[0:00] by Commissioner Perry.
[0:05] » Our dear heavenly father, we come before
this time grateful for the many
[0:07] blessings thou has blessed us with.
We're indeed grateful for this moisture
[0:10] that we're receiving at this time.
We ask that you continue to bless us
[0:14] with the moisture we need to continue to
take care of the needs that we have here
[0:18] in Box Elder County and here in the
state of Utah.
[0:21] We pray that thy spirit will be with us
this day in this meeting that we can
[0:25] do those things that thou would have us
do, that we can listen and be open and
[0:28] be able to learn and and understand and
be able to make the decisions that thou
[0:31] would
be blessed and move forward with. And we
[0:34] ask you to please bless and watch over
those who are serving our country
[0:38] and keeping us free and especially those
who serve us locally in in the law
[0:41] enforcement and fire and EMS that
they'll be protected from harm and that
[0:45] they'll
be blessed for their efforts and the
[0:48] things they do to keep us all safe.
And we ask you to bless those who are in
[0:51] special need of blessings from thee that
stand in need of that that thou can
[0:55] bless them and help them in their time
of need. And we ask for these favors and
[0:58] blessings and say these things in Jesus
Christ's name.
[1:00] » Amen.
>> We will have our Treasurer Shawn
[1:03] Thornley lead us in the Pledge of
Allegiance.
[1:06] » Please stand for the Pledge of
Allegiance.
[1:09] » I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the
[1:15] republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and
[1:22] justice for all.
[1:27] » Thank you, Shawn and Lee. We appreciate
that.
[1:30] Um
I need a motion to approve uh the
[1:33] minutes from April 8th, 2026.
>> I'll make a motion we approve the
[1:36] minutes from April 8th, 2026.
>> Second.
[1:39] » We have a motion by Commissioner Perry
and a second by Commissioner Bingham.
[1:42] All in favor, say I. I. Thank you very
much.
[1:47] Okay, administrative review, reports and
future agenda items.
[1:52] Uh
Commissioner Bingham.
[1:54] » Uh I I
>> Mr. Perry.
[1:57] » Nothing at this time.
>> And I have nothing as well.
[2:01] » Okay, very good. Uh
former agenda items?
[2:06] Commissioner Perry?
>> Nothing.
[2:07] » Commissioner Bingham?
>> Nope.
[2:09] » Okay, very good.
Uh
[2:11] Mark emergency management issues.
>> Nope.
[2:14] » None? Okay, very good. Thank you.
Um
[2:17] Box Elder County employee recognition.
Um
[2:21] we have chosen Ann Hansen.
She has done
[2:27] We have thrown some curve balls at her
the last
[2:31] few months that have been extremely
hectic and so we really appreciate Ann
[2:34] and all that she does for our county.
So, if she would come up to receive this
[2:38] award.
[3:03] » Just so everybody knows Ann Annie is our
county civil attorney and because of
[3:08] that she has to deal with the commission
as much as our county attorney does and
[3:11] so we every time we have an issue or
problem, we throw it to Annie and we
[3:15] call Steve but then we really throw it
to Annie and so she just ends up with a
[3:18] lot of the problems that we that we
create or have happened from the
[3:21] commission. So, we just really feel
strongly that
[3:24] she had does goes way above and beyond
to help the county out. So, thank you.
[3:28] » And the commissioners are hard on her
because usually we you know, it's like
[3:32] last minute things where we've done
something and say, "Ann, what do you
[3:34] think?" And she's like, "Oh my
goodness."
[3:37] So, we truly appreciate our attorney's
office. Annie is she's awesome and she's
[3:41] hard working and willing to help
wherever we need her. So, thank you so
[3:45] much, Ann. It's well deserved.
Okay,
[3:49] um
ARPA and LATCF
[3:52] and uh Sheryl Ann Arson's going to come
and visit with us for a minute.
[4:02] » Sherlene Larson, County Auditor. Um, the
Sheriff's Department had approached me
[4:07] about an additional $5,000 for
same radio situation to make them all
[4:13] communicate with each other and asked if
they could get another 5,000 in the
[4:17] LATCF funding.
And so that's I'm bringing it to you.
[4:23] » Okay. I'd make a motion that we approve
the expenditure of the additional $5,000
[4:28] for the handheld radio encryption.
Um, out of the LATCF fund.
[4:32] » Second.
>> We have a motion from Commissioner Perry
[4:35] and a second from Commissioner Bingham
for fund usage
[4:41] for $5,000 for a handheld radio
encryption.
[4:45] Uh
All in favor?
[4:47] » I.
>> I.
[4:48] » Motion [clears throat] passes. Thank you
very much.
[4:50] » So, could we have Commissioner Perry
explain why we have to do that?
[4:55] » Well, yeah, I mean we can have the
Sheriff's office do it as well, but
[4:57] yeah, what happened is um
because of the split between the radio
[5:01] the the because of some of the agencies
that are on a different radio system, in
[5:05] order for our folks to be able to
communicate what we had to do is change
[5:08] and have some of our radios encrypted so
that we can communicate effectively with
[5:12] Brigham City, Tremonton, and Perry
back and forth. And so this is
[5:17] kind of what we have to do if we're
going to make sure that public safety
[5:20] can communicate with one another. So,
it's we may have some more expenditure
[5:23] before we're done because we are going
to have to figure some things out and
[5:26] work with some of our fire departments
and EMS folks possibly in the future.
[5:30] Right now, fire department luckily I
don't have to be encrypted like law
[5:33] enforcement does, so.
>> Yeah, it was the it was the change that
[5:37] Brigham City
Tremonton, Garland, and and Perry did.
[5:41] So, it's also that we we have to do this
so that we can all communicate properly
[5:45] and
safety for our citizens as well as our
[5:48] officers.
[5:51] » Sherilyn, I'm glad you're still here.
>> Right off the accounts receivable, old
[5:56] fire billings.
>> So, each year when our auditors come in,
[6:01] we review our accounts receivable and
there have been
[6:05] four accounts that have been on since
well before my time and
[6:10] maybe even before Tom's time before me,
but there's three account These are all
[6:15] related to fire and they used to bill
for
[6:19] um call outs on fire to the owners of
property or the people that caused the
[6:23] fires. And so,
we've got four that
[6:28] as far as we can find any history on a
date before 2013.
