04072025 SC EMC MEETING

Version 1 Organization: Shady Cove Emergency Management Commission (SC-EMC) Meeting Purpose: Regular Monthly Meeting (April) Meeting Location: Shady Cove City Hall Scheduled Meeting Date & Time: Monday 4/7/25 at 5:30 – 7:30 pm Natalie Swendener is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting. Join Zoom Meeting https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84339802183?pwd=kpTuVAjDr0043yRTRgFbStUTkue9rx.1 Meeting ID: 843 3980 2183 Passcode: 529507 --- One tap mobile +16699006833,,85047757358#,,,,*397227# US (San Jose) +17193594580,,85047757358#,,,,*397227# US --- Dial by your location • +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose) • +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) Find your local number: https://us06web.zoom.us/u/kcJKWfaf2A 1. General 1.1. Call to Order __5:30 pm_____________. 1.2. Roll Call: Name Seat Position Status Jay Taylor 1 SC-EMC Chair Present Nancy Martin 2 SC-EMC Vice-Chair Present Natalie Swendener 3 SC-EMC Secretary Present Mike Martin 4 SC-EMC Member Present Open seat 5 SC-EMC Member Paige Winfrey Council Liaison Present Guest n/a Guest n/a 1.1. Pledge of Allegiance 1.2. Announcements 1.2.1. Statement for meeting being digitally recorded, start of recording. 1.3. Review and acceptance of previous minutes 1  Motions to approve the minutes of 3/3/25 regular meeting & the minutes of 3/27/2025 SC-EMC & City Council workshop. See summary of motions table below for more details. 2. OLD BUSINESS 2.1. Discussion & follow-up from 3/27/2025 SC-EMC & City Council workshop. Discussion of previous meeting, and each members impressions of the result. SC-EMC members felt that we should hit the pause button and limit work on new initiatives until we receive feedback from the members of the City Council on their direction for SC-EMC. Nancy Martin and Natalie Swendener reviewed the “homework” document with the full quorum of commissioners. This document was requested by the City Council President, which was a review of City charter and Oregon law. See appendix 1 for this document, and the letter sent to the City Administrator. A motion was made to pass the legal research document on to the City Council as soon as possible, via the City Administrator. See summary of motions table below for more details. 2.2. SC-EMC budget request to City Council. Nancy Martin noted that she had previously sent off the budget request to City Administrator Michele Parry, however, there hasn’t yet been feedback. The first official budget meeting is April 15th. 2.3. Upcoming Grant Request deadlines Update from Natalie Swendener on list of grants. 2.4. Partner Agency Updates 2.4.1. Jackson County Emergency Management We discussed the timing of the next meeting with Jackson County Emergency Management. We proposed either May 7th (Wed) or May 6th (Tue) during the day. Natalie Swendener has the action item to confirm timing with Delaney Richmond of Jackson County. Note: This meeting was confirmed for Tuesday, May 6th at 1:45 pm at Shady Cove library. 2.4.2. Fire District 4 – no update. 2.4.3. Other agencies Jay spoke with David Christensen on the radio agency. He said there would be no problem with a small radio announcement. Jay said he needs to work on the text for the announcement. Mike Martin – still in holding pattern on American Red Cross, due to awaiting guidance from City Council. Similarly, Jay Taylor is on-hold w/URCC and Nancy is on-hold w/Sheriff’s office, awaiting City direction. 2 3. NEW BUSINESS 3.1. Discussion of Digital Collaboration concerns raised in recent City Council meeting Natalie presented a draft document for the compliance policy. We reviewed during the meeting. Natalie will present the finalized document to Michele Parry. However, we don’t want this document to overshadow the legal review of ICS status. A motion was made to approve the document and send it forward to the City Administrator Michele Parry. See table of motions below for further details. Motion to approve: N. Martin/M. Martin. All in favor. Note: Shortly after the 4/7 meeting, new information was received on a November 2024 Oregon Government Ethics Commission ruling (24-347A) which provided further guidance on digital collaboration. As a result, the compliance document is continuing to be revised, and a second draft will be provided for SC-EMC to review and approve, prior to sending forward. 4. Standing Agenda Topics 4.1. Review of any upcoming community training and education opportunities 4.2. SC-EMC Commissioner & Council Liaison Updates (roundtable) 4.2.1. Chair Jay Taylor – recommended touching base w/City of Butte Falls, to discuss how they purchased land for a wildfire buffer. We may gain knowledge of how they funded their land purchase. Jay discussed the workshop results, and is glad we will be getting some focus and direction from City Council. He also noted that fire season will be starting. 4.2.2. Vice-Chair Nancy Martin For all discussions on combined workshop, she believes the workshop was necessary and will ultimately be a positive result. Excited to work w/Chief Crume on further ICS IAP formats. 4.2.3. Commissioner Mike Martin Anxious to hear the response from City Council on the results of our legal research and action item. Especially with fire season coming up. 4.2.4. Commissioner Natalie Swendener Still working on action item to get a social media login for SC-EMC. 4.2.5. Council Liaison Paige Winfrey 5. ADJOURNMENT 5.1.1. Recap of any new action items generated during this meeting. 