North Bend council narrows strategic-plan priorities, flags funding limits and pushes charter review

The North Bend City Council and staff spent most of a three-hour work session on April 7 reviewing a draft strategic plan and pressing staff to tie goals to realistic funding scenarios.

Councilors and staff explicitly flagged constrained revenue, aging infrastructure and public-safety staffing as central limits on what the city can achieve without new funding. Council members instructed staff to refine measurable “success measures” and phased options — including service-reduction scenarios — so the council can weigh trade-offs and ballot options later this year.

The discussion centered on four programmatic priority areas in the draft plan: financial sustainability, public safety, infrastructure improvement and economic development. Staff and the council agreed to remove a separate fifth priority — housing affordability/homelessness — from the draft and instead direct related policy work (for example, camping response or homelessness coordination) into other ongoing county or interagency efforts. Councilors moved instead to elevate review and revision of the city charter, council rules of decorum and selected city code updates as a discrete priority that the council will pursue and present to voters if needed.

Why it matters: council members and department heads said the city’s general fund has limited growth (largely property-tax based), core infrastructure — wastewater, stormwater and streets — was mostly built between the 1950s and 1970s and is reaching the end of its useful life, and state and federal revenue streams (including federal and state gas taxes) have not kept pace with inflation and construction costs. Those revenue limits shape which strategic actions the city can realistically complete in a three-year planning horizon.

Key details and staff direction

• Financial sustainability: Council and staff asked that the plan emphasize realistic, tiered options. Rather than presenting “implement sewer funding” as a single success measure, staff was directed to produce a phased set of scenarios showing what funding shortfalls mean for services (including a scorecard showing which services are legally required and which could be reduced), and to model multiyear stabilization plans and forecasts. Staff also noted that any voter‑supported funding mechanisms would require careful feasibility analysis before being placed on a ballot.

• Public safety: Police and fire leaders described their current minimum staffing and equipment needs. The police chief said the department’s current complement is roughly 18 sworn positions (some grant‑funded) and that adding a dedicated narcotics investigator would be a separate request; the fire chief said the department is operating with limited staffing and relies on a mix of career and volunteer resources. Councilors asked staff to produce clear definitions of “fully funded” service levels and a menu of actions tied to different funding levels.

• Infrastructure: Public-works staff summarized deferred maintenance across wastewater, stormwater and streets and noted that streets and other systems face higher repair costs because construction-material prices have risen (staff cited asphalt cost increases from about $110/ton in 2021 to about $160/ton in the most recent year). Staff recommended a tiered infrastructure-priority system, a dedicated funding strategy, and continued pursuit of grants and external funding; the council emphasized that identifying sustainable revenue is a first-order task.

• Economic development: Councilors and staff favored actions that support downtown vacancy reduction, business retention and revenue generation without assuming large new city-funded programs. Staff described existing work with property owners, the urban renewal agency and outside partners to attract tenants and activate commercial spaces.

• Charter, codes and council rules: After discussion, councilors elevated a focused review of the city charter and an update to council rules of decorum and selected city code sections as a top near-term priority. Staff said charter changes would ultimately require voter consideration and that smaller code and ordinance updates can be adopted by the council.

Calendar and next steps

Sarah (the consulting facilitator) said staff will incorporate counsel feedback and produce a revised draft for review. The council indicated it expects a follow-up draft before the city’s next scheduled work sessions, and staff identified two near-term dates for implementation-focused follow-up: a council work-session review on April 20 and a regional implementation cohort meeting on April 28. Staff was directed to return with clearer, prioritized action steps, timelines and funding scenarios.

Other business raised during the work session

• Public comment: Andrew Brainer, a commissioner with the Coos County Airport District, used the public-comment period to thank first responders — including city and county agencies, Coast Guard and local ambulance services — for their response to an airport accident earlier the same day.

• Consent-calendar preview: Staff briefly reviewed items slated for the consent calendar at the council’s next regular meeting: a library subscription (Collection HQ) and authorization related to a dump-truck rebuild. Staff said these are budgeted items and that the council could pull them for separate discussion if desired.

• Building-code fee public hearing: Staff reminded the council a second public hearing on a previously approved building‑code fee adjustment must be held the following evening to comply with state publication and notice requirements; staff said the fee increase had already been voted but requires a second hearing because of a publication delay.

What the meeting did not do: The council did not adopt the draft strategic plan at this meeting and did not take formal votes on funding measures. Councilors asked for more concrete, fiscally bounded options before any policy decisions or ballot measures are pursued.

Ending note: Councilors and staff described the work as iterative. Several department heads warned that without new revenue or a voter‑approved charter change to expand local taxing/funding options, the city will face increasingly difficult choices about service levels and infrastructure investment.