Portland Civic Lab
Join
Performance warehouse

Council Budget Hearing Cockpit

Budget-hearing questions backed by official metrics

This cockpit turns the April 8 council priorities session and the May 7 CEDSA work session into hearing prep: what question is on the table, which budget claim needs evidence, what source packet to open, and what amendment path is available.

Built around the current hearings

Current issue map: 8 budget-hearing issues, 40 source-packet links, and explicit data gaps where Performance Portland does not yet answer the council question.

01

Start

Read this first

Pick the service area on the agenda, then read the metrics and question bank together.

02

Interpret

Why it matters

Councilors need a fast path from a budget claim to official evidence, evidence gaps, and source packets staff can reuse.

03

Act

Scroll for

Hearing prep by service area, amendment impact logic, source export, and question prompts.

Continue down
Export source data

Budget Hearing Prep

Open the exact April 8 and May 7 budget-hearing issue, then pull the official metrics and source gaps tied to it.

Amendment Impact View

Translate likely amendments into affected outputs, outcomes, fund restrictions, and future-year tradeoffs.

Council Question Bank

Use the hearing-record question first, then attach the official metric packet council staff can cite.

Source Packet Export

Export official values and narrative tabs, while keeping hearing interpretation separate from source facts.

Budget-hearing issue map

The specific budget questions Council needs to resolve

Each issue below comes from a public budget hearing, names the policy question, identifies the amendment test, and links to official metrics that can ground the discussion.

Use this first when

Preparing for a question about how the proposed budget reflects April 8 priorities.

Translating a service-area claim into a measurable output or outcome.

Connecting a proposed amendment to source data and a clear tradeoff explanation.

Budget-hearing issue

PCEF / Moda opportunity cost

May 7 CEDSA: Novick pressed whether the administration had identified which PCEF priorities would be displaced by a proposed $75M Moda contribution; the answer did not identify a displacement plan. Morillo, Kanal, and Green raised the weak climate nexus, CIP authority, and opportunity-cost problem.

Council signal

Hard skepticism from Novick, Morillo, Kanal, and Green; procedural/control skepticism from Zimmerman, Koyama Lane, and Avalos; Ryan and Clark were open to an eligibility theory if the city-owned asset has a measurable emissions nexus.

Budget test

Do not let the debate stop at 'can this be PCEF eligible?' Require a specific displacement table: which climate programs, fund balance, interest revenue, or future CIP commitments move if Moda is funded.

Ask this in the hearing

What exact PCEF program, reserve, or future-year CIP commitment would be reduced, delayed, or reclassified to make room for the arena contribution?

Likely amendment path

Condition or prohibit any Moda/PCEF allocation until council receives a displacement schedule, emissions-reduction estimate, community-benefits terms, and fund-balance/interest impact.

Source gap: Performance Portland has PCEF greenhouse-gas and citywide carbon metrics, but no official spectator-venue, Moda subsidy, lease, community-benefit, or PCEF-displacement metric.

Budget-hearing issue

Prosper Portland workforce cuts and downtown ROI

April 8: Smith and Dunphy flagged workforce development as a protection priority. May 7 CEDSA: Pirtle-Guiney pressed whether Prosper was preserving administrative capacity while reducing grant dollars; Avalos challenged the downtown-first ROI theory; Green asked for evidence behind downtown marketing and Clean & Safe / ESD overlap.

Council signal

Avalos, Green, Koyama Lane, Kanal, and Pirtle-Guiney want equity, measurable return, and direct-service clarity; Ryan, Zimmerman, Clark, and the administration were more receptive to a central-city tax-base recovery argument.

Budget test

Separate city-controlled outputs from regional economic indicators. GDP and traded-sector growth do not prove that a marketing line, IBRN cut, or workforce grant cut is justified.

Ask this in the hearing

For each Prosper reduction, how many workers, small businesses, storefronts, or technical-assistance recipients lose direct service, and what measurable downtown return is expected instead?

Likely amendment path

Restore workforce/IBRN/SummerWorks or condition downtown marketing dollars on incremental-activity metrics and Clean & Safe / ESD non-duplication.

Source gap: Official metrics show workforce readiness, small business assistance, quality jobs, GDP, and traded-sector growth, but not IBRN geography, participant loss, downtown-marketing incremental return, or ESD overlap.

Budget-hearing issue

PS3, PSR, Ceasefire, and public-safety restorations

April 8: councilors identified Portland Street Response, PS3s, fire station coverage, and violence prevention as public-safety protection priorities. The proposed budget raised follow-up questions about PS3 capacity, PSR aftercare, and the Ceasefire coordinator.

