Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Services Boundary topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Portland council keeps public record open on Portland–Gresham urban services boundary; first reading continued
Summary
Portland City Council held first reading of ordinances amending the Portland–Gresham urban services boundary and authorizing the city administrator to approve a revised intergovernmental agreement, kept the land-use record open for written testimony through Sept. 23 and scheduled a vote for Sept. 24 at 10 a.m.
The Portland City Council on Sept. 18 held a first reading of two ordinances that amend the Portland–Gresham Urban Services Boundary (USB) maps and direct the city administrator to approve an updated Portland–Gresham Urban Services intergovernmental agreement. Councilors announced the land-use record will remain open for written testimony until Tuesday, Sept. 23 at 5 p.m. and the council will take up the vote at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, Sept. 24.
City policy analyst Claire Adams told the council the ordinances (document numbers 2025-349 and 2025-350) were recommended for passage by the Climate Resilience and Land Use Committee on Sept. 11 and that no written or verbal testimony had been filed prior to that committee action. Adams said the code-change ordinance includes information on economic, real estate and community impacts and noted the USB amendments resolve gaps or overlaps in urban-service maps.
The matter attracted extended discussion from councilors representing District 1 after neighborhood residents in Pleasant Valley raised concerns that they had not received timely notice and did not understand the practical effects. Councilor Smith asked how the changes would affect a Centennial School District-owned parcel that is partly in Portland’s USB, partly in Gresham’s USB and partly in unincorporated Multnomah County. Eric Engstrom, director of the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability, said the changes govern which jurisdiction would provide urban services upon future annexation and “it doesn't directly affect what decisions Centennial may make” about developing the property. Principal planner Ryan Singer said the parcel in question is mostly within Gresham's USB; the proposal would remove a small portion from Portland's USB so Gresham's USB would cover the lot, which staff said should make the development process clearer because sewer service currently connects from Gresham.
Councilors said the parcels at issue include a mix of public right-of-way segments and two lots (one district-owned, one privately owned). Councilors pressed staff about tax effects, infrastructure costs and sidewalks; Engstrom said the property is not in the city limits now and therefore is not generating city tax revenue and that annexation and development can create infrastructure obligations that are often borne by property owners but not always. He also noted the parcel in question is owned by the school district and “there may not be tax revenue” while it remains in that ownership.
Several councilors urged more outreach to Pleasant Valley residents. Adam Murray, policy advisor to Councilor Smith and a resident of the area, told the council that outreach using mailed postcards and English-only materials left many residents unable to engage and said concerns focused on safety, walkability, sidewalks and whether residents would effectively remain “Portlanders” if services were provided by Gresham. Councilors agreed to leave the land-use record open to give residents more time to submit written comments: the council announced the record will remain open through Tuesday, Sept. 23 at 5 p.m., and the council will return to vote on the ordinances at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, Sept. 24.
Because this is a land-use action, City Attorney Lauren King explained, the council can keep the record open for written testimony or for oral testimony at a date and time certain; the council must announce when the record is closed. The council chose to keep the record open until the date specified so staff and councilors could review any incoming material before the scheduled vote.
The council did not reach a final decision on the ordinances on Sept. 18; the action recorded at the meeting is the first reading and the continuation of the public record until Sept. 23 with a scheduled vote Sept. 24.
The council’s next steps: staff will accept written testimony until 5 p.m. on Sept. 23 and the council will consider the ordinances at 10 a.m. on Sept. 24. If the council votes then, the record and vote will be reflected in the official land-use record and ordinance files.
