Portland councilors propose revamping Creative Portland board structure

[0:00] Mark Dion: I'm convening the nominating committee of the City Council for purposes of discussing an initiative regarding our art community. I'm joined today by Councilman Ben Grant, at large, as well as Kate Sykes, District 5 Councilor. We're also joined by Michael Goldman, Corporation Council. All right, Ben. With that said, Ben, I'll turn to you to discuss the proposal. Thanks. [0:33] Benjamin Grant: The genesis of all this, I think, goes back to the last two years. We've had a lot of discussion about arts in Portland. I think it probably kind of crescendoed around the Portland and Music Hall issue, but that I think caused a lot of people in the arts community to come to us and talk to us in depth about what is going on in the arts community at large. And it became clear to me through a lot of those conversations that Creative Portland is, as it's conceived, It should be kind of a hub for arts activity, but it's kind of, I don't want to say lost its way a little bit, but it's not viewed in the way, not used in the way that I would have expected those who are in the arts community in Portland to be using this entity that the city has stood up. And so I got to thinking about what would make it better and more effective, and that's led me to believe we ought to change the kind of categories of the board of directors. In other words, what I observed is that a lot of the people who I view as the kind of participants, the active participants in the arts community, were not those who were on the board or represented on the board of directors of Creative Portland. That was a mismatch to me. That felt like something that we could correct as a council. And then on top of that, we could maybe give them some direction about revamping the cultural plan for Portland, which is a document that some folks seem to value, but it is a bit dated at this point. And through various things that have happened in the last two years, there's probably a little bit more money that we could devote to the arts community in Portland as well. And I'll credit Councillor Sykes for kind of cracking a whip on one of those things, that being the CIP issue. But anyway, what I wanted to do was bring to this committee a proposal to revamp the structure of Creative Portland. So that it was more fit for purpose. It was more representative of those who actually participate in the arts in Portland, and we could give it a new charge, kind of breathe some new life into it so that it would perform the function, I think, that we, or that the city has envisioned that it would perform going forward. So that's my little thrill-clearing attempt to summarize my memo without reading it to you. [3:19] Mark Dion: Okay, Kate, you have been the champion on arts issues. I don't know if I'd ever use the word [3:25] Benjamin Grant: whipcracker with you, but nonetheless, we don't, you don't sit, you don't sit next to her, so, oh, okay. [3:34] Mark Dion: Okay, that's a personal problem between the two of you then. Do you have any comments? Okay, I do, I [3:41] Kate Sykes: just want to thank Ben for bringing this forward. I think this is something that we really need to give a lot of thought to on the council. I think anytime you create an organization or a kind of, you know, sort of inside the city but not totally inside the city organization, you need to look at it every once in a while, so I think it's time to do that. I think there's a lot of things coming up on the horizon that make this the right time for this. We need a new creative, we need a new cultural plan for the city. We should really be looking at that. We have some potential changes in funding for the arts. And so, yeah, I think it's time. A couple of things, questions that I have are really more related to sort of legal questions, because I believe that there are some bylaws that we need to look at. And I'm not sure how much of that can be accomplished through council action or committee action. And so I'd love to hear from Corporation Council about what we need to do next. Do we need to bring the full council in on this through some sort of a resolution before we act, or yeah, what's the path? [4:44] Michael Goldman: Go ahead, Michael. Yeah, thanks, Counselor. Yeah, the short answer is yes, you need council involvement. It's this, the, Portland City Council is the incorporator of the, of the Creative Portland Corporation and has authority to make changes to the articles of incorporation and the bylaws as necessary in order to accomplish the goals that the council might end up having in the end. It is a nonprofit corporation, so we just have to be careful not to make changes that are going to violate, you know, that are going to affect the non-profit status. I don't, I don't see that being a problem, but, that would be the process would be, I, the way I guess the way I see it would be this committee once you settle on sort of, you know, what changes you'd like to see making a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council would then authorize my office to make, you know, to make the changes. And that's a matter of, you know, you all have to do the hard work. On our end, we have to file a few forms with the Secretary of State's office in order to accomplish the changes. [6:15] Mark Dion: Thank you. Any follow-ups, Kay? [6:19] Kate Sykes: Yeah, I mean, I think the next step for us is to just really figure out what changes we're looking for. I've read through Council