Council signal

Progressive bloc likely pushes restorations; Clark prioritizes police staffing and Impact Reduction; Novick and Green still want evidence that special missions and alternatives produce results.

Budget test

Compare response-time and workload metrics to the claimed service impact of cuts. If calls go unanswered or response times worsen, council needs the operational tradeoff in public.

Ask this in the hearing

Which public-safety calls, response times, violence-prevention contacts, or alternative-response outcomes change if PS3, PSR aftercare, or Ceasefire funding is restored or rejected?

Likely amendment path

Restore PS3s, PSR aftercare teams, Ceasefire coordinator, or violence-prevention grants using one-time revenue or offsetting lower-priority public-safety spending.

Source gap: Performance Portland has PSR, PPB, PF&R, gun violence, and response-time metrics, but no clean PS3 metric and no direct Ceasefire/coordinator output measure.

Budget-hearing issue

New-charter DCA efficiency and Council access

April 8: Ryan demanded DCA-level efficiency cuts and questioned whether voters expected to pay more for the new form of government. May 7 CEDSA: Avalos and Kanal said councilors lacked direct information access and pressed the administration on staff-contact restrictions.

Council signal

Ryan, Zimmerman, Green, Morillo, Avalos, and Kanal are all probing management-layer cost, information flow, or staff-access problems, though from different ideological angles.

Budget test

If the administration defends added management capacity, it needs measurable improvements in 311, hiring, procurement, technology, asset condition, and council responsiveness.

Ask this in the hearing

What measurable service-area performance improved because of the DCA layer, and what bureau-level offsets or response-time commitments justify the added cost?

Likely amendment path

Reverse Assistant City Administrator / management add-backs, require bureau offset plans, or require public response-time standards for council information requests.

Source gap: Official metrics include 311, audit, reserves, assets, vehicles, and technology-adjacent operations, but do not measure council information responsiveness or DCA overhead offsets.

Budget-hearing issue

Parks, East Portland, youth, and voter-promise protection

April 8: Pirtle-Guiney, Morillo, Avalos, and Dunphy emphasized Parks Levy promises; Dunphy highlighted East Portland equity, afterschool programs, and Teen Force; Avalos raised East Portland Community Center; Canal opposed pausing the North Portland Aquatic Center.

Council signal

There is broad protection energy around voter promises and youth access, but a public split on North Portland Aquatic Center timing and on where parks reductions should land.

Budget test

Separate access and equity outputs from broad system averages. A citywide parks level-of-service number cannot answer whether East Portland or youth programs are protected.

Ask this in the hearing

Which parks, recreation, swim, youth, and East Portland access metrics change under each proposed reduction, and where is the district-level equity table?

Likely amendment path

Protect levy commitments, fund East Portland repairs, restore youth/recreation access, or condition aquatic-center timing on explicit tradeoff tables.

Source gap: Official metrics include parks level of service, recreation access, swim lessons, trees, and sidewalks, but not district-level East Portland impacts, Teen Force, SUN, or Summer Free For All outcomes.

Budget-hearing issue

Housing, permitting, and unbudgeted housing funds

April 8: Zimmerman named permitting and housing capacity as core city functions. Subsequent budget discussion flagged large unbudgeted PHB housing funds as a major council deliberation topic. May 7 CEDSA kept CED accountability focused on whether housing/permitting claims connect to measurable outputs.

Council signal

Council needs to know whether housing dollars are committed, unspent, producing units, or stuck in pipeline; permitting metrics should show cycle-time bottlenecks, not only a high-level on-time percentage.

Budget test

Do not let affordable units 'in progress' substitute for completed units or permit plan-review compliance substitute for end-to-end permit-cycle performance.

Ask this in the hearing

How many units are completed, under construction, committed but not started, or delayed, and which permitting bottleneck explains delay?

Likely amendment path

Require PHB fund-status disclosure, city-financed project pipeline reporting, and end-to-end permitting cycle metrics before budget adoption.

Source gap: Official metrics cover affordable housing produced/in progress, central city housing, city-financed construction, permits issued, and plans reviewed, but not full fund status or complete permit-cycle detail.

Budget-hearing issue

Arts, Children's Levy, and grant-accountability tradeoffs

May 7 CEDSA: Arts staff quantified small-grant and sponsorship reductions; the Children's Levy clarified it has no general-fund ask and no decision packages; Ryan praised the levy administrative cap and connected it to workforce/cannabis-fund collaboration.