[6:34] And the biggest one being a Whirly Bird
Helicopters.
[6:38] That's for 6,242,
but it's our understanding they've gone
[6:42] out of business and we've been able to
reach anyone to ever get payment. So,
[6:46] we're asking um that we can clear those
off as a bad debt
[6:50] going forward. And I reached out to
Kevin who is our fire marshal and he
[6:54] agreed.
[6:57] » I'd make a motion that we allow our
auditor to write off those account
[7:01] receivable on the old fire billings.
>> Second.
[7:04] » We have a motion by
>> [snorts and clears throat]
[7:05] » Commissioner Perry
and a second by Commissioner Bingham to
[7:09] write off old fire billings.
Uh is there any further discussion? If
[7:14] not, all in favor?
>> Aye.
[7:16] » Aye. Motion passes. Thank you.
[7:20] Updated consolidated fee schedule
resolution and Sherilyn's going to
[7:24] discuss that one with us as well.
>> So, this is uh mostly related to the
[7:30] updates to fairground fees along with
some changes for the recorder's office
[7:36] that they were required to update their
fees as well. So, we're doing a few
[7:41] updates to the fee schedule. This was
very much done in coordination with
[7:45] Annie and Jan. So, if you have further
questions about that fee schedule and
[7:51] the resolution, um
you can ask who knows the answers. So.
[7:59] » Okay, very good.
Need a motion.
[8:02] » So, one of the things I noticed we are
going to where we're not going to be
[8:05] using cash transactions. We're trying to
going to make sure we're using credit
[8:07] card transactions and and other
electronic transactions to keep a better
[8:11] tracking mechanism.
>> I'm assuming that's part of the contract
[8:15] also that you'll be looking at.
>> Right.
[8:17] » That's on the agenda that does state
that we will do that online and e-checks
[8:22] make it so they don't get charged a fee
to do that.
[8:25] » Perfect.
>> Yep. I'd make a motion that we adopt the
[8:29] resolution 2609 for the consolidated fee
schedule.
[8:33] » Second.
>> We have a motion by Commissioner Perry
[8:36] and a second by Commissioner Bingham to
adopt [snorts]
[8:39] the consolidated fee schedule resolution
for the fairgrounds.
[8:43] If there's no further discussion, all in
favor?
[8:45] » I.
>> I.
[8:47] » Motion passes. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you.
[8:50] » Okay.
We have uh a interlocal agreement number
[8:55] 26-15 between Box Elder County and the
Military Installation uh Development
[9:00] Authority, MAIDA,
uh related to the Stratus project
[9:05] area. Um
Paul,
[9:09] he's with MAIDA. If you can just tell us
who you are and
[9:12] we we'll get going.
>> Thank you very much. Really appreciate
[9:15] this opportunity. I'm Paul Morris. I'm
the executive director and general
[9:18] counsel for MAIDA.
MAIDA, for those who don't know, stands
[9:22] for the Military Installation
Development Authority. It was created by
[9:25] the Utah Legislature in 2007. I've been
with the
[9:30] MAIDA since 2008.
Um
[9:34] we're an organization and authority that
was created specifically
[9:38] uh for economic development with a
military focus.
[9:42] Uh the military is very important to
Utah.
[9:45] Um not just for our patriotic reasons,
but because it is also an economic
[9:52] driver for the state of Utah. Uh people
aren't aware sometimes that it rivals
[9:57] the entire construction industry as far
as the GDP annually over about $22
[10:02] billion.
Uh the Kem C. Gardner Institute does a
[10:05] study every 3 years and uh it'll be even
higher the next year. It employs it
[10:11] rivals the whole construction industry
for the whole state. The military rivals
[10:15] it. But the but it employs more people
than the military about 178,000 versus
[10:22] we're talking about defense contractors
and related military personnel. But it
[10:26] pays about 30% more than the
construction industry for the kind of
[10:30] jobs that it has. So, I tell people that
the state of Utah cares about the
[10:35] military, but every county you down to
Washington County and Juab County, we
[10:39] should all care because the GDP is
pretty significant that comes from the
[10:43] military. Plus, we're all very proud
Americans that we have such a incredible
[10:48] military and a great presence here in
the state of Utah.
[10:52] MIDA has a seven has a seven-member
board, five appointed by the governor,
[10:57] one appointed by the speaker of the
house, one by the president of the
[10:59] Senate. Five of of the governor's five
appointees, three must be local elected
[11:05] officials from the at or near our
project areas. And the highest or the
[11:10] top revenue producing project areas
always have to have permanent
[11:16] appointee. The governor has to appoint
somebody from the
[11:19] highest
um revenue producing. MIDA has had great
[11:23] success. We've I won't go through all of
our projects, but we've uh by any
[11:27] measure we have done very very well.
At Hill Air Force Base for example, it
[11:32] went from zero taxable value to 5,000
high-paying jobs that came from out of
[11:38] state and now has about $600 million of
taxable value. Um um along the
[11:45] Hill Air Force Base that straddles the
two counties down there. We have another
[11:49] major project down in Wasatch County and
that went from about $20 million of
[11:55] taxable value to a little over $2
billion of taxable value and it'll
[11:58] probably hit about four or five billion
dollars of taxable value where we
[12:02] support the morale, welfare, recreation.
This specific of the way my data works
[12:08] is
we have to create a project area in
[12:12] order to be able to do use the tools
that the legislature gave us to help
[12:17] both the state economic development
generally,
[12:21] help a local government, and also help
the military. So, what is before you is
[12:27] there was a
group that came to the state of Utah and
[12:30] they went to the governor's office of
economic opportunity. It's going back to
[12:34] the old name, governor's office of
economic development, so GOED, as we
[12:38] call it.
And then they referred it because of the
[12:41] military component of this
data center and the kind of data center,
[12:45] the hyperscale data center, and the
military uses that would come from it.
[12:49] » [snorts]
>> They referred it to my data. This was in
[12:51] January, so we are working on it with
the group. We get a lot of proposals
[12:57] and we turn them down. Either they're
not viable or they don't have a military
[13:01] component. So, we hear a lot of things,
but this one was unusual for both its
[13:06] military
and national security reasons as well as
[13:10] its viability and economic opportunity
it would bring.