Grant's memo and I think that those are all really reasonable. I think some of the other concerns I have is just making sure that we have fiscal oversight, so making sure that we're really looking at the, at the budget of Creative Portland and, you know, that is public money that we're, we're giving to them, and so I just want to make sure the Council has oversight of that. Yeah, well, [6:47] Mark Dion: i 'm in agreement with both of you i think it's it's due time we take a look at it i think it came for crescendo in my thinking is the recent directive from that committee that we should develop the cultural plan i don't think we have the expertise to engage in that process i think that should be their work i also subscribe to the idea that there should be some intentionality about who the members are and what they represent right now feels happenstance. You know, we're kind of pleased that they have a certain particular interest, but it doesn't guarantee cohesion at the committee. And I think they could take a more involved leadership responsibility for the arts community. So I think that would probably aid in our developing some idea of what funding should look like for arts activities in the city, so I'm willing to move forward on this item. Michael, I guess question for you, Ben's memo is kind of a survey of the landscape with some particular observations incorporated therein. Can you draft or should you be drafting a proposed resolution that [8:11] Michael Goldman: accomplishes that yeah i can i think i mean it sounds like this committee is generally supportive of sort of taking that next step to you know considering maybe a more detailed version of counselor grant's proposal and so i think probably the best way to do that would be for me to meet with counselor grant you know put together sort of a draft you know revised version of the bylaws to reflect changes that he's interested in presenting to this group first and then assuming that this group is you know get to the point where you can make a recommendation in the council we then take it to the council if that works for counselor grant I think that's probably the you know the next steps just a little yeah that's fine by me I mean as you [9:08] Benjamin Grant: know, Michael, I've done some of that already, so yeah, we're not, we're not starting from square one, so I think we could take what I've begun and turn that around fairly quickly. Yeah, it [9:20] Michael Goldman: would be, yeah, just, I guess, you know, something we could certainly have in time for the next meeting of this committee, which, when, I'm not sure when that is. Max, when is the [9:33] Unidentified staff member: the next Legislative Nominating Committee meeting or council meeting? Sorry, no, ledge, not, we don't currently have one scheduled. The session hasn't started for legislative, but we can, we can add one ad hoc. We can do the next calendar hold that we have, which I think is the 27th of October. Well, [9:56] Mark Dion: if it comes around, if Michael and Ben can get us a proposed draft quickly, I'm willing to schedule accordingly, so we can get it up sooner if necessary. [10:08] Unidentified staff member: Sorry, this group is usually pretty easy to convene, so if you just keep me in the loop, we can get [10:14] Mark Dion: one scheduled. Yeah, we can do that. Is that just people satisfaction? It is for me. Yeah, I don't think we have to wait that long since you've done the groundwork, Ben. Yeah, what date did you, I [10:29] Michael Goldman: think the date Max threw out was two weeks from now. Is that [10:34] Benjamin Grant: yeah, she said the 27th, but the mayor or said that if we want to do it sooner, if we're moving faster, we can schedule something sooner. So [10:41] Mark Dion: okay, on you, on you and me. Yeah, Max, when is the last meeting of the city council for October? What's [10:50] Unidentified staff member: the date? It's on Monday, so we're going to publish that agenda tomorrow. I think that's a little tight of a turnaround unless you're really ambitious about it, but then the following one is November [11:01] Mark Dion: 2nd, which that seems, yeah, okay, that's what I meant. I had no, I had no intent to make it happen for Monday. Yeah, see, I'm looking out for you, Michael. Appreciate that, Mayor. No, we, I mean [11:15] Michael Goldman: I think this is probably something that I can start working on this week. So I think, you know, we can probably reconvene this group, you know, within, I mean, certainly two weeks is no problem. I think possibly, you know, a week maybe, if I know, Counselor Grant, you said you've got some, a conference to deal with this week, but we can chat offline, counselor, and try to [11:46] Benjamin Grant: I can just call you today sometime and we can plot out some timing. Yeah, sure. All right. [11:55] Mark Dion: Well, if that's the case, I'm going to take a motion to end the meeting of the Nomination Committee, but then I'll look for a motion to open the Legislative Committee for a moment. All right. So moved. Second. All right, all those in favor of ending this meeting, please signify. Yes. Okay, yes. So the Nominating Committee has now closed its business. This chair would seek a motion to open the Legislative Committee. So moved. Second. All those in favor signify. Yes. All right. And don't go away, Michael, because it does involve you for a bit. Council Sykes, I've received your communications about CMP. I've answered some citizen issues this morning. So there is a public interest. I