Plans | Jennifer Massey for Mayor

Response to Your Questions: My Record, My Plans, and What Comes Next

I can expand later if you have more questions, but here is the starting point:

Many of you have asked: what I have done, what I have personally brought forward, what I have authored or proposed, what I am still working on, and what I am willing to be measured against going forward.

One thing I do want people to understand about how I approach this job is that I do not believe the Mayor's role is simply to show up to meetings and vote on whatever appears in an agenda packet. I research issues, bring agenda items forward, draft proposed ordinances and resolutions, ask staff and legal counsel to evaluate ideas, and then put those ideas through the public process. I do not have unilateral authority, and I do not take credit for work that belongs to staff, prior Councils, my fellow Councilors, consultants, partner agencies, or the public. But I do believe elected officials should be able to identify a problem, develop a possible solution, put it in writing, and bring it forward for public review.

1. How will you cut costs to taxpayers?

First, people need the full financial picture. Residents absolutely pay property taxes, but the City of St. Helens receives only about 11 cents of every property tax dollar paid. The City receives approximately $2.17 million in property tax revenue while the City's published 2025 General Fund service costs were approximately $12.3 million. Property taxes therefore funded only about 15 percent of General Fund services. The rest comes from franchise fees, state shared revenues, service fees, licenses, permits, internal service charges, and other sources. So when people say, “we already pay taxes,” they are correct, but most of that property tax bill does not go to City Hall. [14]

My approach is to work both sides of the equation: control recurring expenses, improve accountability for what we purchase, aggressively pursue outside funding, make better use of City assets, expand recurring revenue, and make sure new development pays the costs reasonably attributable to that development. [10][14]

How I plan to do it

I plan to work five tracks at the same time. First, control recurring costs through competitive procurement, stronger scopes, performance reviews, and better contract enforcement. Second, aggressively pursue grants and outside funding so local residents are not the only funding source. Third, create recurring revenue from assets the City already owns, including evaluating the Old Portland Road sports complex and RV park concept rather than leaving potentially productive public property idle. Fourth, use Community Benefit Agreements when a major project seeks substantial discretionary City benefits so growth can produce measurable infrastructure, public safety, workforce, and community value. Fifth, keep reviewing City fees and charges when experience shows they may be poorly calibrated or creating unintended burdens. That is a much more sustainable strategy than simply cutting services until there is nothing left to cut. [7][8][13]

I wrote the ordinance that gives voters the final say before new non-utility fees can be added to utility bills

I have already acted on the principle that existing taxpayers should not simply be treated as the automatic answer every time the City needs more revenue. I introduced the concept and wrote the policy proposal that became Ordinance 3316, which the Council adopted on September 3, 2025. The ordinance added Chapter 13.32 to the St. Helens Municipal Code and requires approval by a majority of voters at a citywide election before the City can establish a new municipal service fee on a utility bill when that fee is unrelated to actual utility services. It also requires voter approval before an existing non-utility municipal service fee can be increased or its purpose changed. Any proposal to establish or increase one of these fees must identify the maximum amount, include an expiration date unless voters later reauthorize it, and state the specific purpose for which the money will be used. The City can reduce or repeal one of these fees without another election. In other words, future Councils cannot simply use the utility bill as an open ended collection vehicle for unrelated City services without first asking the people who will have to pay it. That protection was immediately meaningful: when the City later considered a General Services Fee, Ordinance 3316 required that proposal to go to the voters instead of allowing Council to impose it on its own. [5][16]

That is an important part of how I answer the question about cutting costs to taxpayers. Cost control is not only about cutting a line item after the money has already been spent. It is also about changing the rules so government has to justify new burdens before placing them on residents. I believe essential services still have to be funded, but when the proposal is a new non utility fee collected through a utility bill, the people paying that bill should have the final voice.

General RFP and procurement reform

In October 2025 I publicly raised the broader problem of the City repeatedly extending or renewing contracts without returning to a competitive process often enough. Two weeks later I brought forward a proposed framework addressing when Requests for Proposals should be required, how contracts could be categorized by duration, how long initial terms and renewals should last, and when performance should be reviewed before renewal. Legal counsel discussed how Oregon public contracting law interacts with such a policy, and Council supported continuing the work. This was a general procurement initiative, not something limited to the water taxi or a single contractor. It should be noted that I am one of the few Mayors that write and present ordnances and resolutions I write to move the city forward and reduce staff burden. That reduces waste. [7][8]

Contractor accountability and clearer performance expectations

I am continuing that procurement work with a broader contractor accountability proposal. The objective is to strengthen scopes of work, clearly define deliverables, identify responsible parties, establish schedules and performance expectations, document corrective responsibilities, and create meaningful remedies when contractual obligations are not fulfilled. I do not want the City repeating situations where taxpayers paid for a scope and later discovered that the agreement was too vague about who was responsible for completing or correcting the work. This proposal is still subject to legal review and Council action, so I am not claiming it as adopted law. I believe we have all seen some of this. [7][8]

Stronger professional service agreements

In December 2025 I challenged a professional services agreement because I did not believe it contained enough detail about qualifications, experience, project expectations, delivery dates, revision support, contingency planning, and conflicts. I stated that future professional service agreements should contain stronger documentation of exactly what the City is buying and what happens if the promised work is not delivered. That concern connects directly to the broader RFP and contractor accountability work. [10]

Five year forecasting and reducing dependence on one time money

When budget forecasting showed continuing reliance on one time money, I asked about the City's strategic approach to longer term forecasting. One time revenue can bridge a temporary gap, but it does not solve a recurring mismatch between revenues and ongoing operating costs. My goal is a General Fund that is increasingly supported by stable recurring sources rather than repeated emergency fixes. I also believe the budget committee should be meeting once per quarter [10]

Questioning automatic pass-through increases

When rate and service increases have come before Council, I have asked whether the City can negotiate better value, concessions, or service improvements rather than simply treating every requested increase as automatic. Vendors have legitimate costs, but residents also deserve Council members who ask what the public receives for additional money. [4][7]

Public Safety Fee sunset

I supported making the sunset of the existing Public Safety Fee explicit. This is important for transparency. The fee was created to support the debt associated with the public safety facility. My position has been that residents should not be left with a fee indefinitely after the underlying obligation is gone. That is why I have also been interested in whether future economic development agreements could create opportunities to pay that debt down faster and, if legally and financially possible, eliminate or reduce the fee sooner. This was an important part of my resolution I just wrote. [5]