[13:14] Um they specifically focused on your
county because you have some
[13:19] several unique assets. One is the Ruby
pipeline
[13:22] where you it could generate power uh, a
significant level and also because you
[13:28] have redundant fiber. You have in the
vicinity educated workforce, and we have
[13:33] the universities and others that could
could help
[13:38] with the employment and and and such.
So, when they looked at it, they
[13:42] concluded Box Box Elder could be one of
the best places in the entire country to
[13:47] locate something like this.
The interesting thing, and we we know
[13:52] that this is a rural county, and we
respect the rural nature of it. And some
[13:56] of the things that we do in Wasatch
County and that we do at Hill, we would
[14:00] not propose to do here. We have Hill
Northrop Grumman
[14:04] uh, at Hill, and that's on 20 acres.
It's 5,000 high-paying employees, which
[14:09] is great in that area, but that wouldn't
fit. That's not something that would
[14:12] fit. But this seems to us, particularly
given your interest and concern and need
[14:18] about agricultural and wanted to keep
that, that this is something that could
[14:22] really work. When I look at it, and I've
been at this economic development game
[14:26] for 40 years and in in Utah. We're a
governmental entity. We're not
[14:30] quasi-governmental.
So, there's no bonus program. We're I'm
[14:34] here just to to do good for for the
state and hopefully for you and for the
[14:40] military. Um, but as I look at this, it
seems to fit. It's one of the least
[14:46] dense per acre as far as impact. It will
have an impact. Probably several
[14:51] thousand, not probably it'd have several
thousand construction jobs, and once
[14:55] those go away, about 2,000 permanent
jobs that are high-paying jobs.
[15:00] But it
per acre, it's the least impactful of
[15:05] what I've seen from commercial,
industrial, and residential, but it's
[15:08] the highest value per acre. It's a very
interesting way that this could fit and
[15:13] be compatible, dark sky compliant, out
in a rural area, having ranchers and
[15:18] grazing right next to its fence,
um,
[15:22] you know, low noise and
and many ways very very very compatible
[15:28] with what's going on. Okay, so how it
works is we do not like to go MIEDA
[15:34] where we're not welcome and wanted. So,
we years ago went to the legislature
[15:40] instead of we're going to have private
land that's part of our project area in
[15:43] addition to military land that we need
the consent of the local government.
[15:48] You're the local government because it's
all all this is entirely contained
[15:51] unincorporated county. So, we need your
consent.
[15:54] And then number two, we need all the
land owners consent. This is not like
[15:58] assessments areas where you need 2/3 or
66%. MIEDA requires and I wrote the
[16:03] legislation said I want it 100%. You
want all the land owners
[16:07] to say that yes, they would welcome and
want to be part of a particular project
[16:11] area.
Um, the good news is we have the consent
[16:14] of all of the land owners. This is about
40,000 acres spread between Locomotive
[16:18] Alley, Hansel Valley, and then some near
the freeway. All of the land owners have
[16:23] signed the consent. And and are are
supportive of what we're bringing here.
[16:29] [snorts] I have a letter from as a
representative from one of their short
[16:32] from one of the
property owners.
[16:36] Um,
[16:39] uh,
Jed Heaton. My name is Jed Heaton. I
[16:42] have been working with the West Gen Co
team for the last few months and teaming
[16:47] um, and learning about the project and
what it will be used for. I understand
[16:51] the project and the need for power and
computing for national security. Also,
[16:56] the need for industrial manufacturing
that is military focused. This location
[17:00] was picked because of the gas pipeline
and its location of large amounts of
[17:04] flat buildable land. I signed the
consent form for MIEDA and I'm will
[17:09] and I am a willing participate in the
project. I'm happy to have my land be a
[17:13] part of it. And I think that's a
representative of of the
[17:18] of the of the landowners.
Um the military
[17:22] need. Um there is a desperate national
security need to keep up with China and
[17:28] other locations. We do not have the
computing power
[17:32] uh to do what needs to be done. It's and
we don't have the power generally and
[17:36] then we don't have the
uh the computers that can um um
[17:40] do the AI. Particularly, I'm focused on
military and pentagon sorts of uses and
[17:46] then of course there's the other uses.
And we're talking a hyperscale data
[17:50] center. Now, couple points. Data centers
of the old have a bad reputation. They
[17:55] call gobble up a lot of water.
They use up your power and then and when
[18:01] they're all built, they don't employ
many people.
[18:04] This is not that. This is a hyperscale
compute. It is um
[18:10] the latest technology is the power's
usage is uh
[18:14] is completely self-contained. 100% of
the power will be generated off the Ruby
[18:19] pipeline. It will not take
uh one electron from the from the grid.
[18:23] In fact, they believe that they'll
eventually have excess power that
[18:27] they'll be able to put back into the
grid.
[18:30] Um the water usage is minimal. The water
that they're buying as part of getting
[18:35] the land for both the cooling, it's not
the evaporative cooling of old days.
[18:39] It's uh it's circulated water that's
reused. And the particular water has
[18:45] brine in it. So, they're going to clean
the water, use it for the cooling, and
[18:49] then it will go back down into the
aquifer and feed into the Great Salt
[18:52] Lake. So, I think it'll be a net gain to
the Great Salt Lake. So, lower water
[18:57] usage, self-contained on its power, and
high high value. And then the last one
[19:03] is the jobs. The jobs are are very
high-paying jobs to run something this
[19:08] mag- magnitude, scope, and scale.
As far as the military use, I would like
[19:14] to turn some time over to Colonel Owens.
He is going to be the assistant adjutant
[19:18] general for the National Guard, and he
can describe why it's so important to
[19:22] the military. Thank you.
[19:31] » Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, uh
thank you for allowing me to address you
[19:35] today.
Um from a military standpoint, projects
[19:38] like this matter. Our homeland is no
longer a sanctuary. Our enemies have the
[19:44] capability to touch us at home.
So, national security has to be built
[19:49] into our infrastructure from the start.
