Canby council advances comprehensive plan update after lengthy hearing, sets June 3 second reading

The Canby City Council on May 20 directed staff to revise its updated comprehensive plan and return Ordinance 1670 for a second reading on June 3, following a staff presentation and a public hearing. The motion to send the draft back with the staff‑proposed edits passed 4–0.

Planning Director Don Hardy told the council staff had reviewed 55 attorney comments and agreed with 30 substantive items that would be reinserted into the plan as edits, with a further 28 minor "Scribner's" corrections left for staff to include. "We agree with 30 of those comments," Hardy said, and asked councilors for editorial guidance on a handful of items that still required policy decisions.

The discussion focused on a set of wording changes recommended by the city's legal counsel. Examples included softening mandates to avoid creating unintended legal or implementation obligations: language that once read "ensure" or "require" was suggested to become "endeavor to" or "develop regulations to," and some references to specific Oregon Revised Statutes were proposed to be generalized to "federal and state law" to avoid over‑specifying a single citation.

Councilors raised substantive policy concerns. Councilor Padden argued for closing a perceived loophole that would allow functional septic systems to remain in city limits rather than requiring connections to municipal sewer, saying that leaving the exception could prolong public‑health and environmental problems. "I want to see this loophole closed," Padden said, urging clearer language and an implementation path to require connections when properties annex into the city. Staff said they would work with the city's attorney to draft firmer language and present recommendations at the June 3 reading.

Hardy and staff also walked the council through edits affecting wetlands and floodplain language, cultural‑resource protections (including coordination with tribal governments for areas of "high likelihood" of archaeological resources), changes to noise and nuisance policy language to shift implementation into the zoning/code stage, and suggested language on utility capacity and incentives for a range of housing types. On energy storage, councilors asked that references to battery energy storage systems be broadened beyond industrial uses to allow future residential or commercial applications; staff indicated they could strike the restriction to keep options open.

One member of the public, Ethan Manuel, a long‑term resident and member of the public advisory committee, spoke in support of the update during the hearing. "A lot of work's gone into it," Manuel said, urging approval and noting the plan will form the foundation for future urban growth boundary work.

Council moved to direct staff to incorporate the discussed edits and return with the completed comprehensive plan and maps for a final reading. The council will take up Ordinance 1670 for a second reading and final adoption vote on June 3, per the motion that passed 4–0.