Tax breaks should not be the default economic development strategy

I do not believe the automatic answer to every development proposal should be a tax break. I am not in favor of that at all. If the City is considering a discretionary tax incentive, land transaction, utility participation, public infrastructure assistance, or another substantial public benefit, I want measurable performance commitments in return. Again, I personally will not support tax incentives. Resolution 2101 specifically provides a framework for accountability, reporting, remedies, and potential clawbacks where legally permissible if material commitments tied to a discretionary City benefit are not fulfilled. [13]

Using a future Community Benefit Agreement to reduce an existing burden on residents

One example I want to explore is negotiating a major community contribution toward the public safety facility debt if a future large development. If such a contribution could legally and financially retire that obligation earlier, I would want the City to evaluate reducing or eliminating the associated Public Safety Fee as soon as the debt structure allows. I cannot promise a future private party will agree to a particular amount, but I can state the negotiating objective: use major growth to create measurable value for existing residents instead of simply shifting more costs to them. This would eliminate or reduce the $10.30 non-utility fee on citizens’ water bills. [13][27]

Applying cost consciousness to the Mayor position as well

From the beginning I chose to donate my mayoral stipend rather than treat the office as a source of personal income. I have continued to support reducing the cost of mayoral compensation while recognizing that Council compensation is a separate policy question involving other elected officials. I include this not as a substitute for financial reform, because it is not, but because I believe I should apply the same cost consciousness to myself that I ask the City to apply elsewhere. Also, because of all the threatened personal lawsuitsn by my opponenet, I strongly felt they should have money to defend themselves. [1][34]

2. How will you bring jobs back?

St. Helens has to be open for business, but responsible about it. We cannot force companies to come here. We have to make them want to invest here. Companies look at whether rules are predictable, whether infrastructure can support their operation, whether power is available, whether the community is safe, whether employees want to live here, whether the workforce exists, and whether local government can function as a professional partner. Construction, labor, safety, risk management, contracts, and complex projects are my professional wheelhouse, and I believe that experience matters when the City is dealing with large industrial and construction decisions. [18]

How I plan to do it

My plan is to make St. Helens easier to understand and safer to invest in without lowering the bar for community protection. That means clear development standards, known infrastructure requirements, predictable review processes, early coordination with utilities and emergency services, a safe community, workforce partnerships, and direct City engagement before a company spends substantial money designing a project that cannot work here. Again, I want Community Benefit Agreements that identify measurable employment, apprenticeship, local and regional recruitment, infrastructure, public safety, and community commitments where legally permissible. I also want the City actively marketing what we can offer: industrial land, Columbia River access, a skilled trades workforce, proximity to the Portland metropolitan area, and a local government that understands construction and large project delivery. I have resquested a complete asset inventory list to evluate all aviabale property and assets as well as leases we are paying and being paid. [13]

Industrial redevelopment and the Arcadia Paper Mill

I helped advance the Arcadia transaction during my term, while recognizing that the project involved years of work by the City, prior Councils, staff, the buyer, attorneys, regulators, and other partners. The public record identified the expected benefits as industrial redevelopment, approximately 80 jobs, a significant annual payroll, property returning to the tax rolls, and additional City revenue. That is the kind of redevelopment I want St. Helens pursuing: productive use of industrial land, family wage employment, and a stronger tax base. And, they just recently started making paper… yahoo[12][25]

Responsible Development Resolution 2101

I drafted and brought forward the responsible development framework that became Resolution 2101. I intentionally made it broader than one industry. My position is that St. Helens should evaluate ANY and EVERY large resource intensive development by measurable impacts rather than by whatever label is on the building. The resolution calls for examining water consumption, wastewater generation, electrical demand, transportation, noise, air quality, emergency response capacity, public infrastructure, environmental impacts, financial impacts, and compatibility with the community. It also establishes the policy direction that an applicant should identify and mitigate reasonably anticipated impacts and that the City should examine legally available ways to prevent project specific costs from simply being shifted to existing residents and small businesses. [13]

Community Benefit Agreements as a tool for measurable community value

Resolution 2101 specifically creates a framework for evaluating Community Benefit Agreements when a major project seeks substantial discretionary City benefits. The resolution identifies employment, registered apprenticeships, workforce development, local and regional hiring, infrastructure investment, utility impacts, emergency services, environmental mitigation, beautification, local procurement, public amenities, and community investment as potential areas for measurable commitments. It also contemplates one time or recurring investments that provide durable benefits to the community. Going forward, I want those agreements to contain specific, measurable commitments where legally permissible, not vague promises that disappear after approval. [13]

Family wage jobs, apprenticeships, workforce development, and responsible contractors

Resolution 2101 also directs the City to evaluate family wage construction, operations, and maintenance employment, registered apprenticeship utilization, workforce development, local and regional recruitment, responsible contractor practices, strong worker safety and legal compliance records, and respect for workers' rights. It also identifies Project Labor Agreements, prevailing wage commitments, labor harmony provisions, domestic manufacturing, local supply chain participation, and comparable high road labor standards where legally permissible and appropriately connected to a discretionary City benefit. [13]

Local and regional hiring commitments through future Community Benefit Agreements

Resolution 2101 does not itself establish a fixed hiring quota, and I do not want to overstate it. What it does is expressly authorize the City to evaluate measurable employment, apprenticeship, workforce development, and local and regional hiring commitments in a future Community Benefit Agreement when legally permissible. Going forward, that is exactly what I want the City negotiating. If a major employer asks for substantial discretionary City participation, I want the agreement to identify actual jobs, apprenticeships, workforce partnerships, and measurable local or regional hiring commitments rather than relying on general promises. [13]

Resolution 2101 does not itself impose a fixed hiring quota. What it does is expressly create a framework for measurable employment, apprenticeship, workforce development, and local and regional hiring commitments in a future Community Benefit Agreement when legally permissible. That is the direction I want to pursue. If a major employer asks for substantial discretionary City participation, I want the City asking how many construction jobs, how many permanent jobs, what wages, how many apprentices, what local and regional recruitment will occur, what workforce partnerships will exist, what opportunities local businesses will receive, and what happens if material commitments are not fulfilled. [13]

Performance accountability when major development commitments are not fulfilled

The responsible development resolution also calls for measurable benchmarks, reporting, verification, remedies for material nonperformance, and, where legally permissible, reduction, termination, repayment, or clawback of discretionary City benefits. It also calls for enforceable development agreements, utility agreements, Community Benefit Agreements, and other instruments when appropriate. That is important because economic development should not mean the public provides value first and then simply hopes the promised jobs, infrastructure, or community benefits appear later. [13]