Council signal

Clark and Dunphy link arts to downtown activation and economic development; Ryan and others want grant dollars to show outcomes and administrative discipline.

Budget test

Separate voter-approved or dedicated funds from general-fund grant programs, and ask whether cuts reduce public-facing output or only internal administration.

Ask this in the hearing

How many grants, youth served, partner dollars, exhibitions, performances, sponsorships, or levy-funded services change under the proposed cut?

Likely amendment path

Restore small arts/youth grants, protect dedicated levy funds, or require outcome reporting for grant restorations.

Source gap: Official metrics show community grants, financial support to partners, and youth served, but not specific arts outputs, sponsorship losses, or program-by-program youth outcomes.

Budget-hearing issue

One-time revenue, BLT, reserves, and fund integrity

April 8: Green pointed to possible Trail Blazers business-license-tax revenue as a one-time resource and opposed PCEF as an ad hoc budget plug; several councilors emphasized protecting voter-approved funds such as Parks Levy and P-SEP.

Council signal

Council has to distinguish real one-time resources, restricted funds, fund-balance risk, and voter-approved mandates before using any new money to restore cuts.

Budget test

Every amendment should state whether it uses ongoing revenue, one-time revenue, restricted funds, reserve draw, or delayed spending, and what future-year cliff it creates.

Ask this in the hearing

What is the legally available one-time resource, what restriction applies, and what future-year obligation or reserve risk does the amendment create?

Likely amendment path

Recognize discrete one-time revenue only with a source memo, legal restriction note, and list of one-time restorations that do not deepen the structural gap.

Source gap: Official metrics show reserves, general-fund growth, risk of expiring funding, credit rating, CPI, and audit deficiencies, but not BLT taxpayer-specific revenue or legal restriction memos.

Hearing prep · 01

City Operations

Is the operating backbone of the city becoming faster, more reliable, and more financially defensible?

Evidence metrics

8

Active flags

1

Flagged links

1

Hearing issues from the record

Start with the actual fight, then open the evidence

These cards translate the April 8 and May 7 budget hearings into specific questions, likely amendments, source packets, and data gaps.

Budget-hearing issue

New-charter DCA efficiency and Council access

April 8: Ryan demanded DCA-level efficiency cuts and questioned whether voters expected to pay more for the new form of government. May 7 CEDSA: Avalos and Kanal said councilors lacked direct information access and pressed the administration on staff-contact restrictions.

Council signal

Ryan, Zimmerman, Green, Morillo, Avalos, and Kanal are all probing management-layer cost, information flow, or staff-access problems, though from different ideological angles.

Budget test

If the administration defends added management capacity, it needs measurable improvements in 311, hiring, procurement, technology, asset condition, and council responsiveness.

Ask this in the hearing

What measurable service-area performance improved because of the DCA layer, and what bureau-level offsets or response-time commitments justify the added cost?

Likely amendment path

Reverse Assistant City Administrator / management add-backs, require bureau offset plans, or require public response-time standards for council information requests.

Source gap: Official metrics include 311, audit, reserves, assets, vehicles, and technology-adjacent operations, but do not measure council information responsiveness or DCA overhead offsets.

Budget-hearing issue

One-time revenue, BLT, reserves, and fund integrity

April 8: Green pointed to possible Trail Blazers business-license-tax revenue as a one-time resource and opposed PCEF as an ad hoc budget plug; several councilors emphasized protecting voter-approved funds such as Parks Levy and P-SEP.

Council signal

Council has to distinguish real one-time resources, restricted funds, fund-balance risk, and voter-approved mandates before using any new money to restore cuts.

Budget test

Every amendment should state whether it uses ongoing revenue, one-time revenue, restricted funds, reserve draw, or delayed spending, and what future-year cliff it creates.

Ask this in the hearing

What is the legally available one-time resource, what restriction applies, and what future-year obligation or reserve risk does the amendment create?

Likely amendment path

Recognize discrete one-time revenue only with a source memo, legal restriction note, and list of one-time restorations that do not deepen the structural gap.

Source gap: Official metrics show reserves, general-fund growth, risk of expiring funding, credit rating, CPI, and audit deficiencies, but not BLT taxpayer-specific revenue or legal restriction memos.

Evidence to open

Official metrics behind the hearing

Each row is a source packet: latest value, trend, official notes, history, and ClearImpact source links.