Investments that strengthen energy
[19:52] resilience and support critical systems
help to ensure we're prepared for the
[19:56] challenges ahead and are able to operate
without interruption when it matters the
[20:00] most.
Thanks for letting me uh
[20:04] address the the group today.
Um
[20:07] I can tell you that uh
what the Mighty is doing here on the
[20:12] national level as we compete against our
enemies, China and Russia, um this is
[20:17] going to help bridge those gaps, those
capability gaps that we see well into
[20:20] the future. Thank you.
>> Will you just give your give your name
[20:23] and stuff so we can have it on the
record?
[20:25] » So, my name is Andrew Owens. Um
I'm a colonel in the Utah National
[20:28] Guard. I serve as uh currently the
director of the joint staff, and um in
[20:34] June, I will be the assistant adjutant
general army commander.
[20:38] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[20:39] » Thank you.
[20:44] » So, what you have on the agenda that's
being discussed, I know you're not going
[20:48] to vote on it today, but I wanted you
just to say what the two different
[20:51] things are. One is the consent. As I
indicated, we needed double consent. You
[20:55] have to consent as the uh land use
authority, and then we needed the
[20:59] landowners' consent.
Uh is it that one's a simple resolution,
[21:03] and the law says it has to be done by
resolution.
[21:07] Um the the second part is the interlocal
agreement. So, as patriarch
[21:13] as happy as we are to help the military,
and we still needs to make economic
[21:18] sense, okay? It needs to make economic
sense for the state of Utah, and it
[21:22] needs to make make sense for the
military, and it needs to make sense for
[21:26] you and the local government. And this
one checks all of the boxes in an
[21:30] incredible way. It's the biggest project
I've ever been involved in. I've been in
[21:33] a lot of big projects. Our entities had
for a long time the number one and
[21:37] number two economic develop-
economic development projects for the
[21:41] state of Utah. You could add both of
those together, multiplying times 10,
[21:45] and this is bigger than that. This is
one of those once-in-a-generational
[21:48] opportunities that we have. I happen to
know of two states that would rather us
[21:53] not do it. They'd rather us go slow and
not figure it out because we're trying
[21:57] to jump ahead of them. Right at this
moment, there's things that are
[21:59] happening, particularly on the power
um the backlog of the power of
[22:04] generators that are built. You've got
many years out if you order today to get
[22:10] the best technology. We have a unique
opportunity to jump in front and
[22:14] actually get some that are already
allocated to an another state to have it
[22:19] allocated to our state, and it's the
best technology out there. It's the
[22:23] number one for data centers. If we can
capture that one, it's zero water
[22:28] for the generators, zero. The other ones
are low water. This is zero water. It's
[22:32] all air cooled. And it's the lowest
emissions out there. And so, we're
[22:37] That's why we're
working hard, not trying to push you,
[22:41] not trying to push the state or my data
or my board, except because we're aware
[22:47] that there's a real competition because
of the high value, low impact
[22:51] comparatively that this brings. So, the
So, but we got to make sure it makes
[22:56] economic sense. So, what the interlocal
agreement does is and we've done this as
[23:00] Wasatch County with Hideout with the the
different entities is we say, "Okay, how
[23:06] are we going to be competitive?" So,
some of the money that they're they're
[23:09] going to generate the increase, a lot of
that for the specifically the energy and
[23:13] the data center has to go back into
building water and sewer and storm drain
[23:19] and roads and all of those sorts of
things because we've
[23:23] negotiated with the
the developers
[23:27] no requirement for un Box Elder County
to subsidize you.
[23:33] In fact, it has to be the opposite. You
subsidize them. So, you have to put in
[23:36] all the infrastructure and then dedicate
it to the appropriate governmental
[23:40] entity when that comes.
So, we have a tax structure and MIDA
[23:44] basically has two funds. You get a
development fund that has certain
[23:48] restrictions on how to use it. It's for
development from that incremental
[23:52] increase.
The second one is municipal services
[23:55] fund.
And so, as we've looked at this, MIDA
[23:58] has always liked to defer to the local
government. You are the elected
[24:02] official, so the better fund the better
way for you to be funded is out of that
[24:07] and use the other fund for the
development and to the state of Utah and
[24:11] to MIDA for the military.
So,
[24:14] that particular fund, municipal
services, the way the law works is you
[24:19] provide municipal services with that
and then anything that's excess
[24:25] you just use it however you want to. So,
the proposal in this interlocal
[24:29] agreement is that you would provide
whatever municipal services you deem
[24:33] appropriate.
You don't have to give them more, don't
[24:37] give them less, just what you would
normally do for that
[24:41] for the this kind of a development.
And then, by default, anything that's
[24:46] not needed for municipal services goes
to the city or county that levies a
[24:51] property tax. You're the only one that
levies a property tax cuz this is
[24:54] entirely in the unincorporated county.
So, therefore, you get that money. In
[24:59] the agreement we're proposing that on
the first phase, which is three 3 GW of
[25:04] power, you will get a minimum of $30
annually.
[25:09] And then when they've built this first
phase out that we're describing, you'll
[25:13] get $108 million annually.
>> That's right.
[25:17] Being a reporter, do you have any
questions?
[25:21] » Thir- $30 annually to the general fund
and then $108 million annually
[25:26] annually to the general fund with you
deciding what's the best way to spend
[25:32] that money.
>> It goes back to [snorts] the taxpayer
[25:34] for the last 20 years.
>> What? Thanks, Tim.
[25:38] » [laughter]
>> We'll we'll we'll look into that.
[25:44] I appreciate this time. Um there's a lot
I bore I could say, but I I don't want
[25:48] to belabor it, but if you have any
questions for me, I'd be glad to answer
[25:52] them. Uh we have a board board meeting
on Friday. And the reason we picked
[25:56] Friday was because there were certain
things that are happening nationally
[26:00] where some decisions are being made
about this this high-quality power. And
[26:04] so, that's why we're having the board
meeting on Monday to our Friday to
[26:08] create the project area, to adopt the
standards and guidelines that govern the
[26:13] land use here, to make sure the
agricultural uses are permitted, the
[26:18] green belt continues on, there was going
to be link leasebacks to
[26:22] to the ranchers and such. Um and then we
would adopt this inner our our side of
[26:28] this interlocal agreement with you with
such changes as your attorneys
[26:32] um have that we need to make. And uh and
then we would adopt the development
[26:37] agreement with the with this particular
group to incentivize them to do what we
[26:41] need them to do in our our state and in
Box Elder. Thank you very much.