Turning Resolution 2101 into actual land use and development standards

Resolution 2101 is the framework, not the finish line. A resolution does not by itself rewrite land use code. The next step is the legally required planning and code development process, including technical review, Planning Commission work, public participation, legal review, and Council action. I want the City to have clear standards in place before a large applicant is standing at the counter, not after. I also want regional coordination with Columbia County, the Port, utilities, emergency services, state and federal agencies, neighboring jurisdictions, property owners, residents, businesses, and labor because the impacts of major development do not stop at the City boundary. [13]

Regional electrical transmission and load planning

I sought Council approval to participate in Columbia County's Transmission and Load Planning Task Force. Economic development conversations are meaningless if the region does not understand whether the electrical system can support future employers and what upgrades would be required. I want St. Helens at the table before major energy decisions are made around us, not after. [8]

Water storage and reservoir capacity

Additional water storage was identified early in strategic planning as a major infrastructure need. The City has advanced reservoir siting work because adequate water storage is not optional. It affects drinking water reliability, emergency resilience, fire flow, future housing, and economic development. I consider the reservoir and other core utility infrastructure to be fundamental City responsibilities even when they are not politically exciting. [1][29]

Wastewater capacity and aging infrastructure

The City also faces major wastewater and collection system capacity needs. I have consistently connected economic development to infrastructure capacity because we cannot recruit employers or approve major growth while pretending water, sewer, stormwater, transportation, and emergency service capacity are unlimited. My responsible development framework expressly requires those impacts to be evaluated before major projects move forward. [13][30]

Broadband and outside funding

I supported the City backing multiple broadband grant proposals rather than picking only one provider because better broadband supports residents, remote work, education, local business, and economic development. This reflects a broader approach I want the City to take: pursue state, federal, regional, philanthropic, and private partnership dollars aggressively so every improvement is not funded only from local residents. [6]

A safe community and sustainable 24 hour police coverage

The City restored continuous police coverage, but for a period that coverage depended heavily on overtime because staffing had not yet caught up. By January 2026 the projected overtime burden was substantial. As newly hired officers completed the academy and field training process, staffing became more stable and routine coverage could rely less on overtime. My position has been that 24 hour public safety should be maintained through a sustainable staffing model rather than permanent burnout and extraordinary overtime. [12][19]

Public safety is economic development. Businesses consider theft, vandalism, emergency response, employee safety, customer safety, and whether the community is stable. A business is less likely to invest millions of dollars in a place where it cannot protect its people or property. That is another reason I view sustainable police coverage as an economic issue as well as a public safety issue. If the levey fails we will need to cut staff to fill the 1.9 million dollar gap. We will have to try to re-build/re-pay to hire staff in the future as we create more revenue streams. [12][19]

3. How will you support our businesses?

I want businesses dealing with a City that is predictable, responsive, safe, and focused on problem solving. The City cannot guarantee that an individual business succeeds, but it can decide whether its rules are understandable, whether permitting is predictable, whether infrastructure planning is competent, whether businesses can get answers, whether the community is safe, and whether City policy creates unnecessary obstacles.

How I plan to do it

I plan to support existing businesses in three practical ways. One, reduce unnecessary friction by reviewing fees, permitting, contracting practices, and City processes that create cost without a clear public benefit. Two, increase the number of customers walking through local doors by building year round reasons to come to St. Helens, including sports tournaments, RV visitors, river activity, events, and waterfront use. Three, expand the number of residents earning family wage incomes through responsible industrial and commercial development, because stronger household income is also stronger local business revenue. Public safety is part of this strategy too. Businesses notice theft, vandalism, disorder, emergency response, and whether employees and customers feel safe.

Revisiting the rental business license fee structure

I am working to revisit the rental business license fee structure because those costs can ultimately affect tenants as well as property owners. The earlier fee schedule charged $20 annually for residential rentals and $50 annually for commercial rentals. The later schedule moved residential rentals to $120 annually and commercial rentals to $240 annually. That is a 500 percent increase for residential rentals and a 380 percent increase for commercial rentals. The 2024 Budget Committee record shows my opponenet made the motion recommending $240 per unit annually for both residential and commercial rentals, while the final schedule adopted in 2025 was different. I also participated in the budget and Council processes that produced the adopted schedule, so I am not pretending this was one person's decision. My position now is that government should be willing to revisit its own decisions when experience shows a fee may be poorly calibrated or creating downstream impacts on tenants and businesses. [31][32][33]

Building year round economic activity

Tourism matters, and Spirit of Halloweentown is important to the local economy, but I do not want the City's economic identity to depend on one event or one month. I want more reasons for people to come to St. Helens throughout the year, including waterfront activity, recreation, sports tourism, river access, local events, and stronger connections between visitors and local businesses. [18]

The sports complex and RV park concept fits directly into that business strategy. Tournament families spend money on food, fuel, groceries, retail, lodging, entertainment, and services. RV guests do the same, but can also stay for multiple nights or longer seasonal periods. The point is not only the direct City revenue from field reservations or RV spaces. The larger objective is to bring outside dollars into St. Helens and circulate them through local businesses throughout more of the year. Portland's Delta Park is much larger than anything I am proposing, so I do not use it as a revenue forecast for St. Helens. I use it as evidence that concentrated sports facilities can create measurable visitor activity and outside spending. Based on research from Delta Park and other facilities, 5 NCAA fields could generate approx 1.5-2 million a year in reveune. [38][39]

Waterfront development and productive use of major assets

I supported exploring the Romano Properties waterfront opportunity through an exclusive negotiating agreement that allowed due diligence and concept development while preserving the requirement that any actual land transaction or development agreement come back for further public action. I believe the waterfront should produce both public value and economic activity, but an exploration period is not the same thing as giving away public property or preapproving a final project. We will know more about this by Dec 31^st, 2026. [7]

Testing the water taxi through an RFP rather than immediately disposing of it

When the City was considering declaring the water taxi surplus in January 2026, I suggested testing the market first through an RFP to see whether an outside operator could operate, lease, or otherwise make productive use of the vessel. Council rejected simply disposing of the asset at that point and directed development of an RFP. The resulting RFP identified tourism, economic development, community engagement, river access, connectivity, and revenue as objectives. [12][26]

Tourism financial transparency

In June 2025 I used the Clearing Confusion process to publicly document how the tourism contractor repayment worked, including a $200,000 transfer to the City and an additional reimbursement for staff time. I also explained the change in the tourism banking structure so Council and the public could understand where tourism revenue was being held and how reimbursements were being processed. Whatever someone's opinion of a tourism contractor, the financial structure should be understandable and documented. [4]

Contract renewal only after financial information is available

*We need to have a full review of toruisum, it’s events and the contracts.*

I also want economic development to strengthen existing businesses rather than bypass them. Future Community Benefit Agreements can be used, where legally permissible, to address local procurement, workforce development, public amenities, and community investment. More family wage employment means more residents with disposable income. More year round visitors means more customers. Better river access, recreation, broadband, public safety, and infrastructure make the community more attractive to both customers and employers. [13][18][26]

4. What are your pet projects to improve our way of life?

I have several projects and priorities I want to continue pursuing, but I separate ideas that are already underway from concepts that still need a business case. I do not think an elected official should promise a project simply because it sounds good. I want the numbers, legal authority, operating plan, and long term community value understood first.