1CONSUMER PRICE INDEX: West Coast Cities Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W)Indicator · 2025Latest3.0%up2ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING QUALITY: Number of Audit Deficiencies (Material Weaknesses) Reported in the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR)Performance Measure · FY 2023 - 24Latest1up3FUNDING SAVED FOR EMERGENCIES: Dollars in reserve funding for the general fund discretionary budgetPerformance Measure · FY 2024 - 25Latest$74.80Milup4CITY CREDIT RATING: Portland’s General Obligation (GO) Bond RatingPerformance Measure · FY 2024 - 25Latest9flat5CITY VEHICLE AVAILABILITY: Average of percentage of hours fleet was available out of possible hoursPerformance Measure · FY 2024 - 25Latest95%up6ASSET AND INFRASTRUCTURE CONDITION: Percentage of city assets in fair or better conditionPerformance Measure · FY 2023 - 24Latest81%flat7ASSET AND INFRASTRUCTURE UNMET FUNDING: Estimated additional annual funding needed to maintain assets in fair or better conditionPerformance Measure · FY 2022 - 23Latest$1.45Bilflat8TIME TO FILL A VACANT CITY POSITION: Average number of calendar days to fill a vacant City position by recruitmentPerformance Measure · FY 2024 - 25Latest79down

Hearing prep · 02

Community and Economic Development

Can CED connect spending and program activity to visible housing, permitting, climate, and economic outcomes?

Evidence metrics

8

Active flags

1

Flagged links

1

Hearing issues from the record

Start with the actual fight, then open the evidence

These cards translate the April 8 and May 7 budget hearings into specific questions, likely amendments, source packets, and data gaps.

Budget-hearing issue

PCEF / Moda opportunity cost

May 7 CEDSA: Novick pressed whether the administration had identified which PCEF priorities would be displaced by a proposed $75M Moda contribution; the answer did not identify a displacement plan. Morillo, Kanal, and Green raised the weak climate nexus, CIP authority, and opportunity-cost problem.

Council signal

Hard skepticism from Novick, Morillo, Kanal, and Green; procedural/control skepticism from Zimmerman, Koyama Lane, and Avalos; Ryan and Clark were open to an eligibility theory if the city-owned asset has a measurable emissions nexus.

Budget test

Do not let the debate stop at 'can this be PCEF eligible?' Require a specific displacement table: which climate programs, fund balance, interest revenue, or future CIP commitments move if Moda is funded.

Ask this in the hearing

What exact PCEF program, reserve, or future-year CIP commitment would be reduced, delayed, or reclassified to make room for the arena contribution?

Likely amendment path

Condition or prohibit any Moda/PCEF allocation until council receives a displacement schedule, emissions-reduction estimate, community-benefits terms, and fund-balance/interest impact.

Source gap: Performance Portland has PCEF greenhouse-gas and citywide carbon metrics, but no official spectator-venue, Moda subsidy, lease, community-benefit, or PCEF-displacement metric.

Budget-hearing issue

Prosper Portland workforce cuts and downtown ROI

April 8: Smith and Dunphy flagged workforce development as a protection priority. May 7 CEDSA: Pirtle-Guiney pressed whether Prosper was preserving administrative capacity while reducing grant dollars; Avalos challenged the downtown-first ROI theory; Green asked for evidence behind downtown marketing and Clean & Safe / ESD overlap.

Council signal

Avalos, Green, Koyama Lane, Kanal, and Pirtle-Guiney want equity, measurable return, and direct-service clarity; Ryan, Zimmerman, Clark, and the administration were more receptive to a central-city tax-base recovery argument.

Budget test

Separate city-controlled outputs from regional economic indicators. GDP and traded-sector growth do not prove that a marketing line, IBRN cut, or workforce grant cut is justified.

Ask this in the hearing

For each Prosper reduction, how many workers, small businesses, storefronts, or technical-assistance recipients lose direct service, and what measurable downtown return is expected instead?

Likely amendment path

Restore workforce/IBRN/SummerWorks or condition downtown marketing dollars on incremental-activity metrics and Clean & Safe / ESD non-duplication.

Source gap: Official metrics show workforce readiness, small business assistance, quality jobs, GDP, and traded-sector growth, but not IBRN geography, participant loss, downtown-marketing incremental return, or ESD overlap.

Budget-hearing issue

Housing, permitting, and unbudgeted housing funds

April 8: Zimmerman named permitting and housing capacity as core city functions. Subsequent budget discussion flagged large unbudgeted PHB housing funds as a major council deliberation topic. May 7 CEDSA kept CED accountability focused on whether housing/permitting claims connect to measurable outputs.

