Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Resolution 2087 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
St. Helens council delays vote on five-year police levy after public concern; staff says measure would add one position
Summary
After multiple public comments questioned whether a proposed five‑year local option levy would add staff and how funds would be used, the St. Helens City Council declined to adopt Resolution 2087 at its July 15 meeting and asked for legal review and further consideration at a special session July 21.
The St. Helens City Council on July 15 declined to adopt Resolution 2087, a proposed five‑year local option levy of $0.46 per $1,000 of assessed value for police services, and directed staff to seek legal review and return the measure to a special session on July 21.
Several members of the public urged caution. Tony Morgan, a St. Helens resident, told the council the levy was “an attempt to sway our community” and called it “unjust,” saying it would not necessarily solve underlying problems. Brady Preheim sharply criticized the city’s finance presentation and alleged the finance director had “lied” about whether the levy would hire additional staff, asserting the resolution “says it right in the levy.”
Candace Popper, another resident, said public comment is “a vital part of the democratic process” and urged the council to consider broader resource questions, including a call to ban data centers that some commenters said would strain local water and energy supplies.
Council members cited the need to review public comments and legal issues before final action. One councilor said they were not comfortable approving the measure without legal review and asked to move discussion to a July 21 special session; staff agreed that legal counsel would review the ballot measure and public comments. A staff member clarified to the council that if approved by voters the levy would fund a dedicated staff member — described by the council as one additional position combining detective and school-resource-officer duties.
The council recorded a majority of 'no' votes on adopting the resolution at the July 15 meeting and did not place the measure on the ballot that night. The item will return for further review and potential action at the special session scheduled for July 21.
What’s next: legal staff will review the ballot measure language and the public comments; council will revisit Resolution 2087 at the July 21 special session.