How I plan to evaluate major projects

For major projects, my approach is feasibility first, design second, financing third, construction last. I want the City to define the public objective, identify all permitting and infrastructure constraints, build a conservative operating model, test outside funding and partnership options, establish measurable success criteria, and then decide whether the project deserves public investment. That is the approach I am applying to the sports complex, RV park, potential ferry connection, reservoir, and other major initiatives.

Complete the public safety facility and manage it to completion responsibly

I made getting the public safety facility moving one of my earliest stated goals as Mayor. The project had already existed for years and was not mine alone, but during my term the Council revisited the site question, held a public forum, returned to the Columbia Boulevard site, continued design and value engineering, and ultimately reached groundbreaking in July 2026. I have repeatedly emphasized that long delays have financial consequences and that once the City has collected money and issued debt for a public safety facility, the project has to be managed to completion responsibly. [1][2][7][22]

Police station value engineering and budget scrutiny

In September 2025 I specifically noted that the police station had undergone substantial value engineering to reduce the estimated project budget from more than $15 million to approximately $12.6 million. The owner representative confirmed a project budget of approximately $12.525 million with contingency. I want major capital projects managed against an actual budget and schedule, not simply discussed in general terms. [7]

Police station project dashboard

I asked for a recurring dashboard on the public safety facility showing schedule and budget progress so Council and the public could see whether the project was on track. Large public projects should be monitored while they are happening, not reconstructed after a cost overrun or delay has already occurred. [8]

Updated police staffing analysis

I entered office already saying the Police Department needed an updated staffing study because the City's older study no longer reflected current call volume, investigative demands, training requirements, and service expectations. I raised the issue again publicly in 2025 and continued pushing for an updated analysis. A staffing plan should be based on actual workload and service expectations rather than assumptions. [7][11][18]

Police funding question referred to voters

The proposed five year police services levy is now before voters, not because I believe voters should be forced into one conclusion, but because the City has to be transparent about the cost of maintaining current police services and the service reductions that follow when temporary funding disappears. The City's published information identifies 24 hour patrol, child exploitation and ICAC work, investigations, and other police operations as part of the funding question. Voters should have clear facts and make that decision themselves. My opponenet states that no staff will lose their jobs and that the PD can run on the budget approved by the budget committee. That is not feisable and he has not provided a plan. The PD is about 89% staff. The Patrol are also covered by a union. My opponent has stated he wants to disband the union. This is not feisable and will result in lawsuits ULPS and arbratration. He is not being truthful with voters.[19]

School Resource Officer and child safety

The City and School District have worked on the School Resource Officer concept, and the police funding discussion has included maintaining a detective position capable of supporting child exploitation and Internet Crimes Against Children investigations while also providing School Resource Officer coverage when available. I consider child safety and the ability to investigate serious crimes against children a core public safety responsibility. [1][19]

Sports complex and RV park concept on Old Portland Road

The Ross Road concept was the first version I explored because combining School District and City property could have created a larger recreation site. When the future of the School District parcel created uncertainty, I did not want the entire idea to die. I began evaluating City owned property in the Kaster Road and Old Portland Road area of the St. Helens Industrial Business Park, including the property behind the FARA building, because the City already controls the land and the site may offer an opportunity to create recurring revenue from an asset we already own. The council president and I ahve been working on this and there are concepts avialable and are being reviewed.[36][37]

What the Old Portland Road concept actually includes

The conceptual plan developed for the Kaster Road and Old Portland Road site shows three proposed 300 foot diamond fields, open space and passive recreation, trails, a playground, concessions, restrooms, stormwater facilities, parking, and an RV park. My concept has also included exploring whether the FARA building can support some of the amenities needed for the RV component rather than duplicating facilities unnecessarily. Separately, I want to evaluate whether the two existing fields at McCormick Park can be reconfigured or expanded so the City could have a five field tournament inventory across its park system. The exact sport configuration and field dimensions still require design confirmation. [36][37]

Why the number of fields matters

A tournament facility has to be able to run multiple games at the same time. One or two fields can support local play, but a larger field inventory is what begins to make regional tournament scheduling practical. My objective is to determine whether three new fields on Old Portland Road, combined with two upgraded fields at McCormick Park if feasible, could create enough capacity for meaningful weekend tournaments while still serving local recreation. I have looked at Delta Park as a scale comparison, not as a promise of what St. Helens would produce. Portland Parks lists seven softball fields and nine soccer fields at the Owens Sports Complex. A 2017 ECONorthwest analysis using 2015 activity estimated 239,373 total sports complex visits, about $1.1 million in net visitor spending, about $759,870 in operations spending, and 37 jobs with $2.8 million in economic output. The same study modeled improvements increasing visits to 364,769, net visitor spending to $1.6 million, and economic output to $4.2 million. St. Helens is a much smaller market and a five field concept would not be Delta Park. The point is that sports facilities can create a measurable visitor economy when there is enough capacity to attract events. [38][39]

The RV park is intended to create recurring revenue, not simply another amenity

The early RV park model used approximately 70 spaces. To test whether the concept was even worth pursuing, I ran a simple gross revenue scenario using seasonal monthly rates of $950 from November through April and $1,500 from May through October. At full occupancy, that model produces approximately $1,029,000 in gross annual site revenue. At 80 percent occupancy, approximately $823,200. At 60 percent occupancy, approximately $617,400. Those are not profit projections and they are not promises. They are gross screening numbers before staffing, utilities, maintenance, insurance, reservation systems, capital costs, debt service, taxes, repairs, and other operating expenses. The purpose of the exercise is to determine whether a 70 space facility has enough potential revenue to justify a professional feasibility and business plan before the City commits major money.

How I plan to move the sports complex and RV park from an idea to a real decision

1. Complete a real market and financial feasibility study. I want demand, achievable rates, tournament demand, occupancy, operating expenses, capital costs, maintenance, staffing, insurance, replacement reserves, and realistic net revenue tested before the City makes a major commitment.