Council signal

Council needs to know whether housing dollars are committed, unspent, producing units, or stuck in pipeline; permitting metrics should show cycle-time bottlenecks, not only a high-level on-time percentage.

Budget test

Do not let affordable units 'in progress' substitute for completed units or permit plan-review compliance substitute for end-to-end permit-cycle performance.

Ask this in the hearing

How many units are completed, under construction, committed but not started, or delayed, and which permitting bottleneck explains delay?

Likely amendment path

Require PHB fund-status disclosure, city-financed project pipeline reporting, and end-to-end permitting cycle metrics before budget adoption.

Source gap: Official metrics cover affordable housing produced/in progress, central city housing, city-financed construction, permits issued, and plans reviewed, but not full fund status or complete permit-cycle detail.

Budget-hearing issue

Arts, Children's Levy, and grant-accountability tradeoffs

May 7 CEDSA: Arts staff quantified small-grant and sponsorship reductions; the Children's Levy clarified it has no general-fund ask and no decision packages; Ryan praised the levy administrative cap and connected it to workforce/cannabis-fund collaboration.

Council signal

Clark and Dunphy link arts to downtown activation and economic development; Ryan and others want grant dollars to show outcomes and administrative discipline.

Budget test

Separate voter-approved or dedicated funds from general-fund grant programs, and ask whether cuts reduce public-facing output or only internal administration.

Ask this in the hearing

How many grants, youth served, partner dollars, exhibitions, performances, sponsorships, or levy-funded services change under the proposed cut?

Likely amendment path

Restore small arts/youth grants, protect dedicated levy funds, or require outcome reporting for grant restorations.

Source gap: Official metrics show community grants, financial support to partners, and youth served, but not specific arts outputs, sponsorship losses, or program-by-program youth outcomes.

Evidence to open

Official metrics behind the hearing

Each row is a source packet: latest value, trend, official notes, history, and ClearImpact source links.

1ECONOMIC GROWTH: Real Gross Domestic Product for the city of PortlandIndicator · 2024Latest$80.20Bilup2HOUSING COSTS: Percentage of households spending more than 30% of income on housing costsIndicator · FY 2024 - 25Latest39.4%flat3AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Percentage of Portland’s housing units that are regulated and affordable to householdsIndicator · FY 2024 - 25Latest8%flat4CENTRAL CITY HOUSING: Number of housing units constructed in the Central CityIndicator · FY 2024 - 25Latest634down5QUALITY JOBS: Percentage of workers in Portland able to meet basic income needsIndicator · 2024Latest58%up6BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED: Total number of building permits for commercial and residential issuedIndicator · FY 2024 - 25Latest6,442up7WORKFORCE READINESS: Number of workers provided training and/or workforce placement through City-funded programsPerformance Measure · FY 2024 - 25Latest1,695up8SMALL BUSINESS ASSISTANCE: Number of small businesses helped through technical or financial assistancePerformance Measure · FY 2024 - 25Latest1,089up

Hearing prep · 03

Public Safety

Are emergency response, violence prevention, and public-safety outcomes improving at the level council can defend?

Evidence metrics

8

Active flags

1

Flagged links

3

Hearing issues from the record

Start with the actual fight, then open the evidence

These cards translate the April 8 and May 7 budget hearings into specific questions, likely amendments, source packets, and data gaps.

Budget-hearing issue

PS3, PSR, Ceasefire, and public-safety restorations

April 8: councilors identified Portland Street Response, PS3s, fire station coverage, and violence prevention as public-safety protection priorities. The proposed budget raised follow-up questions about PS3 capacity, PSR aftercare, and the Ceasefire coordinator.

Council signal

Progressive bloc likely pushes restorations; Clark prioritizes police staffing and Impact Reduction; Novick and Green still want evidence that special missions and alternatives produce results.

Budget test

Compare response-time and workload metrics to the claimed service impact of cuts. If calls go unanswered or response times worsen, council needs the operational tradeoff in public.

Ask this in the hearing

Which public-safety calls, response times, violence-prevention contacts, or alternative-response outcomes change if PS3, PSR aftercare, or Ceasefire funding is restored or rejected?

Likely amendment path

Restore PS3s, PSR aftercare teams, Ceasefire coordinator, or violence-prevention grants using one-time revenue or offsetting lower-priority public-safety spending.