3 5.1.2. Review any motions made during the meeting. Motion Raised By Second By In Favor/ Opposed Accept minutes of 3/3/2025 regular N. N. Martin All in favor meeting. Swendener Accept minutes of 3/27/2025 SC-EMC M. Martin N. All in favor & City Council workshop. Swendener Motion to approve the SC-EMC’s legal N. N. Martin All in favor. research document and pass it on to Swendener the City Council via the City Administrator. This document was requested by City Council during the 3/27 workshop. See Appendix for a copy of this document. Motion to approve the SC-EMC N. Martin M. Martin All in favor. document for initial version of digital compliance policy. 5.1.3. Review schedule of upcoming meetings for participants awareness. Meeting Date/Time Location SC-EMC Monthly Meeting 5/5/2025 @5:30 PM At City Hall (May) Meeting w/Jackson County 5/7 or 5/6 (proposed) TBD EM SC-EMC Monthly Meeting 6/2/2025 @5:30 PM At City Hall (June) SC-EMC Monthly Meeting 7/14/2025 @5:30 PM At City Hall (July) Aug 4th Sept 8th 5.1.4. Meeting adjourned at: ______7:34__pm_____________________________. 4  Appendix 1 – Document of Legal Research from SC-EMC, per request from City Council Legal Research On Lines of Succession & Governance – SC-EMC Action Item from City Council Document Version Version Date Author Notes 1.0 4/1/25 Swendener Initial Draft 1.1 4/2/25 Martin, N Added State Statutes 1.2 4/7/25 Swendener Miscellaneous cleanup & formatting 2.0 4/7/25 SC-EMC Final corrections & document approval at SC-EMC regular meeting. Overview. ......................................................................................................................................... 6 Reference Documentation. .............................................................................................................. 6 Making City Policy Decisions During an Emergency – Declaration and Ratification. .......................... 6 DECLARATION. ............................................................................................................................. 7 RATIFICATION. .............................................................................................................................. 7 Additional Emergency Policy Authorization Conferred by City Charter. ............................................ 8 Ability to Direct City Employees During an Emergency. .................................................................... 8 Employee Job Descriptions & “Additional Duties As Assigned”. ........................................................ 9 Oregon State Law and Emergency Management ............................................................................... 9 5 Overview. During the 3/27/2025 SC-EMC and City Council Meeting, the SC-EMC was given an action item to review the City Charter and research Oregon Law. This document is an attempt to complete the research. Since the “ask” from City Council was fairly broad, SC- EMC attempted to answer three questions. (1) During an Emergency, does the City Council have the power to make decisions during an emergency without a quorum. More specifically, can the Line of Succession for City Policy decisions specified in Ordinance 33 be legally used? The SC-EMC believes that the City Council does have this power, by declaring a state of emergency. (2) During an Emergency, does anyone other than the City Administrator have the authority to direct City Staff. More specifically, can Michele delegate authority to direct City staff to someone with ICS responsibilities? The SC-EMC believes that under emergency circumstances, it is possible for individuals other than the City Administrator to direct City staff. (3) The City Council (President Kathy Nuckles) also requested that the SC-EMC research Oregon Law. Therefore, we include research from Nancy Martin on applicable sections of Oregon Law which provide further justification for City responsibilities, Lines of Succession and City Emergency Management. Please note that certain text within this document is highlighted for additional emphasis to the reader. Reference Documentation. The SC-EMC used the online version of the City Charter and the online version of Shady Cove’s Ordinance 33, Emergency Management, as posted on the City website. Note: During the workshop, the Council expressed concern that Ordinance 33’s lines of succession were not valid. Their reasoning was that Ordinance 33 conflicted with the guidance in the City Charter and was therefore wrong. There were also concerns this may not have been “codified correctly”. However, as this ordinance appears to have been passed in 2003, several years after the 1998 City Charter was adopted, the SC-EMC assumes it was legally passed by the City of Shady Cove. If the Ordinance is legally adopted, then presumably it is legally in effect. Recommendation for Legal Review: The SC-EMC recommends that the City engage their legal counsel to determine if Ordinance 33 Emergency Management conflicts with the City Charter. Making City Policy Decisions During an Emergency – Declaration and Ratification. An emergency is any incident or emerging situation that the City cannot handle with normal operating procedures and/or resources. A key point is to understand the difference