2. Resolve the land use and environmental constraints before final design. Planning has already identified that an RV park would require a Conditional Use Permit in the Light Industrial zone and that portions of the concept interact with wetlands, riparian protections, Milton Creek, tree requirements, and other sensitive land standards. My direction would be to redesign around avoidable impacts rather than pretend those constraints do not exist. [37]

3. Solve access and transportation correctly. City Engineering has already identified that direct RV access from Old Portland Road would create problems near the intersection and recommends Kaster Road access instead. Engineering also identified the potential need for the planned Kaster Road and Old Portland Road roundabout, emergency access, pedestrian safety, transit accommodation, and ADA parking. Those are design requirements to price and solve, not reasons to stop asking whether the project can work. [36]

4. Price the infrastructure honestly. Engineering identified water main condition, sewer extensions, stormwater treatment and detention, restrooms, a separate RV dump station, large vehicle turning movements, and other utility needs. Those costs need to be in the pro forma from the beginning so the public is not shown an artificially cheap concept. [36]

5. Build the tournament inventory strategically. Before constructing everything at once, I want to evaluate the least expensive improvements that increase usable field capacity, including the existing McCormick Park fields, then determine what three new Old Portland Road fields add to tournament capability and revenue. It would also be benifical to partner with the St. Helens Boosters.

6. Use outside money and partnerships before relying on the Commnuity Developement Fund. I want grants, sponsorships, naming rights, tournament partnerships, concession and vendor arrangements, and a possible private operating partner or competitive RFP evaluated. If a private operator can assume operating or capital risk while the City retains appropriate control and public benefit, that deserves analysis.

7. Build the revenue model around more than one source. Potential direct revenue includes field reservations, tournament fees, RV site fees, concessions, food vendor fees, sponsorships, naming rights, clinics, camps, and special events. The indirect economic benefit is the outside spending at local restaurants, fuel stations, grocery stores, lodging, retail, recreation businesses, and other services.

8. Establish measurable go or no go criteria. Before construction, Council and the public should know what occupancy, field utilization, event count, operating margin, outside funding, and capital cost assumptions have to be met. If the project cannot meet an acceptable threshold, I would rather know that from the analysis than after the City spends the money.

The City has already started identifying the real constraints

This is not just a drawing on a napkin. Public Works and Planning have already reviewed the concept and identified specific issues that would have to be solved, including wetlands, zoning, access, water and sewer extensions, stormwater, parking, ADA access, transit, large vehicle circulation, a dump station, tree requirements, potential power transmission corridors, and the possible Kaster Road and Old Portland Road roundabout. I view that feedback as exactly what should happen at the concept stage. The next question is not whether constraints exist. Every serious project has constraints. The next question is what they cost, which can be designed around, which require permits, which create unacceptable risk, and whether the final business case still works after those issues are honestly priced. [36][37]

Potential Columbia River connection to Washington

I also want to determine whether a future ferry or river transportation connection to Washington has a defensible business case. That does not mean promising taxpayers a ferry before the analysis exists. It means studying ridership, landing locations, Washington partners, Coast Guard requirements, operator structure, insurance, capital costs, operating costs, grants, private participation, tourism, commuter demand, and realistic revenue. If it does not pencil out, we should know that before spending major public money. If it does, the Columbia River is an economic and transportation asset we should not ignore. Many citizens have offered opinions in support of this concept. Many have cited more potential job opportunites and livablity improvements. [1][26]

Parks, trails, and signage follow through

After discussions with the Parks and Trails Commission, I brought park and trail signage back to Council so the discussion could move into actual implementation. The work included the downtown walking trail, connections between parks, signage locations, installation, and integration with waterfront interpretive signage. I have also supported giving volunteer commissions a stronger voice in the projects that fall within their mission. [10][9]

Gable Road and Highway 30 safety

I raised the safety problem at Gable Road and Highway 30 publicly and asked that the City pursue what it could within its authority. Transportation safety, jurisdiction, signalization, pedestrian access, and road ownership all affect whether the City can act. I have supported the City's efforts to take a more direct role where jurisdiction makes that possible. [6][28]

New water storage and reservoir planning

Wastewater capacity and aging infrastructure

Youth Council and youth participation

Reviving youth participation was identified during strategic planning, and I have continued advocating for a Youth Council or similar youth representation. Young people are going to inherit the infrastructure, debt, development choices, parks, public safety system, and economy we create now. I want them exposed to local government before adulthood and given a meaningful way to participate. I am bummed about this one. This was councilor Sundeens goal and we did not accomplish it. Perhaps if we create4 one, he may volenteer in the future. [1][11]

If I Were Mayor student outreach

In April 2025 I highlighted the If I Were Mayor student contest, recognized the participating students at a Council meeting, and stated that I wanted substantially more promotion the following year, including visiting schools to encourage more participation. Civic engagement should not begin only when someone is old enough to be angry about a tax bill. It should begin with young people understanding how local government works. [2]

Public drug education and prevention

At my first January 2025 work session I asked about bringing back a Police Department presentation at the library on the dangers of drugs because a prior version had been well received. Public safety is not only enforcement after something goes wrong. Education and prevention matter too, particularly in a community dealing with fentanyl, overdose, child safety, and behavioral health issues. They just completed one a couple weeks ago. [1]

Amani Center and community partner support

During the difficult budget process, when the City could not immediately provide the Amani Center the requested financial support, I asked that the request stay on the Council's parking lot for reconsideration rather than simply disappearing. Financial reality matters, but so does maintaining partnerships with organizations that provide essential services to children and families. [6]

I also want to keep looking for ways to turn underused public assets into community and economic value. That is the common thread behind the sports complex concept, waterfront opportunities, the water taxi RFP, and the possible future river connection. I am not promising that every concept will pencil out. I am promising that I will investigate them seriously and will not spend substantial public money without a defensible case for doing so. [8][12][26]

5. What do you value most about living here?

I value that St. Helens is still a community, not simply a collection of houses. My family's roots here go back generations. I want a place where children can grow up safely, working families can build a life, businesses can succeed, people know their neighbors, public services function, and our river and natural resources remain part of our identity. [18]

I do not believe we should have to choose between economic opportunity and quality of life. Responsible growth should mean both. I want family wage jobs, a broader tax base, and new investment. I also want clean water, functioning infrastructure, safe neighborhoods, reliable public safety, environmental stewardship, parks, recreation, access to the river, and a City government that people can actually reach and question. That balance is the reason I wrote Resolution 2101 broadly around measurable impacts rather than around one specific industry. [13]

I also value the fact that citizens here are willing to show up and challenge government. I do not always agree with every criticism, but I believe people should be able to bring research, questions, and concerns directly to Council and receive more than silence in return. That is why citizen forums, extended presentations, public questions, joint commission meetings, and direct communication have mattered to me. [7][11][21]

