This Ordinance is intended to ensure that all city employees can perform their job responsibilities on behalf of the City without fear of the financial risk associated with improper and retaliatory federal prosecutions or other legal actions.
Official proposal and impact statementEmergency ordinance2026-078
Should Portland amend Office of the City Attorney Code to authorize payment of costs for City employees facing certain criminal or civil proceedings (amend Code Section…
This Ordinance is intended to ensure that all city employees can perform their job responsibilities on behalf of the City without fear of the financial risk associated with improper and retaliatory federal prosecutions or other legal actions.
Official impact statementSee the official legal title
*Amend Office of the City Attorney Code to authorize payment of costs for City employees facing certain criminal or civil proceedings (amend Code Section 3.10.020)
Next appearanceFinal action is posted; watch for implementation updates.
Follow this matterWhat this proposal would actually do.
Plain-language orientation first. Every substantive statement below links to its official basis.
The reviewed sources do not clearly identify every existing policy, service, contract, or obligation that would remain unchanged.
Official matter recordThis proposal concerns public safety and requires action through Portland’s public legislative process.
Official matter classification and recordThis Resolution is expected to have minimal (if any) community impacts or involvement.
Official community impact statementWhat the record establishes and what it does not.
Votes show choices. They do not, by themselves, prove why a member made that choice.
Final Council action
Passed · 11–0
Read the exact motion or vote question
Final action on 2026-078: *Amend Office of the City Attorney Code to authorize payment of costs for City employees facing certain criminal or civil proceedings (amend Code Section 3.10.020)
Rationale review not yet published
We will not turn the roll call into invented arguments.
The vote above establishes who supported or opposed that exact motion. A source-validated account of the competing reasons will appear only after human review of the meeting transcript and documents.
Short-term financial and budgetary impacts are expected to be minimal to modest. The City will need to defend or provide for the defense of any legal proceedings, civil or criminal, brought by the federal government for the apparent purpose to intimidate or retaliate against a City employee for action taken as part of the employee's official duties and responsibilities within the course and scope of their employment with the City. The City Council by resolution, or through written approval by the Mayor or City Administrator is required before the City takes action.
Official financial impact statement- The source-linked record has not yet received a human review of competing arguments. A yes or no vote alone does not establish a Councilor’s rationale.
- What implementation evidence will show whether the intended result occurred?
Can residents still participate?
Official testimony on this decision has closed. Residents can still contact their district Councilors about implementation and follow-up.
Official Council agendaInspect the complete research record.
Official text, source files, exact motions, roll calls, provenance, and the technical completeness check remain available without crowding the explanation above.
Official documents2 sources
Final legal actionEmergency ordinance 192157
The operative official record after Council action.
Open at Portland.govRead the full official text
The City of Portland ordains.Section 1. The Council finds:Oregon has been a Sanctuary State since 1987, and in 2021, the Oregon State Legislature passed the Sanctuary Promise Act (HB3265) to strengthen Sanctuary Laws, community safety, and support immigrant and refugee communities by prioritizing human rights for all Oregonians.On March 22, 2017, City Council adopted Resolution 37277: Declare the City of Portland a Welcoming City, Sanctuary City, and an Inclusive City for all.On October 15, 2025, City Council adopted Resolution 37719: Denounce any attempts to deploy the United States Armed Forces, the National Guard, or militarized Federal Immigration Enforcement in Portland and establish the Protect Portland Initiative.On October 15, 2025, City Council adopted Ordinance 192115: Add Code to enact Sanctuary City status protections (add Code Chapter 23.20).The federal government has threatened or begun criminal investigations and prosecutions against state and local government officials seemingly because of the positions taken by those government officials related to federal immigration enforcement and the opposition to using local resources in connection with such enforcement efforts.Specifically, the federal government has subpoenaed state and local officials in Minnesota in connection with an obstruction investigation.ORS 244.040 expressly excludes both official compensation package and the reimbursement of expenses from restrictions on the prohibition of use of an official position or office for personal gain.OAR 199-008-0005 defines official compensation package to include "the direct payment of a public official's expenses by the public body, in accordance with the public body's policies."The City of Portland is committed to ensuring that elected officials and all City employees can perform their job responsibilities on behalf of the City without fear of the financial risk associated with improper and retaliatory federal prosecutions or other legal actions.NOW, THEREFORE, the Council directs:Amend City Code Section 3.10.020 as shown in Exhibit A.The City Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to adopt a City policy providing the specific circumstances and requirements for the representation of employees in connection with legal proceedings initiated by the federal government consistent with City code.Section 2. The Council declares an emergency exists because of the urgent need to have protections in place due to the posture of the federal government; therefore, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage by the Council.
