Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Reconstitution topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Troutdale explores phased reestablishment of city police as budget gap forces choices
Summary
City staff presented a phased plan to reconstitute a Troutdale Police Department — starting with hiring a chief and lieutenant — and recommended either raising the public-safety fee to $25 or pursuing a $1.60 levy to address a multimillion-dollar budget shortfall. No formal council decision was made.
Troutdale city staff outlined a multi-year plan to reestablish a Troutdale Police Department, starting with the hires of a chief and lieutenant and advancing toward a 12-officer rotation, and told the council that public-safety costs outstrip projected revenue.
The staff presentation said total public-safety costs for FY 2026–27 exceed $10 million while estimated tax revenue is about $7.9 million, leaving a multimillion-dollar shortfall. "We're recommending $25 for the next fiscal year," the city staff member said, and staff presented a $1.60 public-safety levy as an alternative to cover roughly five years of need. Staff cautioned that the phased approach may not produce full 24/7 coverage immediately and described the year-one work as preparing policies, ordering equipment and recruiting leadership.
Why it matters: council members and residents framed the discussion as a choice between higher recurring fees, a voter-approved levy, or continued contracting with Multnomah County — each option carries trade-offs for service levels, cost stability and local control. Staff warned that, under the current contract trajectory, a public-safety fee could rise substantially for ratepayers over time.
Resident commenters raised safety and staffing concerns. One resident told the task force, "I like having Troutdale cops there," and urged that local visibility matters for prevention and community trust. Terry O'Keefe, a retired Gresham police sergeant, said the Sheriff's Office brings detectives and tactical teams that would be difficult to replicate locally and described those county resources as "unmeasurable" in their value for major incidents.
Council members pressed staff on operational details. Questions included how the department would cover training, sick leave, court time and overtime; how the city would compete for officers given regional pay differences; and what mutual-aid arrangements would remain in place. Staff said some overtime is expected and that the city could use reserve officers and mutual-aid agreements while it grows the department. The staffing model presented assumed two sergeants and four squads of two officers, with flexibility to adjust for court and training days.
Financial details and clarifications: staff said the current $15 public-safety fee generates about $1.4–1.5 million annually; that the $25 fee is a staff recommendation for the next fiscal year; and that a $1.60 levy was modeled to spread costs over five years (staff characterized the levy as an alternative to annual fee increases). Specific levy or fee impacts on individual tax bills or assessed-value calculations were not finalized in the meeting.
No formal policy decision was taken at the meeting. The committee treated the presentation as an informational first step and sought direction from the full council before hiring executive staff. The task force set a follow-up meeting and recommended continued outreach and detailed financial comparisons before any fiscal measure is placed before voters.