6. How will St. Helens be better because you were our Mayor?

The fairest way to answer that is not with a slogan. Look at what I said I was going to do, then compare it with the public record. My campaign priorities included transparency, accountability, economic development, infrastructure, fiscal responsibility, public safety, and civic engagement. Some of that work is complete. Some is underway. Some still requires another Council vote, a legal process, funding, or a feasibility analysis. [18]

Voters now have a direct voice before new non utility municipal service fees can be placed on utility bills

I introduced the concept and wrote the policy proposal that became Ordinance 3316. The Council adopted it on September 3, 2025. It requires majority voter approval at a citywide election before the City can establish, increase, or change the purpose of a municipal service fee collected through utility bills when the fee is unrelated to actual utility services. It also requires any proposal to state the maximum amount, the specific purpose, and an expiration date unless voters reauthorize it. The City may reduce or repeal the fee without another election. This was not symbolic. When the later General Services Fee was considered, the ordinance required that proposal to be referred to the voters rather than simply imposed by Council. [5][16]

The side by side ordinance moved from a citizen request to adopted City law

I personally developed and brought forward the side by side ordinance after hearing repeatedly from residents who wanted the City to consider allowing street legal Class IV ATVs on designated City streets. I researched what other communities were doing and worked through questions involving licensing, insurance, safety equipment, Highway 30 crossings, operator qualifications, and law enforcement concerns. The proposal went through City administration, legal review, and Police Department review. It ultimately became Ordinance 3320, adopted February 18, 2026. I did not bring it forward because I personally needed it. I brought it forward because residents had asked their local government to consider something that could be regulated with reasonable safety requirements. Note this was not my favorite project, but I did uphold a commitment to citizens I made during my first campaign.[10][17]

The City now has an adopted responsible development framework

I drafted and brought forward the responsible development framework that became Resolution 2101. I intentionally made it broader than one industry. My position is that St. Helens should evaluate any large resource intensive development by measurable impacts rather than by whatever label is on the building. The resolution calls for examining water consumption, wastewater generation, electrical demand, transportation, noise, air quality, emergency response capacity, public infrastructure, environmental impacts, financial impacts, and compatibility with the community. It also establishes the policy direction that an applicant should identify and mitigate reasonably anticipated impacts and that the City should examine legally available ways to prevent project specific costs from simply being shifted to existing residents and small businesses. [13]

The public safety facility moved into construction during my term

Industrial redevelopment moved forward through the Arcadia transaction

I helped advance the Arcadia transaction during my term, while recognizing that the project involved years of work by the City, prior Councils, staff, the buyer, attorneys, regulators, and other partners. The public record identified the expected benefits as industrial redevelopment, approximately 70 jobs, a significant annual payroll, property returning to the tax rolls, and additional City revenue. That is the kind of redevelopment I want St. Helens pursuing: productive use of industrial land, family wage employment, and a stronger tax base. [12][25]

Citizens were given an extended forum to present the lagoon research directly to Council

Citizens Art Leskowich and Steve Topaz had spent substantial time researching the secondary lagoon and wanted more than the normal three minute visitor comment period to present what they had found. I supported creating a dedicated public forum where citizens could present their research at length, uninterrupted, and answer questions. The forum was held October 1, 2025. I believe citizen engagement means creating meaningful opportunities for people to present complicated information, even when they disagree with City staff or elected officials. [7]

Public forums continued instead of being treated as a one time event

I supported continuing public forums into 2026 so residents could hear longer explanations, ask questions, and receive factual information on difficult issues. That philosophy carried into the 2026 State of the City meeting, which included City project updates, department information, a virtual attendance option, and a public question period. [11][21]

Council interaction with boards and commissions increased

When the frequency of joint meetings with volunteer boards and commissions was discussed, I did not support reducing meaningful interaction to only once a year. Council ultimately moved toward twice yearly joint meetings beginning in 2026. Planning, Parks and Trails, Library, and other volunteer bodies should have an opportunity to communicate directly with the elected Council instead of having every idea filtered exclusively through staff. [10]

Factual questions raised in meetings gained a formal follow up process

One of my goals coming into office was to stop treating three minutes of public testimony as though it disappeared into a wall. The Council created a recurring work session section called Clearing Confusion and Setting the Facts Straight so factual claims raised at a meeting could be researched and answered in the public record. The Council adopted the item in February 2025 with the stated purpose of allowing staff time to verify information before responding. I have used that process repeatedly to respond to questions involving contracts, tourism money, public records, meeting procedures, and other City issues. [1][4][12]

Council priorities were pushed toward a measurable roadmap

During the February 2025 strategic planning work I pushed for a simplified Council roadmap rather than relying only on a large strategic plan that was difficult to use as a tracking tool. I specifically suggested adding percentage complete and budget information. The concept was to show the responsible party, category, priority, action required, progress, status, and other information so Council and residents could see whether priority projects were actually moving. [1]

The RFP and procurement process became a policy issue rather than just a contract by contract question

Contractor accountability is being developed into a broader policy proposal

I am also still working. I want responsible development principles converted into actual code. I want stronger contractor and procurement accountability. I want the police station completed. I want sustainable public safety. I want the reservoir and wastewater work advanced. I want a real answer on whether a sports complex makes financial sense. I want a real answer on whether a Washington river connection is viable. I want more recurring revenue, family wage jobs, and a larger tax base. I want Community Benefit Agreements used to produce measurable value when a major project seeks substantial discretionary City benefits. And I want citizens to continue having direct access to the people they elected. [13][19][26][29][30]

How I expect people to measure the next phase

Do not measure me by whether every idea becomes a project. Measure me by whether I do the work necessary to reach a defensible decision. Did responsible development principles move into actual code? Did the contractor and RFP framework become a stronger City process? Did the public safety facility stay on schedule and budget? Did the City identify a sustainable public safety funding plan? Did we advance the reservoir and wastewater projects? Did the sports complex and RV park receive a real feasibility and business analysis with the Old Portland Road constraints priced honestly? Did we identify new recurring revenue? Did major development agreements contain measurable community value where legally permissible? Did residents continue to receive direct answers and meaningful opportunities to participate? Those are outcomes that can be checked against the public record.

If someone wants to know whether I did what I said I would do, go back and look at what I said I was going to do before I became Mayor, then look at the Council record. I am still working on parts of that agenda and I am not claiming everything is finished. But I am comfortable being measured by what I actually brought forward, what became policy, what moved forward, and what remains on my stated work list. [18][5][13][22]

Catch all: Other things I have authored, suggested, brought forward, or worked on

The six questions above cover the major policy areas, but they do not capture everything I have brought to the table. These are additional examples from the public record that show how I have approached the job.