[26:45] » Hey Hey, Paul. Um
>> Yes.
[26:48] » Are you comfortable talking about um
the upfront cost to the county.
[26:52] » Oh, yes. I That's a great point. Yes.
So, they they proposed that they would
[26:58] pay because there's about a 3-year leg
a lag and that's
[27:04] it's been a problem for me when I first
started is you do all this work and you
[27:08] have no money until the building's built
and then finally the taxes start flowing
[27:12] in and so we had that was always been a
challenge is is to get to prime the pump
[27:17] to make this thing happen. Well,
um,
[27:21] that you need some upfront cost cuz you
don't want we don't expect they do not
[27:24] expect you to subsidize them.
And, and you came up with a number that
[27:29] was more than I thought and they agreed
to it and it's $16.2
[27:33] million
spread out over 3 years. So, on the when
[27:38] they first get a building permit, that
means construction workers are coming on
[27:41] that first building permit, they pay you
$5.2 million.
[27:45] And again, you use it how you deem
appropriate for providing services. The
[27:49] next year, they pay another $5.2
million. The next year, they pay another
[27:54] $5.2 million and then by then the cash
flow will start uh start coming in. So,
[28:00] yeah, excellent point.
>> So, the purpose of that is
[28:04] we understand there's going to be added
pressure on the sheriff's department, on
[28:08] our fire department, on our EMS people.
And so that's why we needed the funds to
[28:14] to boost those different organizations
so that we can provide the service that
[28:18] we need to.
>> Totally appropriate as well as roads and
[28:20] infrastructure. Absolutely.
>> Yes.
[28:23] » And then I I did want to make one other
point. In the interlocal agreement, we
[28:27] always create we did this in our two
other locations they've worked
[28:30] excellent. We create what's called a
development review committee.
[28:33] The executive director, my position or a
designee, chairs that committee. The
[28:38] other six members are all that you ask
us to put. We ask for people like and we
[28:43] recommend even a a landowner on there
or the your planners, public works, your
[28:49] fire people, the technical kind of
people. Those are the ones that look at
[28:53] all the subdivision, all the site plan,
where are the roads going to go, where
[28:57] are they building and they're the ones
that have to approve that. And as six of
[29:00] the seven are all people that you want
to have on that on that board. And it's
[29:05] worked out really well in Wasatch County
and in our
[29:09] Hill Air Force Base project. We've had
We've had years of experience with them.
[29:13] Works excellent. Thank you.
>> Thanks, Paul. Thanks, Paul.
[29:18] » Well, we are grateful for you folks
being here today. I mean, that's one of
[29:22] the things, you know, as this
come before us and
[29:27] there's been some hiccups in the road
that's uh
[29:30] caused us to want to slow down a little
bit. One of the big things that that the
[29:34] commission talked about was making sure
that we involved um our folks in our
[29:39] county, that our citizens had the
opportunity to come and and hear what
[29:42] this was about and and somewhat try to
understand this. I I don't know how you
[29:47] feel, but I remember when Paul came and
they first talked to us, I felt like I
[29:51] was drinking out of a fire hose and
trying to digest all of this
[29:57] so quickly and trying to understand
this.
[30:00] Um
And so, that's why uh
[30:04] these two items we're going to table
today. But
[30:08] one of the big things is we wanted you,
our community and our county to be
[30:12] involved. I I mean, this project looks
exciting and the potential investment,
[30:17] job creation sounds great. Um but we
want to make sure this project's done in
[30:21] the right way. We want to protect our
agricultural heritage, maintain and we
[30:27] want to maintain local control and uh
and also address the concerns of our
[30:32] residents.
The commissioners and the county
[30:35] attorney uh attorneys are taking time to
fully review the interlocal agreement
[30:40] and understand it.
And uh so, that's why we're not ready at
[30:44] this time to, um,
to make a decision on the interlocal
[30:49] agreement, uh, as well as, um,
the resolution.
[30:54] Um, we just want to make sure that, uh,
we're taking time to be thorough in
[30:58] understanding everything and making sure
that all of the players, uh, especially
[31:03] the commission and our attorneys, all
understand the project and understand
[31:06] what we're doing. We don't want to just
jump into something and down the road,
[31:11] uh, have it come back to bite us in and
and have a problem. And then just to
[31:15] make sure that, uh, the property land
the private property land owners that
[31:20] are involved, uh, in this project are
being taken care of.
[31:25] That that we make sure that they
understand and and are aware of the
[31:29] impacts and those type of things,
uh, which will, um, make sure that we're
[31:35] strong in the future as well.
So, um, I would just like to ask those
[31:40] who,
uh, have land in the project area that
[31:44] are actually going to be, uh, impacted
by this project, who are in favor to
[31:48] raise your hands.
[31:52] Okay, those
that have property in the impact area
[31:55] that are opposed, raise your hands.
[32:01] Okay.
Very good. Um,
[32:03] » How about all of us in the impact area
that are
[32:06] undecided [clears throat] because we
need more information?
[32:08] » Well, and that's the honestly that's the
reason we're where we're at. Is we want
[32:13] to make sure that that there's more
information to you to you folks, so you
[32:16] understand this project. And
it's, like I say, the commissioners, um,
[32:22] as we addressed this and went, uh, and
had meetings, um,
[32:27] I I I wanted to be able to understand it
better as well, but most important thing
[32:31] that the commission discussed and and
visited about was making sure that our,
[32:36] um, citizens had information. That they
knew what was going on. And Paul, we
[32:40] realize the urgency in those type of
things, but again, um as we've
[32:44] discussed, uh we just need some some
time to digest some things.
[32:49] » Mr. Chair,
I just want to point out the fact that
[32:51] the commission has not been sitting on
this for months. Um this is as is
[32:55] pointed out, it it started or back in
January, February. The commission has
[32:59] only been made aware of it in the last
couple of weeks, and so that's where
[33:01] we're at at this point. We're trying
trying to absorb the information at this
[33:04] point, and that's one of the reasons the
commission can't go forward today
[33:07] with this particular resolution. So.
