THINK IT HAS I THINK YOU HAVE

1:44:10SEEN A DECREASE OVER THE YEARS

1:44:12IN NEIGHBORHOODS. IN

1:44:15PARTICULARLY OUR OUR DENSE. YOU

1:44:17KNOW, I THINK ABOUT IT WASN'T

1:44:18THAT LONG AGO. WE HAD A FIRE

1:44:20RIGHT ON ALBERTA, RIGHT. THE

1:44:21NORTH, THOSE DENSE

1:44:23NEIGHBORHOODS. AND I THINK THAT

1:44:24THAT HAS IMPROVED OVER THE

1:44:26YEARS, BUT CERTAINLY VALID

1:44:27POINTS IN TERMS OF HOW DO WE

1:44:29ENFORCE AND SHOULD WE, YOU KNOW,

1:44:31THANKS.

1:44:37>> I CAN MENTION JUST TWO OTHER

1:44:40POTENTIAL OPTIONS THAT WE

1:44:41HAVEN'T EXPLORED. ONE BEING TO

1:44:44WORK REGIONALLY TO SEE IF WE

1:44:46COULD ALIGN FIREWORKS POLICIES

1:44:48THROUGHOUT THE REGION AND ALSO

1:44:50EXPLORE LEGISLATIVE OPTIONS AT

1:44:53SALEM, OR I'M NOT SURE WHAT'S

1:44:55AVAILABLE OUT THERE, BUT THERE

1:44:57DOES SEEM TO BE QUITE A SUPPLY

1:44:59OF ILLEGAL FIREWORKS THROUGHOUT

1:45:01THE STATE THAT ARE ILLEGAL

1:45:03EVERYWHERE. AND I DON'T KNOW IF

1:45:04THERE'S BEEN ANY EFFORT TO LOOK

1:45:07AT WHAT COULD BE DONE TO STOP

1:45:08THAT, BUT THOSE ARE NOT THINGS

1:45:10THAT WE HAVE EXPLORED. NEXT

1:45:13SLIDE.

1:45:17>> YEAH, MY INSTINCT GENERALLY,

1:45:20AS WITH AS WITH DRUGS, MY

1:45:22INSTINCT IS THAT REDUCING THE

1:45:25DEMAND IS GENERALLY MORE

1:45:27EFFECTIVE THAN TRYING TO

1:45:28CONSTRAIN THE SUPPLY. BUT IF

1:45:30WE'RE DOING NOTHING, IF THE

1:45:32STATE'S DOING NOTHING TO

1:45:33CONSTRAIN THE SUPPLY, THAT

1:45:34WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE NICE FOR

1:45:36THEM TO AT LEAST GIVE IT A SHOT.

1:45:38AND BY THE WAY, I DON'T WANT TO

1:45:40GLOSS OVER THE FACT THAT IT IS

1:45:42IMPORTANT TO NOT OVERLOAD THE

1:45:43SYSTEM WITH 911 CALLS, AND THE

1:45:45FACT THAT WE'VE MADE PROGRESS

1:45:46IN THAT IS COMMENDABLE. SO I

1:45:51APPRECIATE THAT UPDATE.

1:45:55>> I WOULD JUST BE CAUTIOUS OF

1:45:58GOING TOO FAR DOWN A

1:46:00LEGISLATIVE PATH HERE. WHEN

1:46:01YOU'RE WHEN YOUR NEIGHBOR

1:46:03JURISDICTION HAS A WHOLE

1:46:04DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATION OF

1:46:05FIREWORKS, THE TERM FRUITLESS

1:46:08EFFORT KIND OF COMES TO MIND.

1:46:10SO AS LONG AS WASHINGTON STATE

1:46:12IS SELLING A WHOLE BRAND OF

1:46:13FIREWORKS THAT ARE WHOLESALE

1:46:16ILLEGAL IN OREGON, IT'S A

1:46:17MATTER OF IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

1:46:20AND IT'S LIKE TRYING TO STOP

1:46:21WATER. SO, YOU KNOW, WITH

1:46:24RESPECT TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS

1:46:25LEGAL IN OREGON, BECAUSE MOST

1:46:27OF THE STUFF WE TALK ABOUT THAT

1:46:28HAS CAUSED PROBLEMS IN PORTLAND,

1:46:29FRANKLY, IS NOT EVEN WHAT'S

1:46:31LEGAL IN PORTLAND IN THE BEFORE

1:46:32ERA. IT'S STUFF THAT'S COMING

1:46:33ACROSS THE THE STATE BORDER. SO

1:46:37I WOULDN'T I WOULDN'T WANT TO

1:46:38PUSH TOO HARD IN SOME SORT OF

1:46:40GRAND PLAN TO ACHIEVE NOTHING.