Creating a public Proactive section for future Council initiatives

I supported creating a Proactive section on Council agendas so Councilors could publicly identify future policy issues and goals rather than allowing everything to happen only in reaction to the next emergency or staff agenda item. The purpose was to make future work visible and give the public a better idea of what individual Council members wanted to pursue. [6]

Strategic planning focused on measurable priorities

Within the first weeks of the new Council, we held strategic planning sessions focused on public safety, infrastructure, fiscal sustainability, economic development, citizen engagement, transportation, tourism, local business support, emergency preparedness, youth programs, waterfront development, and other long term priorities. I pushed for a smaller number of trackable priorities rather than a strategic plan that became too broad to measure effectively. [1]

Continuity of operations and emergency preparedness

During strategic planning, continuity of operations and emergency preparedness were identified as priorities and I volunteered to research continuity planning. A City needs to know how it will maintain essential functions during a major emergency, loss of key staff, infrastructure failure, cyber incident, natural disaster, or other disruption. The unexpected loss of City Administrator John Walsh in 2026 reinforced why continuity planning and clear chains of authority matter. [1][20]

Meeting schedule changes intended to improve access and give Council more time to research

At the January 15, 2025 work session I proposed restructuring the meeting schedule so work sessions and regular sessions could be spaced in a way that gave Council time to research and validate information before final decisions. I also suggested later meeting times because the early afternoon schedule made participation difficult for working residents. Council ultimately changed work sessions to a 3:00 p.m. start and continued discussing meeting structure and public access. [1]

Standardized department reporting

Early in 2025 I pushed for more useful and consistent department reports. The Council and staff developed condensed templates so Council could receive information on operations, grants, funding opportunities, projects, challenges, staffing, and accomplishments rather than seeing a department only when an item required a vote. When the new format was implemented, I asked staff for feedback about whether it was working and supported placing reports earlier on the agenda so employees did not have to sit through an entire meeting unnecessarily. [3][2]

Special session to finish the Council roadmap and governing policy

In March 2025 I brought forward a special session specifically to finish the Council roadmap and governing policy work. Those governance documents matter because they define how the Council tracks priorities, how elected officials interact with administration, and how responsibilities are divided. I wanted those expectations written down rather than left to personalities or informal practice. [3]

Chronic nuisance premises policy research

At my first January 2025 work session I brought forward research on chronic nuisance premises ordinances used by other cities. The issue was the extraordinary number of repeat law enforcement calls being generated at particular properties and the lack of an effective tool to address chronic criminal nuisance behavior without discouraging legitimate victims, including domestic violence victims, from calling police. The public discussion included Beaverton and Corvallis models, landlord notification, progressive enforcement, judicial discretion, code enforcement, and the need to carefully protect people who legitimately need police assistance. [1]

Hiring policy and human resources process review

In June 2025 I told Council I wanted to begin working on hiring policies and requested background information about existing practices. Later in the year I continued asking for progress on HR assistance and department head evaluations. The City moved toward outside HR support and clearer evaluation processes. I believe government should have defined, repeatable hiring and evaluation systems rather than reinventing the process every time a vacancy or performance issue occurs. [4][12]

Public records procedure and fee policy

I brought forward the need for clearer public records procedures, including more understandable standards for fee reductions, legal review costs, and implementation. Public records law is controlled substantially by Oregon law, but the City can still make its internal process clearer, more predictable, and easier for the public and staff to navigate. I supported updating the City's forms and procedures so people can understand what is expected and how fees are determined. [9]

Earlier Council notification of regulatory and compliance issues

When I learned late in the process about an upcoming DEQ matter involving alleged violations, I specifically asked staff to notify Council about matters like that earlier in the future. I also asked for updates on the nuisance fee ordinance and questioned whether the City was applying its own rules consistently with the standards imposed on private development. Elected officials cannot provide meaningful oversight if significant regulatory issues reach them only after they are already well underway. [10]

Clearer department head evaluations and management systems

I supported establishing defined evaluation processes for the City Administrator and department directors rather than leaving evaluation practices informal. I also supported recognizing relevant experience as an alternative to formal education where appropriate in management job qualifications. A professional organization should have clear expectations, documented evaluations, and realistic qualification standards. [12][11]

Detailed review of job descriptions and organizational changes

During the April 2025 review of the Public Works Supervisor job description, I asked detailed questions about reporting structure, FLSA classification, licensure, physical requirements, and other provisions and offered written corrections and suggestions. That may sound administrative, but job descriptions become the foundation for hiring, accountability, compensation, and discipline. I do not believe elected officials should approve organizational changes without understanding what they actually say. [2]

City Administrator transition and structured recruitment

The unexpected loss of City Administrator John Walsh in June 2026 required the City to stabilize operations immediately and then conduct a full administrator recruitment. The City ultimately reported 82 applications, multiple interview rounds, public meet and greets, candidate presentations, Council deliberation, and an open session decision. I supported a structured process that gave both professional evaluators and the public an opportunity to see the finalists before the Council made its decision. [20][35]

Community recognition and continuity during the Walsh tragedy

During the emergency following John Walsh's disappearance, I issued a proclamation lowering flags in his honor and the City established a public tribute location so the community could grieve and support his family. Essential services also had to continue while staff were dealing with a traumatic event. That period was a stark reminder that leadership includes continuity, communication, and supporting employees and residents through events no strategic plan can fully anticipate. [20]

My accessibility and accountability to residents

I spend countless hours every week reading reports, reviewing contracts, researching policy, meeting with residents, talking with businesses and partner agencies, writing proposed policy, answering questions, and trying to move projects forward. People may not always like my tone. They may disagree with my answer or my vote. That is part of public office. But I am present and accessible, including to people who strongly disagree with me. When someone asks me a question, they are hearing from me. I do not rely on other people to speak for me. I would rather have a difficult conversation directly than avoid it. [18]

This is not the entire record, and I can expand on it further when I have more time. But it is a detailed factual starting point that people can compare against the public record.

I am not asking anyone to accept any of this simply because I said it. The meeting minutes, adopted ordinances and resolutions, City financial information, project records, and public documents are there so residents can review them and make their own judgment.