Meetings, motions, amendments, and votes3 meetings · 3 votes
Passed as amendedAgenda item 8
RescheduledAgenda item 18
Referred to City CouncilAgenda item 3
Recorded amendments
Motion to amend the Ordinance to add an emergency clause due to the urgent need to have protections in place due to the posture of the federal government: Moved by Koyama Lane and seconded by Ryan. (Aye (11): Kanal, Pirtle-Guiney, Ryan, Koyama Lane, Morillo, Clark, Green, Zimmerman, Avalos, Smith, Dunphy; Absent (1): Novick)
Read all 2 exact motions
Motion to amend the Ordinance to add an emergency clause due to the urgent need to have protections in place due to the posture of the federal government: Moved by Koyama Lane and seconded by Ryan. (Aye (11): Kanal, Pirtle-Guiney, Ryan, Koyama Lane, Morillo, Clark, Green, Zimmerman, Avalos, Smith, Dunphy; Absent (1): Novick)
Motion to refer the Ordinance, Document Number 2026-078, to City Council with the recommendation it be passed: Moved by Pirtle-Guiney and seconded by Green. (Aye (4): Avalos, Pirtle-Guiney, Green, Zimmerman; Absent (1): Novick)
Meeting-level motion or recommendation · Apr 2, 202611 yes · 1 absent
Motion to amend the Ordinance to add an emergency clause due to the urgent need to have protections in place due to the posture of the federal government: Moved by Koyama Lane and seconded by Ryan. (Aye (11): Kanal, Pirtle-Guiney, Ryan, Koyama Lane, Morillo, Clark, Green, Zimmerman, Avalos, Smith, Dunphy; Absent (1): Novick)
Final Council action · Apr 2, 202611 yes · 0 no · 1 absent
Final action on 2026-078: *Amend Office of the City Attorney Code to authorize payment of costs for City employees facing certain criminal or civil proceedings (amend Code Section 3.10.020)
Meeting-level motion or recommendation · Feb 23, 20264 yes · 1 absent
Motion to refer the Ordinance, Document Number 2026-078, to City Council with the recommendation it be passed: Moved by Pirtle-Guiney and seconded by Green. (Aye (4): Avalos, Pirtle-Guiney, Green, Zimmerman; Absent (1): Novick)
Data quality, timeline, and provenanceRules v2
Why technical findings are hidden above
Unreviewed keyword matches and machine-extracted fragments are not presented as authoritative findings. Only 0 human-reviewed findings are available for this matter.
Technical information-completeness check · Ready With Caveats
This checks whether decision-relevant categories appear in the published packet. It does not recommend approval or opposition.
Decision definition
CompleteThe official title and operative text identify the requested action.
Official legal text
CompleteOfficial text was found. This check does not certify that every referenced exhibit is complete.
Financial impact
CompleteThe official impact statement includes financial information.
Funding source
CompleteThe impact statement identifies funding information without an explicit unresolved-source qualifier.
Supporting documents
Complete1 linked supporting document found; presence alone does not verify their internal completeness.
Referenced exhibit integrity
UnknownThe text references exhibits. This guide has not yet automatically verified that each referenced exhibit is present, populated, and internally consistent.
Counterparty acceptance
Not ApplicableThe reviewed action is not expressly identified as a non-binding agreement.
Implementation
CompleteA direction, reporting requirement, or deadline appears in the official text.
Document stability
UnknownStability requires at least two observed snapshots; the system will update this after another ingestion.
- First discovered
- Aug 13, 2026, 1:06 PM PDT
- Last checked
- Sep 13, 2026, 2:24 AM PDT
- Evidence hash
- 1a324b39900ccf35
- Guide status
- Deterministic baseline
- SOURCE UPDATED
Passed as amended by council
- DOCUMENT PUBLISHED
Observed in the official source.
- Council Action
Passed as amended
- Council Action
Rescheduled
- Council Action
Referred to City Council