[33:12] » Okay, very good. Um again, those of you
who would like to make comments, please
[33:17] fill out uh
fill out the the uh forms. Um you we we
[33:22] will give you an opportunity to speak as
to this in our public comment period. Um
[33:28] because of the might of the investors'
sensitive timeline on this project, we
[33:32] would like to notify the public that
there will likely be a special set
[33:36] county commission meeting to readdress
the interlocal agreement and provide
[33:40] consent before the next regularly
scheduled commission meeting.
[33:44] The meeting will be noticed at least 24
hours in advance as required by state
[33:50] law.
So.
[33:52] Anyway, if you would like to speak to
that, please fill a form out, and uh
[33:57] we'll give you an opportunity in our uh
public comment period. So, but we really
[34:01] appreciate you being here. Paul, thank
you, and Colonel, thank you for you guys
[34:05] and and your time, and so.
Okay, uh
[34:11] » So so uh
do we need a motion to
[34:13] » Yeah, we need a motion to to table the
>> items 9A and 9B.
[34:17] » Yep.
>> I will make a motion that we table items
[34:20] 9A and 9B on our agenda today.
>> We have a motion by Commissioner
[34:24] Bingham.
>> I'll second it.
[34:26] » And second by Commissioner Perry. If
there's no further discussion, all in
[34:29] favor?
>> I.
[34:31] » Thank you.
>> We have a different resolution that we
[34:34] want to propose or not?
>> What's that?
[34:36] » Do we have another resolution that we
>> [cough]
[34:40] » So,
yeah, if we could have Annie, we have a
[34:43] resolution that we do want to talk about
though in dealing with this. So,
[34:49] » Um based off of the discussions that
we've had that I've had with you on the
[34:54] commission,
um
[34:56] you wanted to instead of passing consent
by resolution during this meeting, um we
[35:01] prepared a resolution that talks about
the importance of the project, outlines
[35:06] the details um that Mr. Morris has
shared, and um
[35:10] just extends the county's um intent to
engage and to look into the full
[35:16] benefits for the county along with um
what other impacts and outcomes might
[35:22] might come just to demonstrate that um
your participation with MYDA on looking
[35:28] into this project. And then that will
get you through until
[35:32] um you may be ready in the future to
consent officially.
[35:35] » Okay.
So, I [snorts] have
[35:38] » Any motions?
>> So, I have a motion. It's um amended.
[35:41] It's an amended resolution 2610.
Um it's a resolution of Box Elder County
[35:46] Commission to engage with the Military
Installation Development Authority on
[35:49] exploring the opportunity to have a
private land located in unincorporated
[35:52] Box Elder County included in the Stratus
projected area. And I would make a
[35:56] motion to to pass that resolution at
this time.
[35:59] » Second. We have a motion by Commissioner
Perry to pass resolution 2610 and a
[36:05] second by Commissioner Bingham.
>> The amended 2610.
[36:07] » Excuse me, amended 2610.
We have a motion by Commissioner Perry
[36:12] and a second by Commissioner Bingham.
If there's no further discussion, all in
[36:16] favor?
>> I.
[36:18] » Okay, thank you.
[36:21] Okay.
>> [clears throat and cough]
[36:23] » And number 10 on the community
development,
[36:27] Garland 300 South Corridor Preservation
Fund request by Scott Lyons.
[36:32] » [clears throat]
[36:40] » Thanks, Scott.
>> Thank you.
[36:43] All right.
>> [cough and clears throat]
[36:46] » First item
is a quarter preservation fund request
[36:51] by Garland City for the 300 South
roadway between Main Street and 100
[36:57] West.
So, Garland is proposing to rebuild this
[37:02] portion of roadway and as part of that
they have requested of the cog and the
[37:08] county commission funding out of the the
local transportation quarter
[37:13] preservation fund.
This has been reviewed by staff. There's
[37:17] a scoring matrix that it goes through.
The minimum score required to be
[37:22] considered for funding is 15 points and
this project scored 15 points.
[37:29] Uh
it went to the cog for review and for
[37:33] their decision.
And the cog
[37:37] decided they made a motion to fund the
project. Um
[37:42] the request the requested amount
by Garland City was $295,318.
[37:51] That fund the current balance is just
over $120,000 currently.
[37:57] Uh so, the cog's motion recommended that
it be funded up to $120,000.
[38:04] Um I don't know if you have any
questions on it
[38:07] or if there's anything else you'd like
me to cover.
[38:09] » not for right-of-way?
>> Correct. It's an existing existing
[38:14] roadway that they wanted to improve.
>> This roadway is not impacted by the
[38:20] current inland port project that have up
there, is that correct?
[38:23] » Not that I'm aware of.
>> Okay.
[38:30] » Okay. I I'd make a motion that we
approve uh
[38:34] the Garland 300 South Quarter
Preservation Fund request that's been
[38:38] presented by Scott Lyons.
>> Second.
[38:41] » We have a motion to approve the Quarter
Preservation Fund request by Garland
[38:45] uh
Commissioner by Commissioner Perry and a
[38:48] second by Commissioner Bingham. Is there
any further discussion?
[38:51] All in favor, say I.
>> I.
[38:54] » Motion passes. Thank you.
[38:57] » Next item I have is a Quarter
Preservation Fund request by Willard
[39:02] City. This one is for right of way
acquisition. Uh the
[39:08] total right of way acquisition cost is
$60,400.
[39:12] The city is proposing to contribute 25%
of that, and they are requesting out of
[39:18] the Quarter Preservation Fund $45,300.
Um this project uh for for large cities
[39:27] uh the minimum score required to be
eligible for funding is 25 points, and
[39:32] this project scored 37 points. So, it
was well above the minimum. Uh this
[39:38] project staff feels is exactly what this
fund was established for. Um and this
[39:46] one went to the COG as well, and the COG
approved the request for $45,300.
[39:54] » Hey, I will make a motion that we
approve Willard City's request for the
[39:57] 300 East Quarter Preservation Fund
request of $45,300
[40:02] for right of way
acquisition.
[40:05] » I'll second it.