between “declaring” and “ratifying”. In city government, “declaring” refers to an official announcement or statement, while “ratification” is the formal approval or confirmation of that declaration by a governing body. 6 DECLARATION. To invoke a State of Emergency, the Mayor (or designee per Line of Succession) must follow Ordinance 33, subsection 02. This requires the Mayor (or designee) to make a written declaration of the emergency, its impact and the geographic boundary of the event. Per Ordinance 33.02, the Declaration is what activates the Emergency Management Plan (not the ratification). Activation of the Emergency Management Plan, in the SC-EMC’s interpretation, gives the authority to form an ICS to handle the situation. Additionally, with the declaration of Emergency, the Ordinance allows for special regulations to be imposed because of the state of emergency (33.02(c)). Per Ordinance 33.03, if the Mayor is unavailable or unable to perform his duties under Ordinance 33, responsibility for declaring the Emergency passes to the individuals listed below. This means any of the individuals listed below could act as the Mayor and declare a state of emergency within the City, including the City Administrator and Incident Commander, who are not members of the Council. • Council President • Senior Council member • City Administrator • Incident Commander Recommendation for Legal Review: SC-EMC recommends the City engage counsel for legal review. In our interpretation, the Mayor or his designee can declare an emergency and this gives full authority to start the ICS, make necessary special rules & regulations and handle the emergency. We do NOT interpret this language as meaning the Mayor must wait for ratification. Ratification is not necessary to start Emergency management operations, rather it’s necessary for the Council to provide confirmation of the declaration after-the-fact. See the section below on ratification. We also want to note that this Ordinance (which again we assume was legally passed and binding already) will give the same authority to anyone in the above line of succession if the Mayor isn’t available. RATIFICATION. Ordinance 33 is clear that a quorum of the City Council is required to ratify the Emergency Declaration. Per Ordinance 33.02, within 24 hours a special meeting must be called for a quorum of the City Council to ratify the declaration. Sensibly -- since in an emergency not all council members may be available -- the ordinance also notes that the ratification can be delayed but should take place as soon as a quorum can be assembled. Ordinance 33.02 (2) also notes that with the ratification process, the City Council is also authorized to add additional specific emergency powers to the declaration. Presumably, this would give the council the ability to approve any interim emergency decisions made and potentially adjust the scale and scope of the emergency response. 7 SC-EMC believes it’s likely that some scenarios would delay the ratification. For example, an approaching fire and evacuation would probably take precedence over convening Council members in City Chambers to ratify the Emergency. We recommend that the City take steps to ensure all Council members have the capability to attend meetings remotely in such a situation. KEY POINT TO CONSIDER: To-date, most discussions about declaring an emergency have focused on the fact that a formal declaration is required to unlock County and State assistance. SC-EMC wants the City Council to understand that declaring an emergency also provides a legal basis for utilizing emergency operations and procedures where necessary. Again, we want to emphasize that a state of emergency is any situation where the City cannot handle the issue with its existing resources. The declaration of a state of emergency would typically be done in Incident Level 3 or Incident Level 4. This is consistent with the SC-EMC’s definition of Incident Levels, and it would allow the City to start the ICS. Additional Emergency Policy Authorization Conferred by City Charter. In City Charter section 33, subsection (2), the City Council is also given special powers to adopt an emergency ordinance if necessary. This section has nothing to do with the declaration of emergency, rather it notes that under the emergency declaration, ordinances can be updated using non-standard procedures. The City Charter states the following. 33(2): The council may adopt an emergency ordinance at a single meeting by the express unanimous votes of all council members present, provided the ordinance is read first in full and then by title. 