Decisions/2026-137
Report2026-137

Should Portland appoint members to the Noise Review Board?

The Noise Review Board is comprised of five members, including three community member-at-large positions, a representative from the construction industry, and a professional in the field of acoustics. Appointments to the volunteer Noise Review Board are made for a three-year term.In accordance with Title 18, the Noise Review Board is charged with reviewing and approving or denying noise variances for projects that range from nighttime construction projects to large outdoor concerts, to auto racing events at PIR. The Board also works to develop long-term objectives for achieving the reduction of noise levels in the community.

Official impact statement
See the official legal title

Appoint members to the Noise Review Board

Next appearanceFinal action is posted; watch for implementation updates.
Follow this matter
01 · Understand it

What this proposal would actually do.

Plain-language orientation first. Every substantive statement below links to its official basis.

What would change

The Noise Review Board is comprised of five members, including three community member-at-large positions, a representative from the construction industry, and a professional in the field of acoustics. Appointments to the volunteer Noise Review Board are made for a three-year term.In accordance with Title 18, the Noise Review Board is charged with reviewing and approving or denying noise variances for projects that range from nighttime construction projects to large outdoor concerts, to auto racing events at PIR. The Board also works to develop long-term objectives for achieving the reduction of noise levels in the community.

Official proposal and impact statement
What would stay the same

The reviewed sources do not clearly identify every existing policy, service, contract, or obligation that would remain unchanged.

Official matter record
Who may be affected

Noise Review Board members are expected to serve as a voice for community and for industry/infrastructure in balancing requests for noise variances with direct impact on community livability concerns.For this search, we conducted outreach to groups that have expressed interest in noise issues. We utilized the extensive email list Office of Community & Civic Life sends out regularly. Outreach included business groups, professional acoustical lists, neighborhood coalitions, diversity and civic leadership partners, and personal staff contacts.

Official community impact statement
What happens next

Accepted

Latest official agenda appearance
02 · Evaluate it

What the record establishes and what it does not.

Votes show choices. They do not, by themselves, prove why a member made that choice.

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.

Open questions
  • 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 agenda
03 · Verify it

Inspect 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 documents1 sources
Final legal actionReport 2026-137

The operative official record after Council action.

Open at Portland.gov
Read the full official text

TO THE COUNCIL:As Mayor, I request Council confirmation of the following appointments to the Noise Review Board.The Noise Review Board (NRB) is a 5-member, quasi-judicial board. The NRB works to improve neighborhood livability by striking a balance between sound-generating activities related to construction and special events, and the desire for livable communities. The board reviews applications for noise variances for events and construction that may impact many people or take place over a significant period of time. The board is also responsible for working with the Noise Program to advise and make recommendations to the Portland City Council on sound-related code and policy decisions.The Board holds monthly meetings which currently occur at 6:00 p.m. on the third Wednesday of the month.I recommend two candidates for appointment.AppointmentMembership CategoryTermTerm DurationJeremy MaxwellCommunity-at-Large1st5/1/26 – 4/30/29Martin LeimaCommunity-at-Large1st 6/1/26 – 5/31/29Jeremy MaxwellHolds a B.S. in Automotive Industry Management and two years serving on the Board of Directors of Depave, a Portland-based nonprofit organization focused on removing unnecessary pavement to restore community spaces and improve environmental and neighborhood health.Over ten years of continuous volunteer service, including newsletter public communications, special events, and facilitation of space science education.Demonstrated dedication to equitable access to science education, particularly for youth, aligned with inclusion and equity values.Residency in both Southwest Portland and East Portland, providing firsthand understanding of neighborhood-level disparities and the real-world impacts of local issues, including noise, on residents' daily lives.Statement from Jeremy Maxwell: The idea of helping my neighbors is very exciting. It's a challenging time for Portland, and I've thrown my support to my city for the long term. I'm determined to participate in government alongside my new district reps. I'm eager to help.This candidate brings a community-centered and policy-informed perspective to the Noise Review Board. He will support thoughtful evaluation of noise impacts on quality of life and contribute constructively to balanced, practical noise policy discussions.Martin LeimaRetired high-tech professional with extensive experience working in diverse, international, and multidisciplinary environmentsHolds both a B.S. and M.S. in Electrical Engineering with a solid technical knowledge base and professional experience in IP telephony, including acoustics, noise reduction, and echo cancellation.Worked with people across a wide range of ages, ethnic backgrounds, gender identities, and with professionals from more than two dozen countries.Statement from Martin Leima: What excites me most about serving on this board is the opportunity to provide input to the Noise Review Board that includes my work in acoustics.This candidate brings a wide range of experience, professional expertise, and community perspectives that will strengthen the Noise Review Board and City.Both candidates will bring complementary community and technical expertise to the Noise Review Board, strengthening its ability to evaluate noise issues, review noise variance applications, and promote strategies that enhance livability across Portland.With these appointments, the Noise Review Board membership will have all vacant seats filled.

Meetings, motions, amendments, and votes2 meetings · 2 votes
Read all 1 exact motions
Apr 15, 2026 · Main · Recorded

Motion to refer the Report, Document Number 2026-137, to City Council with the recommendation it be accepted: Moved by Smith and seconded by Dunphy. (Aye (12): Pirtle-Guiney, Ryan, Koyama Lane, Morillo, Novick, Clark, Green, Zimmerman, Avalos, Dunphy, Smith, Kanal)

Final Council action · May 6, 202612 yes · 0 no

Final action on 2026-137: Appoint members to the Noise Review Board

Meeting-level motion or recommendation · Apr 15, 202612 yes

Motion to refer the Report, Document Number 2026-137, to City Council with the recommendation it be accepted: Moved by Smith and seconded by Dunphy. (Aye (12): Pirtle-Guiney, Ryan, Koyama Lane, Morillo, Novick, Clark, Green, Zimmerman, Avalos, Dunphy, Smith, Kanal)

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

The official title and operative text identify the requested action.

Complete
Official legal text

Official text was found. This check does not certify that every referenced exhibit is complete.

Complete
Financial impact

The official impact statement includes financial information.

Complete
Funding source

The impact statement identifies funding information without an explicit unresolved-source qualifier.

Complete
Supporting documents

No linked attachments were found on the official page.

Unknown
Referenced exhibit integrity

No explicit exhibit reference was detected in the official text.

Not Applicable
Counterparty acceptance

The reviewed action is not expressly identified as a non-binding agreement.

Not Applicable
Implementation

A direction, reporting requirement, or deadline appears in the official text.

Complete
Document stability

Stability requires at least two observed snapshots; the system will update this after another ingestion.

Unknown
Source record
First discovered
Aug 13, 2026, 1:05 PM PDT
Last checked
Sep 13, 2026, 2:24 AM PDT
Evidence hash
28db8b59f128ea70
Guide status
Deterministic baseline
Append-only timeline
  1. SOURCE UPDATED

    Accepted

  2. DOCUMENT PUBLISHED

    Observed in the official source.

  3. Council Action

    Confirmed

  4. Council Action

    Referred to City Council