>> Have a motion by Commissioner Bingham
[40:08] and a second by Commissioner Perry to
approve Willard's request on the 300
[40:13] East Quarter Preservation Fund.
Uh
[40:17] if there is no other
um
[40:20] if if no other comments, all in favor?
>> Aye.
[40:23] » Aye.
>> Motion passes. Thank you.
[40:26] » Uh next item is
uh memorandum of understanding.
[40:31] Uh
we have it listed as agreement 2617.
[40:34] This would be between the Box Elder
County and the BLM
[40:38] regarding the High Desert Trail. So, the
High Desert Trail
[40:42] um is a trail that extends from
Washington County. So, basically the
[40:46] southern point of Utah to uh Snowville,
the northern point of Utah. Um
[40:53] and so, each
county would participate in this MOU
[41:00] between Box Elder County and the BLM
as part of an environmental assessment
[41:04] that the BLM does. Essentially, what the
county does is say, "Here's your point
[41:08] of contact um for any questions you may
have as you are conducting your
[41:14] environmental assessment, and that point
of contact will assist you as needed
[41:18] throughout that process."
Um I anticipate for our portion of that,
[41:24] it will be incredibly minimal. Our
portion of the High Desert Trail through
[41:28] Box Elder County is using existing
county roads.
[41:32] Um so, there would be no new trail cut
through BLM land or anything like that.
[41:37] So,
uh but with that said, uh
[41:41] we can either choose to be a cooperating
agency through that process or we can
[41:45] decline. They do require a reason for
declination, but uh
[41:51] anyway, so.
>> I'd make a motion that we approve um
[41:57] the MOU with the BLM in Box Elder County
2617 for the High Desert Trail
[42:01] environmental assessment. We've been
working on this project with the other
[42:05] counties for quite some time, so I think
it's necessary we continue to do that.
[42:09] » Second.
>> I have a motion by Commissioner Bingham
[42:12] or by Commissioner Perry
to approve Box Elder County and BLM MOU
[42:17] number 26-17
for the High Desert Trail environment
[42:22] and as second by Commissioner Bingham.
If there's no further discussion, all in
[42:25] favor say I.
>> I.
[42:27] » Motion passes. Thank you.
>> Yeah. So, next item is a surplus
[42:32] property request. Uh this came before
you a few weeks back. An adjacent
[42:37] property owner to a
uh sliver parcel in Perry City
[42:42] was interested in in acquiring that
property.
[42:46] Um
[42:48] between now and then I've done a little
bit of research and
[42:52] » [clears throat and cough]
>> the
[42:54] the parcel is listed in our recorder's
database as 0.06 acres in size. Um I
[43:01] it looked larger than that on our web
map, so I got in touch with the
[43:05] recorder's office to and asked them if
they could dig into it a little bit and
[43:10] find out more information on this
property. Um the pro the county obtained
[43:14] possession of the property in
via
[43:17] tax deed in 1999.
Um with that said, after consulting with
[43:24] the recorder's office, their
recommendation, they kind of dove into
[43:28] it, went down a little bit of a rabbit
hole, is that the if
[43:34] if the property owner is interested in
acquiring this, that a survey be done.
[43:40] Um there's some conflicting property
lines, deeds, and other things like that
[43:44] in that area.
Um otherwise, it is unclear enough that
[43:50] if no survey is done that that the
recorder's office
[43:54] would recommend that it not be
surplussed.
[43:58] » So, uh would the potential purchaser pay
for that survey?
[44:04] » Correct. If they want it done, yeah.
>> So, we're kind of waiting for that to
[44:08] happen type thing then?
>> So,
[44:12] yeah. I mean, I I I haven't spoken with
them specifically about that yet.
[44:17] Uh
discussed this with the recorder, I
[44:19] think on Monday,
um and then wanted to bring it before
[44:22] you so that you could give us some
direction there. If that is your
[44:26] direction, then I'll get back to the
landowner and let him know that that's
[44:29] the direction that's what the county
commission feels on this before starting
[44:33] the surplus pro the surplus disposal
process.
[44:35] » So, because of the boundary issue, you
don't know exactly how large the parcel
[44:39] is?
>> Correct.
[44:41] Yeah.
And I I know Chad's here. If you have
[44:45] additional questions, he knows more
about the specifics of it than I do
[44:49] having, you know, his department and his
background knowledge in in legal
[44:53] descriptions and all of that. So,
[44:58] » Do you want to come talk to us for a
second, Chad, just to make sure I
[45:01] I mean, right now I'm inclined to say if
they want to have it assessed and come
[45:04] or have it surveyed and come back, then
I would be willing to possibly put it on
[45:08] the surplus, but
>> And I think the questions that were
[45:10] provided in your packet as far as if we
go to surplus, I think those can be
[45:14] addressed at
the time, like if the survey is done,
[45:19] right, then that can be addressed.
>> So, Chad Montgomery, Box Elder County
[45:24] Recorder.
The
[45:26] The issue is that the the acreage
doesn't match the the legal description.
[45:30] It's all based on lessers.
As we drew the surrounding parcels, it
[45:34] looks like the gap extends further north
than what is actually shown on the web
[45:39] map.
Um because that's unclear, they come
[45:42] from separate section corners, and they
don't tie to each other.
[45:46] It looks like the one to the north
actually should be, if it's tied
[45:50] properly, should
be the road on the east side rather than
[45:53] the west side.
But, based on the description that's
[45:56] currently used from when it went to tax
sale,
[45:58] um it would be a much larger parcel and
could cause some conflicts with other
[46:03] landowners. And I don't think we want to
create any issues with additional
[46:07] landowners. And that's why we suggested
that we
[46:11] have them get a survey for
the particular parcel that they were
[46:14] interested in for surplusing.
[46:18] » Yeah, I think we I think we ought to
wait to have a survey.
[46:20] » Do we need a motion to that effect? Do
you Would you like a motion to that
[46:23] effect?
>> Uh I don't know that you need a motion,
[46:26] but uh
>> direction from
[46:28] » Direction that I think they have to have
a survey before they can bring it back
[46:30] before we can feel good about putting it
for
[46:32] » Yeah.
>> Then we can vote on it.
[46:34] » It's still
Okay.