34: Section 34 (Effective dates of ordinances) also states that an ordinance adopted to meet an emergency may take effect as soon as adopted. Note: Within the City Charter, there is no definition of what would constitute an emergency that would warrant an emergency ordinance be adopted. Ability to Direct City Employees During an Emergency. Problem statement: During the SC-EMC workshop, a point of concern for the City Council was the tasking of City Employees by members of the ICS. The Council stated that the City employees are unionized and that the Shady Cove City Charter states that they can only be directed by City Administrator Michele Parry. The SC-EMC is not disputing or arguing that the above approach isn’t correct. In an “Ideal Emergency” it would be best if the City Administrator were in charge and could focus their energy on directing city employees on how to respond. Again, SC-EMC does not argue that approach. However, SC-EMC would like to note that most emergencies aren’t normal situations. We are simply trying to note that in the process of forming an ICS and managing an emergency, there will necessarily be situations where City employees may need to take directions from someone else. Examples where this may be needed. What if our City Administrator is taking a well-deserved vacation during the summer, when a fire breaks out? What if they have a temporary medical issue, and need to take time to recover 8 when there is a severe storm and extended power outage? SC-EMC thinks it’s a good idea to think through these issues and be clear on the governance before an event happens. Here is what the City Charter says about the matter: Section 23(5)(e ). “The City Administrator is responsible for supervising and controlling the Administrator’s appointees in their service to the City”. Note: The language in the charter uses the word “appointee”. The SC-EMC believes that the term “appointee” should be taken as meaning a City employee. One definition of “appointee” – (n.) is a person who is appointed to a position. Section 23(8). When the Administrator is absent from the City or disabled from acting as Administrator, or when the office of Administrator becomes vacant, the council shall appoint a manager pro tem, who has the powers & duties of Administrator, except that the Administrator pro tem may appoint or remove personnel only with approval of the council. SC-EMC believes that this gives the City Council powers to nominate one of their members, or a member of the ICS staff as Administrator pro tem. This provides the pro tem the ability to task City employees. Further, since the mayor (or designee) are also authorized to declare an emergency, we believe this gives the Mayor (or designee) the ability to designate an Administrator pro tem as part of the Emergency Declaration if the actual City Administrator is unavailable. Employee Job Descriptions & “Additional Duties As Assigned”. The SC-EMC recommends that the City review the formal job descriptions of any unionized employees. It’s fairly common for a job description to include the words “and additional duties as assigned”. This language, in combination with delegation of duties from the City Administrator (or Administrator Pro tem) should provide sufficient justification to support the ability to task a city employee in support of an emergency. For additional background and context on why SC-EMC is raising questions about tasking City employees, here are several situations where we believe it would be valid to use City employees. • Evacuate City-owned vehicles and council building equipment in advance of an approaching fire (assuming a Level-2 “Get Set” situation with advance notice). • Task a City employee to handle resource distribution before volunteers arrive to relieve them. Recommendation for Legal Review: SC-EMC recommends the City obtain a legal review to clarify under what circumstances it’s acceptable to task a City employee in support of an emergency. As with the City Council, it may be advisable to understand whether certain employees should have capabilities to work remotely. Oregon State Law and Emergency Management SC-EMC was requested, by City Council (specifically Council President Kathy Nuckles) to research Oregon State Law as it pertains to Emergency Management within the city. Although no one on the EMC is a legal expert; a para- 9 legal with an expertise in legal research; nor has access to all the legal resources available (as in a law library), we believe we were able to complete a very brief guide to the statutes that would apply to the City of Shady Cove. RECOMMENDATION FOR LEGAL REVIEW: The SC-EMC recommends that the City obtain legal review to further define their responsibilities regarding the below listed Oregon State Statutes. SC-EMC has taken the liberty of high-lighting and underlining sections of the statutes that have been questioned or commented on during the combined City Council and Emergency Management Commission workshop. Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 401 Emergency Management and Services As used in this chapter: (1) “Emergency” means a human created or natural event or circumstance that causes or threatens widespread loss of life, injury to person or property, human suffering or financial loss, including but not limited to: (a) Fire, wildfire, explosion, flood, severe weather, landslides or mud slides, drought, earthquake, volcanic activity, tsunamis or other oceanic phenomena, spills or releases of oil or hazardous material as defined in ORS 466.605 (Definitions for ORS 466.605 to 466.680), contamination, utility or transportation emergencies, disease, blight, infestation, civil disturbance, riot, sabotage, acts of terrorism and war; and (b) A rapid influx of individuals from outside this state, a rapid migration of individuals from one part of this state to another or a rapid displacement of individuals if the influx, migration or displacement results from the type of event or circumstance described in paragraph (a) of this subsection. (2) “Emergency service agency” means an organization within a local government that performs essential services for the