appreciate your willingness to move quickly if possible. What I'm gonna try to do is schedule a team from CMP to appear before the Sustainability Committee next week. And my humble advice at this juncture is that we wait for that presentation so that we can determine a path for where the council might want to go. It'll also give Michael a chance to consider outside council on energy matters. It's a pretty complicated bar. It's not one that I don't think Corporation Council is equipped to answer with any reliability on their opinion without the assistance of outside council. And I had the opportunity to talk with Ben last night, if he wants to share the conversation. I think it just reinforces the idea that we should move, but with at least some prudence in how we get there. [13:58] Benjamin Grant: Ben? Yeah, I mean, I had a reason to speak, not because of this issue, just kind of randomly. I'm friends with someone who works at the PUC and we were just kind of talking about city issues and I was kind of getting just a little, end up getting some grounding in PUC process. I'm nowhere near as familiar with it as the mayor. But I was basically, I ended up asking kind of like, is this more like sort of public legislation equivalent, you know, where there's a lot of public input and public testimony is really important, or is this more legal in nature? The answer, I don't want to quote anybody, but the impression I got was this is more of a legal proceeding. And so our intervener status is the important piece of this, which we have already. And, you know, I gather from the email traffic, there's some concern about a public comment period. Period. And while I would never say public comment's unimportant, I would say that, you know, in the balancing our efforts here, you know, the focus on public comment is probably less important. So I don't know that we need to get really spun up about the timing of public comment and that type of thing. I mean, we want, obviously we want our residents, our citizens to be able to submit public comment, but that's really, I guess for the message I received, that's not really where the game is won and lost on an issue like this. So does that match, Mayor, with what your experience is with these PUC proceedings? Yeah, I think I've outlined that in some detail [15:40] Mark Dion: in my email traffic it has a role but it's secondary or i should say the testimony that has most value to the puc and to all the parties that are in contest is that which is submitted it as testimony that can be cross-examined, and that's the quasi-judicial nature. I do recognize the need for public participation. I have experience, but I will not put myself out there on that role. I think we need to have outside counsel come in, at least brief us as a collective effective as to what we can do and where we can do it. I guess my other questions. We have status, which only means to my mind, we have access to the proceedings. How we exercise that access remains an open question. So that's why I thought it would be of value to have CMP, and I talked to the CEO about that, to come in and at least give us their side of the story first, and they would be open to questions from council members if they elect to pose questions to them. So does that make sense to the two of you? [16:55] Benjamin Grant: It makes sense to me. I know Councilor Sykes is the one who raised this, but I'll just say something briefly. I mean, I just don't know the issue at all. So it appeals to me to hear from CMP, like what are they doing? Why are they doing it? And just to hear what the project is about from them. And then I think we're not going to be short on information from people who have issues or might have issues with it. So I think just getting a little balanced information at the front end makes sense to me. All right, Kate, I'm sorry. Go ahead. [17:27] Kate Sykes: No, that's okay. Thank you. I read through your response and I appreciate that you've been working with sustainability and transportation to maybe try to get this in their camp. Obviously, this is a huge issue and just for the public that may be watching today the i don't think there's much information about out about this at all there was a story in the press herald a couple days ago but there is a cmp transmission line that runs through falmouth north deering east deering kind of ends at the rue institute that is a pretty small transmission line i actually walked it the other way day with my dog a lot of a lot of trails out there runs through a lot of homeowners backyards runs through city property and there are trails there I'm not entirely sure if Portland Trails has easements on there or kind of how that works but they should be involved in this conversation as well and I think you know seeing the scope of this and understanding that this expansion may include clear cutting of that entire corridor broadening of the quarter to the existing right-of-way transmission lines that could potentially be several hundred feet in height. It's a pretty big project. I mean, that's an understatement. It's a huge project. And it could really impact the future of Portland in terms of our electricity needs, whether or not we can electrify the port, the Roo Institute. There are a lot of pretty major stakeholders here. And the fact that we're just hearing about this, from what I understand from the calendar of events, the deadline to testify as an intervener is October 23rd, is very concerning to me. And so not only would I ask that CMP be