Public Sources and Citations

[1] City of St. Helens, Council minutes covering January 15, February 18, and February 19, 2025
https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/sthelensor-meet-2512cfc0cbb84efdab7b8f1f7b943213/ITEM-Attachment-001-4bf69739b1504d53825e280a7f9d2b75.pdf

[2] City of St. Helens, Council minutes covering April 2, 2025
https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/sthelensor-meet-7c64932000ec40898c9990f8e2da1458/ITEM-Attachment-001-b47d963bff26438a9741efe91b99c72a.pdf

[3] City of St. Helens, Council Work Session minutes, March 5, 2025
https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/sthelensor-meet-1a23d11aff7b4d6294fcb6d7ea9f46b4/ITEM-Attachment-001-e8da674221b8427e8c8b69d3890a2f89.pdf

[4] City of St. Helens, Council minutes covering June 4, 2025
https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/sthelensor-meet-c1e3a5661a974846a246290f54baaf02/ITEM-Attachment-001-aa21b63a8e8d41a98eceffdd9563c445.pdf

[5] City of St. Helens, Ordinance 3316 and 2025 municipal service fee records
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/1536/Ordinances

[6] City of St. Helens, Council minutes, May 2025
https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/sthelensor-meet-1adbb99607e64a3bb1c72c4bed70f0f4/ITEM-Attachment-001-7c00d38193d24ec38fcc862e8fcd4624.pdf

[7] City of St. Helens, Council minutes covering September 17 and October 1, 2025
https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/sthelensor-meet-9955300c64704b0a9bbc0bc9d25fa368/ITEM-Attachment-001-654dd86601914f37800d11e78d7479c4.pdf

[8] City of St. Helens, Council minutes, October 15, 2025
https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/sthelensor-meet-6164511e578543b492cb7b7416daed03/ITEM-Attachment-001-6ad5e11fa80d41e4aa0204d1ce29f335.pdf

[9] City of St. Helens, Council minutes, November 5, 2025
https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/sthelensor-meet-2659a5cd05334f718517fdf82af91e56/ITEM-Attachment-001-9dea1d13195741178718b835e126bea9.pdf

[10] City of St. Helens, Council minutes, December 3, 2025
https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/sthelensor-meet-0f212ab93d71438e8ea329f02873ee3e/ITEM-Attachment-001-1588cd14edd74b31ac290b45560f2252.pdf

[11] City of St. Helens, Council minutes, December 17, 2025
https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/sthelensor-meet-9e188c506cb64940929dc257781e3114/ITEM-Attachment-001-2ed09e711da743c390534fc196eb0c4f.pdf

[12] City of St. Helens, Council Work Session minutes, January 7, 2026
https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/sthelensor-meet-45b73ed200a849eeb25f52c605960280/ITEM-Attachment-001-798f0fb2df3643b699ee5b0ec635061a.pdf

[13] City of St. Helens, Resolution 2101, Responsible Development, September 16, 2026, and meeting packet
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/1535/Resolutions

[14] City of St. Helens, General Fund Information and 2025 General Fund flyer
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/1549/General-Fund-Information

[15] City of St. Helens, Municipal Elections and City ballot information
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/1212/Municipal-Elections

[16] City of St. Helens, Resolution 2067 referring the proposed General Services Fee to voters, February 25, 2026
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/ordinance/58808/res_no_2067_-_refer_to_voters_at_051926_election_ballot_measure_to_adopt_general_services_fee_24_adopted_022526.pdf

[17] City of St. Helens, February 18, 2026 Council Regular Session, Ordinance 3320
https://meetings.municode.com/adaHtmlDocument/index?cc=STHELENSOR&ip=True&me=f11b64b2a0e8471e87e64fa1668ddb52

[18] Jennifer Massey campaign website, original stated priorities and public commitments
https://www.jennifermasseyformayor.com/

[19] City of St. Helens, 2026 Police Services Levy information
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/m/newsflash/home/detail/23

[20] City of St. Helens News Flash, June 2026 City Administrator emergency, recovery, and Mayoral proclamation
https://sthelensoregon.gov/m/newsflash?cat=1

[21] City of St. Helens, State of the City meeting, April 11, 2026
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/administration/page/st-helens-state-city-meeting-april-11-2026

[22] Jennifer Massey for Mayor, public link to St. Helens police station construction coverage
https://www.jennifermasseyformayor.com/in-the-news.html

[23] City of St. Helens, Council Work Session packet, September 16, 2026, Resolution 2101 staff report and police quarterly report
City Council public meeting packet, September 16, 2026

[24] City of St. Helens, September 16, 2026 Council Work Session packet, Columbia County wellness grant for patrol AEDs
City Council public meeting packet, September 16, 2026

[25] City of St. Helens, Arcadia transaction and economic development records
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/1535/Resolutions

[26] City of St. Helens, Water Taxi Services RFP, 2026
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/administration/page/58927/water_taxi_services_rfp_-_final.pdf

[27] City of St. Helens, Public Safety Facility FAQ
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/1492/Frequently-Asked-Questions

[28] City of St. Helens, Resolutions, road jurisdiction records
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/1535/Resolutions

[29] City of St. Helens, Reservoir Project
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/1229/Reservoir-Project

[30] City of St. Helens, wastewater capacity improvements and bid information
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/bids.aspx?bidID=2

[31] City of St. Helens, older Universal Fee Schedule showing prior rental business license rates
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/ordinance/56514/res_no_1937_-_update_universal_fee_schedule_w_new_library_fees_adopted_100621.pdf

[32] City of St. Helens, 2025 Universal Fee Schedule showing current rental business license rates
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/administration/page/12921/universal_fee_schedule_-_effective_101525_-_adopted_by_resolution_no._2062.pdf

[33] City of St. Helens, Budget Committee records, May 2, 2024, rental business license fee discussion
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/1223/Budget-Committee

[34] Sarah Zuber Memorial Scholarship, public support page regarding mayoral stipend donation
https://www.sarahzubermemorial.org/support

[35] City of St. Helens News Flash, City Administrator finalist process, September 2026
https://www.sthelensoregon.gov/m/newsflash?cat=1

[36] City of St. Helens Engineering Department, Concept Sports Complex Plan for the St. Helens Industrial Business Park, 2026 memorandum

[37] City of St. Helens Planning Department, Concept Sports Complex at the St. Helens Industrial Business Park, 2026 memorandum

[38] Portland Parks & Recreation, Delta Park, Owens Sports Complex
https://www.portland.gov/parks/delta-park-owens-sports-complex

[39] ECONorthwest for Portland Parks & Recreation, The Impact of Portland's Delta Park: An Economic Analysis Before and After Proposed Facility Improvements, May 2017
https://www.portland.gov/parks/documents/delta-park-economic-analysis-study/download

COUNTING DOWN TO

Election Day

On November 3, 2026, vote for Jennifer Massey
for Mayor of City of St. Helens.

COUNTING DOWN TO

Election Day

On November 3, 2026, vote for Jennifer Massey for Mayor of City of St. Helens.

On November 3, 2026, vote for Jennifer Massey
for Mayor of City of St. Helens.