public’s benefit before, during or after an emergency, such as law enforcement, fire control, health, medical and sanitation services, public works and engineering, public information and communications. (3) “Emergency services” means activities engaged in by state and local government agencies to prepare for an emergency and to prevent, minimize, respond to or recover from an emergency, including but not limited to coordination, preparedness planning, training, interagency liaison, fire fighting, oil or hazardous material spill or release cleanup as defined in ORS 466.605 (Definitions for ORS 466.605 to 466.680), law enforcement, medical, health and sanitation services, engineering and public works, search and rescue activities, warning and public information, damage assessment, administration and fiscal management, and those measures defined as “civil defense” in 50 U.S.C. app. 2252. (4) “Local government” has the meaning given that term in ORS 174.116 (“Local government” and “local service district” defined). “Major disaster” means any event defined as a “major disaster” under 42 U.S.C. 5122(2). [1983 c.586 §2; 1985 c.733 §21; 1987 c.373 §84; 1989 c.361 §8; 1991 c.418 §1; 1991 c.956 §10; 1993 c.187 §1; 1999 c.935 §29; 2005 c.825 §9; 2007 c.97 §10; 2007 c.223 §5; 2007 c.740 §20; 2009 c.718 §17; 2021 c.592 §16] KEY POINT TO CONSIDER: SC-EMC believes for the purpose of this statute, and by the City of Shady Cove adoption of the City of Shady Cove - Commission, Committee and Volunteer Group Bylaws – Addendum 2: Emergency Management Commission that the SC-EMC could be deemed an Emergency Service Agency under this provision. 10  401.032 Statement of policy and purpose. (1) The general purpose of this chapter is to reduce the vulnerability of the State of Oregon to loss of life, injury to persons or property and human suffering and financial loss resulting from emergencies, and to provide for recovery and relief assistance for the victims of emergencies. (2) It is declared to be the policy and intent of the Legislative Assembly that preparations for emergencies and governmental responsibility for responding to emergencies be placed at the local level. The state shall prepare for emergencies but shall not assume authority or responsibility for responding to an emergency unless the appropriate response is beyond the capability of the city and county in which the emergency occurs, the city or county fails to act, or the emergency involves two or more counties. [Formerly 401.015] 401.035 Responsibility for emergency services systems. (1) The emergency services system is composed of all agencies and organizations involved in the coordinated delivery of emergency services. The Governor is responsible for the emergency services system within the State of Oregon. The executive officer or governing body of each county or city of this state is responsible for the emergency services system within that jurisdiction. (2) In carrying out their responsibilities for emergency services systems, the Governor and the executive officers or governing bodies of the counties or cities may delegate any administrative or operative authority vested in them by this chapter and provide for the subdelegation of that authority. [1983 c.586 §3; 2009 c.718 §24] 401.038 Emergency incident training for certain officials. (1) All elected officials in this state, all administrative heads of state agencies and all persons in the state government management service as defined in ORS 240.212 shall complete introductory courses offered or approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency on incident command and the National Incident Management System. (2) All officials of a local government, as defined in ORS 174.116, who have or could reasonably be expected to have emergency or disaster response responsibility shall complete education on emergency response as recommended by the emergency program manager appointed by the local government under ORS 401.305 or the chief administrative officer of the local government. [2022 c.55 §4] Note: 401.038 was enacted into law by the Legislative Assembly but was not added to or made a part of ORS chapter 401 or any series therein by legislative action. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation. 401.305 Emergency management agency of city, county or tribal government; emergency program manager; coordination of emergency management functions. (1) As used in this section, “tribal government” means a federally recognized sovereign tribal government operating within the borders of this state or an intertribal organization formed by two or more federally recognized sovereign tribal governments operating within this state. (2) Each county of this state shall, and each city or tribal government may, establish an emergency management agency that is directly responsible to the executive officer or governing body of the county, city or tribe. (3) The executive officer or governing body of each county, and any city or tribe that participates, shall appoint an emergency program manager who is responsible for the organization, administration and operation of the emergency management agency, subject to the direction and control of the county, city or tribe. (4) When a city or tribal government has an emergency management agency, the city or tribal government, as applicable, and the counties within which