Sherwood council revises draft goals; asks staff to clarify Chapman/99 alignment and refine funding priorities

Sherwood city councilors used the Jan. 18 work session to refine proposed council goals for 2025, focusing discussion on economic development priorities, infrastructure actions (notably alignment work for Chapman at Highway 99), and how to frame innovation and funding priorities across policy documents.

Kristen (city staff) walked the council through a draft that grouped prior items into pillars such as economic development, infrastructure, livability and public safety. Councilors asked staff to remove or consolidate redundant items and to clarify several deliverables that remained in draft form.

On infrastructure the council identified the Chapman/Highway 99 intersection as a high‑priority item that needs alignment work rather than immediate construction. Council members asked staff to scope the current goal for the coming year as “agree on an alignment” and noted the project will require coordination with affected agencies and property owners. One councilor said the east side of 99 at Brookman and other developments are on hold until an alignment is agreed.

Councilors also asked that the TSP update and the Sherwood West comprehensive-plan process proceed in parallel so the city can test multiple scenarios for where high‑volume roads and crossings should go. Staff confirmed the two efforts will be run concurrently and will “form each other” as they proceed.

On economic development, staff and councilors agreed existing industry‑cluster work (completed earlier by staff) provides a starting place and does not need a new full analysis unless the market shows a meaningful shift in competitive industries or wages. The council agreed to keep monitoring trends rather than launch a new baseline analysis immediately.

Councilors discussed tourism lodging (TLT) funds and requested staff review current distributions and whether allocations should be adjusted to support city initiatives. Staff will prepare revised wording to clarify that the council seeks a review of TLT use and potential adjustments rather than an immediate reallocation.

Under livability, councilors flagged a parks master‑plan mapping omission that created confusion about the Ice Age regional trail’s shown alignment; staff said the issue appears to be a missing GIS segment in the parks plan and suggested a limited amendment or GIS correction to resolve it rather than a large policy change.

The council also discussed whether to treat “innovation” as a separate goal. Several members recommended folding innovation into core values and applying it across pillars — for example, using technology to improve fiscal efficiency, emergency services and public engagement — rather than making it a standalone, finance‑focused deliverable.

Staff proposed several near‑term deliverables: recruit and appoint a citizen advisory committee for the TSP by mid‑April, finalize a recommended alignment concept for Chapman/99 to guide grant and design work, and return revised goal language reflecting council direction. No votes were taken; council direction was captured as staff assignments and language edits.

The work session concluded with councilors asking staff to return a cleaned draft that removes duplicates, tightens deliverables and includes suggested performance measures for prioritization of projects and programs.