at that council meeting, but I think we also need to have representatives from the PUC or the public advocate's office to inform us what the process is and what our kind of game plan is here, because I feel like we're pretty behind the eight ball. I think we have a role as representing constituents who may have property that they're concerned about. And so communicating to the public is really important. We have a role as a potential landowner where there is, that this crosses. And I think we have pretty major stakeholders like Portland Trails that we really need to incorporate into the process. So I guess I would just urge that we try to do those things to make sure that we're not set up to not be able to testify the way we need to by the 23rd, if that is indeed the deadline. So there's just a lot of information that I don't have at this time that I think it's, we just need to get as much as we can. [20:02] Mark Dion: I understand. I can read between the lines, Kate. [20:08] Kate Sykes: Well, I mean, reading between the lines is great, but also this affects the public, right? And so we just need to make sure that folks understand. [20:13] Mark Dion: I don't have any disagreement with your concerns. [20:18] Benjamin Grant: If I may, I mean, it strikes me that several of the things you've flagged, Kate, don't require a meeting. I mean, if I don't want to assign Michael more homework, but it does feel like some of those procedural steps, just a basic understanding of those steps is something that could just be a memo. You know, what is the public advocate's role? Where are they right now in this case? Are they in the case? What are they doing? You know, what are the timelines? What do those mean? I mean, some of those stuff doesn't require people to testify before us. So in other words, I think we get quicker answers on some of your questions. [20:53] Kate Sykes: questions. That's great. I agree with that. I think there's also some staff work here. I think that I'd ask the director of planning and the director of sustainability to look into some of the things like does our land use ordinance prohibiting the use of pesticides apply to this particular project? Because I know that one of the concerns of the neighbors is that they may spray pesticides very close to their backyard. So does that control in this circumstance? And then also just what is the extent of city land that is impacted by this? I think I've not seen a map that's worth a darn. CMP's map is blurry. It's hard to figure out where anything is. And so I think we need to just take that up and figure out what we're dealing with here. All right. So understood. So [21:36] Mark Dion: Michael, I think you've gotten some direction from the committee and some of the work you can start with. Yeah. The reason I took sustainability just as a footnote is when it kind of falls in their policy arena, but also it gives us a very quick, in terms of calendar time, access to a forum so that we can have some of that conversation begin. So I just want you to understand my motives. I'll circle back with CMP and I'll reach out to Heather Sanborn as the public advocate for any added information she might be able to provide. Because I think Ben's right, a lot of it can be provided right now by memo and I think once we digest that initial batch of information we might have enough clarity to be more focused about where we think we might work and what we [22:28] Michael Goldman: need so that's it can you tell me again I'm sorry I don't my calendar handy the S&T committee when are they meeting the 21st oh the 21st so after the council meeting okay i mean a couple of thoughts that are sort of running through my head is you know if i know that i believe that the town of falmouth recently submitted a some testimony as to the to the puc in this case i don't know if portland is going to be on the same page as falmouth obviously we have to get guidance from well from the council on that but one of the things i'm thinking of this if it makes sense to you know coordinate with them if we're going to bring in outside counsel it's you know if our interests are aligned maybe it makes sense to try to do that together but anyway these are the things that are just running through my head [23:29] Mark Dion: right now no it's you may want to talk with troy because i assigned him what two weeks ago to connect with falmouth and see what they were considering yeah for possible responses. I mean, one of the rumors that they were trying to track down is whether or not the lines would be underground or above ground. I did talk to Linda Ball, the CEO of CMP, and she says there was no plan at this juncture to go underground, but they were redesigning what transmission towers could look like. So I think those are all topics that are relevant to a the council inquiry when we bring the team in. So, all right, okay. Any other comments, Kate or Ben? [24:18] Benjamin Grant: No, just thanks to Kate for raising this up. [24:22] Kate Sykes: I appreciate that. Yeah, thanks you guys. I think that we all have some really good angles that we can work on this to make sure that we're getting the information we need. So I appreciate everyone moving quickly on this. [24:33] Mark Dion: Okay, well with that, we have no further business before us and ask for a motion to adjourn so moved second all right all those in favor please signify yes and myself is yes as well the legislative meeting is now concluded thanks Michael for attending we'll talk so I think well all right