the city or tribal government operates shall jointly establish policies that: (a) Provide direction and identify and define the purpose and roles of the individual emergency management programs; 11  (b) Specify the responsibilities of the emergency program managers and staff; and (c) Establish lines of communication, succession and authority of elected officials for an effective and efficient response to emergency conditions. (5) Each emergency management agency shall perform emergency program management functions within the territorial limits of the county, city or tribal government and may perform the functions outside the territorial limits as required under any mutual aid or cooperative assistance agreement or as requested and authorized by the county or city in whose territorial limits the emergency functions are performed. (6) The emergency management functions include, at a minimum: (a) Coordination of the planning activities necessary to prepare and maintain a current emergency operations plan, management and maintenance of emergency operating facilities from which elected and appointed officials can direct emergency and disaster response activities; (b) Establishment of an incident command structure for management of a coordinated response by all local emergency service agencies; and (c) Coordination with the Oregon Department of Emergency Management to integrate effective practices in emergency preparedness and response as provided in the National Incident Management System established by the Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5 of February 28, 2003. [1983 c.586 §12; 1993 c.187 §9; 2005 c.825 §11; 2013 c.189 §2; 2021 c.539 §35] Recommendation for Legal Review: The SC-EMC believes that with the designation of the City Administrator as the City Emergency Manager in conjunction with the Emergency Operations Plan, the City of Shady Cove has established an emergency management agency and thus is bound by the above. We are recommending that the City reviews this with city legal counsel. 401.309 Declaration of state of emergency by city or county; procedures; mandatory evacuations. (1) The governing body of a city or county in this state may declare, by ordinance or resolution, that a state of emergency exists within the city or county. The ordinance or resolution must limit the duration of the state of emergency to the period of time during which the conditions giving rise to the declaration exist or are likely to remain in existence. (2) A city or county in this state may, by ordinance or resolution, establish procedures to prepare for and carry out any activity to prevent, minimize, respond to or recover from an emergency. The ordinance or resolution shall describe the conditions required for the declaration of a state of emergency within the jurisdiction. (3) An ordinance or resolution adopted under subsection (2) of this section may designate the emergency management agency, if any, or any other agency or official of the city or county as the agency or official charged with carrying out emergency duties or functions under the ordinance. (4) A city or county may authorize an agency or official to order mandatory evacuations of residents and other individuals after a state of emergency is declared under this section. An evacuation under an ordinance or resolution authorized under subsection (2) of this section shall be ordered only when necessary for public safety or when necessary for the efficient conduct of activities that minimize or mitigate the effects of the emergency. (5) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect or diminish the powers of the Governor during a state of emergency declared under ORS 401.165. The provisions of ORS 401.165 to 401.236 supersede the provisions of an 12 ordinance or resolution authorized by this section when the Governor declares a state of emergency within any area in which such an ordinance or resolution applies. [1997 c.361 §2; 2009 c.718 §32] KEY POINT TO CONSIDER: SC-EMC believes that by declaring an emergency, the City will follow established procedures to carry out any activity to prevent, minimize, respond to or recover from an emergency. This then, establishes a need for the ICS system and IAP’s to assist the City during the emergency. Additional Recommendations – Shady Cove Emergency Operations Plan (2012 ) The SC-EMC would like the City Council to clarify the status of the 2012 Shady Cove Emergency Operations Plan. During the workshop, the Mayor asked that the 2012 EOP be deleted from the City Website, as its line of succession was incorrect. SC-EMC would like to understand if the intent is to completely delete the plan due to being deemed inaccurate, or is it simply not available to the public? The SC-EMC believes that the existing plan (even with its limitations) is still valuable, and currently it is the only formalized comprehensive emergency document that the City has. We also believe the document is required by the state of Oregon. We believe it should remain available to members of the City Council and SC-EMC, even if it is not posted on the website. The SC-EMC would be happy to remove the section on lines of succession in the EOP document, we would be able to handle that with PDF to Microsoft Word conversion software if the original isn’t 13 Appendix 2 – Email from SC-EMC to send document to City Council. 14 Appendix 3 - 15