1:46:42THAT'S KIND OF HOW I WOULD

1:46:43THINK THAT THE LEGISLATIVE

1:46:44INTENT WOULD BE. I ALSO, YOU

1:46:45KNOW, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE

1:46:47WHERE I WANT TO BE REALLY

1:46:48RESPECTFUL OF THE REST OF THE

1:46:50STATE AND THAT THE WAY OUR

1:46:52COMMUNITY IS BUILT UP IS

1:46:54DIFFERENT. AND I DON'T WANT

1:46:56THIS PRESENTATION TO BE TAKEN

1:46:57AS ANY SORT OF ADVOCACY, AT

1:46:59LEAST FROM MY CHAIR ANYWAY, FOR

1:47:01A LARGER STATEWIDE BAN, BECAUSE

1:47:03I ACTUALLY THINK IT WILL HAVE

1:47:05NO IMPACT ON PORTLAND, BUT IT

1:47:07ALSO WOULD BE ANOTHER KIND OF

1:47:08PORTLAND REACH INTO OTHER PARTS

1:47:09OF THE STATE AND THOSE

1:47:11COMMUNITIES WHO ARE STILL

1:47:14THEY'RE VERY MUCH, YOU KNOW,

1:47:15THEY STILL HAVE SHOWS AND THEY

1:47:16STILL PUT ON THEY STILL HAVE

1:47:18FIREWORKS. AND IT'S PART OF THE

1:47:19COMMUNITY. AND IT'S NOT

1:47:20SOMETHING TO BE AFRAID OF. IT'S

1:47:22NOT SOMETHING TO WALK AWAY FROM.

1:47:23IT'S, IT'S, THEY'RE, THEY'RE

1:47:24GOOD EVENTS. IT JUST OUR CITY

1:47:26IS DIFFERENTLY BUILT AND DENSE

1:47:27AND WE'VE MADE A CHOICE YEARS

1:47:29AGO. SO I JUST THINK ABOUT THAT

1:47:31IN TERMS OF WHAT OUR NEIGHBORS

1:47:33ARE AND THE LIKELIHOOD OF

1:47:34STOPPING STUFF COMING THROUGH

1:47:36IS THAT'S PROBABLY NOT WORTH

1:47:36THE SQUEEZE.

1:47:38>> I INSTINCTIVELY TEND TO

1:47:39AGREE WITH THAT. I THINK THE

1:47:41FOCUS SHOULD BE ON SEEING IF WE

1:47:43CAN ENFORCE OUR OWN LAWS,

1:47:44RATHER THAN TRYING TO FIGURE

1:47:46OUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING WE CAN

1:47:47DO REGIONALLY. BUT I THAT MIGHT

1:47:51BE A NOT AN ENTIRELY INFORMED

1:47:53OPINION.

1:47:54>> CAN WE END IT WITH, AGAIN, A

1:47:56REMINDER TAP, TAP, TAP, PLEASE.

1:47:58YOU KNOW, LIMIT WHO YOU CALL IF

1:48:01YOU SEE ILLEGAL FIREWORKS. IT'S

1:48:02NOT A NOT A MOMENT FOR A 911

1:48:05CALL.

1:48:06>> THANK YOU. YES. IT'S NOT A

1:48:08MOMENT FOR A 911 CALL, BUT IT'S

1:48:11STILL SOMETHING THAT I MEAN.

1:48:15SOMETIMES YOU CAN JUST ASK YOUR

1:48:16NEIGHBORS TO STOP AND POINT OUT

1:48:18THAT IT'S ILLEGAL. I'VE

1:48:19ACTUALLY DONE THAT WITH TEENAGE

1:48:20KIDS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, AND

1:48:22THEY WERE POLITE ABOUT IT.

1:48:23>> YOU GET OFF YOUR LAWN.

1:48:24>> TO WHAT? I JUST TOLD THEM.

1:48:28MY DOG'S REALLY SCARED. AND

1:48:29THEY'RE LIKE, OH, OKAY, WE'LL

1:48:30STOP. SO SOMETIMES THAT WORKS.

1:48:33THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND SEEING

1:48:35NO ONE ELSE IN THE QUEUE, WE

1:48:37CAN GIVE PEOPLE BACK ONE HOUR

1:48:40IN 19 MINUTES. AND THIS MEETING

1:48:42OF THE COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC

1:48:43SAFETY COMMITTEE IS ADJOURNED.