Source gap: Performance Portland has PSR, PPB, PF&R, gun violence, and response-time metrics, but no clean PS3 metric and no direct Ceasefire/coordinator output measure.

Evidence to open

Official metrics behind the hearing

Each row is a source packet: latest value, trend, official notes, history, and ClearImpact source links.

1REPORTED CRIME RATE: Number of reported NIBRS Group A crimes per 1,000 residentsMeasure · FY 2024 - 25Latest91.84up2TOTAL HOMICIDES: Number of reported homicidesMeasure · FY 2024 - 25Latest50down3PREVALENCE OF GUN VIOLENCE: Total number of verified shooting incidentsMeasure · FY 2024 - 25Latest568down4EMERGENCY CALL VOLUME: Total number of 9-1-1 and emergency telephone callsIndicator · FY 2024 - 25Latest698,823down5TRAFFIC SAFETY: Number of traffic deaths and serious injuriesMeasure · 2025Latest39down6SUCCESSFUL CARDIAC ARREST RESUSCITATION RATE: Percentage of cases where pulse was regained during resuscitation effortsIndicator · FY 2024 - 25Latest31.8%down7EMERGENCY CALL ANSWER TIME: Percentage of emergency 9-1-1 calls answered in 20 secondsPerformance Measure · FY 2024 - 25Latest57.0%up8HIGH PRIORITY POLICE DISPATCHED CALLS: Number of dispatched high priority calls with a PPB unit responsePerformance Measure · FY 2024 - 25Latest58,061down

Hearing prep · 04

Public Works

Are core infrastructure, utility, mobility, parks, and asset outcomes improving despite cost and backlog pressure?

Evidence metrics

8

Active flags

1

Flagged links

2

Hearing issues from the record

Start with the actual fight, then open the evidence

These cards translate the April 8 and May 7 budget hearings into specific questions, likely amendments, source packets, and data gaps.

Budget-hearing issue

Parks, East Portland, youth, and voter-promise protection

April 8: Pirtle-Guiney, Morillo, Avalos, and Dunphy emphasized Parks Levy promises; Dunphy highlighted East Portland equity, afterschool programs, and Teen Force; Avalos raised East Portland Community Center; Canal opposed pausing the North Portland Aquatic Center.

Council signal

There is broad protection energy around voter promises and youth access, but a public split on North Portland Aquatic Center timing and on where parks reductions should land.

Budget test

Separate access and equity outputs from broad system averages. A citywide parks level-of-service number cannot answer whether East Portland or youth programs are protected.

Ask this in the hearing

Which parks, recreation, swim, youth, and East Portland access metrics change under each proposed reduction, and where is the district-level equity table?

Likely amendment path

Protect levy commitments, fund East Portland repairs, restore youth/recreation access, or condition aquatic-center timing on explicit tradeoff tables.

Source gap: Official metrics include parks level of service, recreation access, swim lessons, trees, and sidewalks, but not district-level East Portland impacts, Teen Force, SUN, or Summer Free For All outcomes.

Evidence to open

Official metrics behind the hearing

Each row is a source packet: latest value, trend, official notes, history, and ClearImpact source links.

1DRINKING WATER QUALITY: Number of drinking water contaminant violationsIndicator · FY 2024 - 25Latest0flat2ECOLOGICAL HEALTH: Watershed Health Index for Water QualityIndicator · FY 2024 - 25Latest5.3down3TRAFFIC SAFETY: Number of traffic deaths and serious injuriesMeasure · 2025Latest39down4COMMUTE METHODS: Percentage of Portland commuters who drove aloneIndicator · 2024Latest52%up5TREE COVERAGE: Percentage of land covered by tree canopyIndicator · FY 2024 - 25Latest29.8%flat6PARKS LEVEL OF SERVICE: Percentage of population living within 1/2 mile of a park or natural areaIndicator · FY 2024 - 25Latest86.3%up7COMMUNITY CENTER LEVEL OF SERVICE: Percentage of population living within 3 miles of a full-service community centerIndicator · FY 2024 - 25Latest72.0%flat8ADA BARRIERS REMOVED: Percentage of total barriers removed as identified in the Portland Parks & Recreation American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition PlanIndicator · FY 2024 - 25Latest20%up

Amendment Impact View

Amendment tests from the hearings

State the hearing priority or follow-up request the amendment is responding to.
Attach source packets for every official metric the amendment claims to affect.
Name the tradeoff: restored service, delayed project, restricted fund use, reserve risk, or missing outcome evidence.
Export all source data