[46:35] » Thank you. Thanks, Chad.
[46:40] » All right. So, my next item is the
ordinance 649. This is a request for a
[46:45] zoning map amendment in the Tremonton
area.
[46:50] More specifically, third ward area, if
you're familiar with that. It's kind of
[46:53] southeast or sorry, southwest of
Tremonton.
[46:56] Um it's approximately 1,362
acres.
[47:01] This one consisted of multiple
landowners requesting that their
[47:05] property in a joint application
requesting that their property
[47:09] uh change from unzoned to the
agricultural heritage zone.
[47:13] This went to the planning commission in
March on March 19th.
[47:18] Public hearing was held
uh and the planning commission following
[47:21] that public hearing process recommended
approval to the county commission.
[47:29] » Hey, I will make a motion that we
approve ordinance 649 to rezone from
[47:33] unzoned to ag heritage zone 1,362
acres.
[47:37] » I'll second it.
>> We have a motion by Commissioner Bingham
[47:40] and a second by Commissioner Perry to
approve six number 649 rezone
[47:45] um from unzoned to ag heritage zone as
presented. Any further discussion? All
[47:51] in favor say aye.
>> Aye.
[47:55] » Okay, and then the final one, ordinance
650. This is
[47:59] uh similar.
This one is requesting to rezone
[48:04] approximately 1,622
acres. This one's located in the Garland
[48:10] and Riverside area.
Similarly, that area zone is unzoned,
[48:15] and this property owner is requesting
that his property be rezoned to the
[48:19] agricultural heritage zone as well.
Um
[48:23] and this one went to the planning
commission in April on April 16th.
[48:29] Public hearing was held, and the
planning commission forwarded a
[48:31] recommendation of approval.
[48:35] » So, I will make a motion to approve
ordinance number 650 to rezone from
[48:40] unzoned to ag heritage zone, 1,622 acres
in the
[48:44] Garland Riverside area.
>> I'll second it.
[48:48] » We have a motion by Commissioner Bingham
and a second by Commissioner Perry
[48:52] to appro- to approve number 650 rezone
from unzoned to ag heritage zone as
[48:58] presented.
If there's no further discussion, all in
[49:02] favor?
>> Aye.
[49:03] » Aye.
>> Motion passes.
[49:06] » And my final item will move to a future
meeting. Thank you.
[49:10] » Okay.
>> Thanks, Scott.
[49:11] » Thanks, Scott.
[49:14] » Okay. Uh number 11 under fairgrounds
is going to come and talk to us about uh
[49:21] facility use agreement.
Number
[49:24] and number 26-12.
[49:29] » This facility use agreement 26-12
um will update the agreement between Box
[49:35] Elder County and Lola Baker,
um often known as the boot lady, with
[49:41] the rental of exhibit hall number three
out at the county fairgrounds. Um it
[49:47] updates the monthly amount um required
for rent. Um
[49:53] and stipulates that the agreement
expires in February of 2027.
[50:00] Um in speaking with Lola, she is working
on her new location and so
[50:05] she will keep us in the county updated
county commission updated on if she is
[50:10] able to move before then or if she
requires some additional time.
[50:16] » Very good.
[50:20] » So you need a motion?
>> Yep.
[50:21] » I'll make a motion we approve facility
use agreement 26-12
[50:26] fairgrounds building.
>> I'll second it.
[50:28] » We have a motion by Commissioner Bingham
and a second by Commissioner Perry to
[50:32] approve agreement number 26-12 as
presented. Is there any further
[50:37] discussion? If not,
all in favor say I.
[50:41] » I.
>> I.
[50:42] » Motion passes. Thank you.
[50:53] » Are you ready for me on the next?
>> Yes, I'm ready for the next one.
[50:55] » Okay.
>> Sorry.
[50:56] » No, you're fine. On this next one, um
the attorney's office has been working
[51:01] in conjunction with um Commissioner
Tyler, Jan with the fairgrounds, and
[51:06] Sherlene in the auditor's office to
update the current horse stall
[51:11] rental agreement. Um once this is put in
place, we'll be able to follow up with
[51:16] the current um renters to if if they're
willing and able to meet the new
[51:22] requirements to renew
um their agreement to continue. As of
[51:28] this time, just to update you on the
status, they were given until I think it
[51:32] was June 12th or right around there
>> Right.
[51:36] » in the original notice um to vacate. And
so, as long as we're able to help them
[51:42] renew this agreement before June 12th,
um there should be no impact to them.
[51:48] And then additionally, we're working
with the others on special equipment
[51:51] that's there at the grounds. But the
updated agreement and it is very
[51:55] comprehensive, much longer than what we
had in place before, just to cover the
[52:00] liability of the county and to ensure
that, um, both the renter and the county
[52:05] are on the same page as to what's
allowed in and what would is not allowed
[52:09] in what would require special
permission, um, through Jan or through
[52:13] the commission.
>> It looks like it's very similar to what
[52:15] I noticed Cache County has something
similar. Utah State has something very
[52:19] similar. So it's basically protecting us
similar to those folks as well. So
[52:22] » It should. And in this agreement, that's
where it removes the option for cash
[52:26] payments on horse stall rentals, but
does allow for not only the online
[52:31] credit card payments, but also an
e-check or an electronic checking
[52:36] account option. So that hopefully that
will be a fit for everyone.
[52:39] » Great. Very good.
I'd make a motion that we approve the
[52:42] updated standard horse stall
month-to-month rental agree- the form
[52:45] agreement.
>> Second.
[52:47] » We have a motion by Commissioner Perry
and a second by Commissioner Bingham to
[52:50] approve the updated standard horse stall
month-to-month rental agreement form as
[52:56] presented by Ann Hansen. If there's no
further discussion, all in favor?
[53:00] » Aye.
>> Aye.
[53:01] » Motion passes. Thank you, Ann.
[53:05] Okay, Recorder's Office.
Uh
[53:11] Hi, Chad.
>> Hello.
[53:12] » You're going to talk to us about the
Common Chain, uh, LLC agreement.
[53:16] » Yes. Chad Montgomery,
county recorder. So I'm here to talk
[53:20] about, uh, the agreement 2613 with the
company Common Chain LLC.
[53:26] Um, this does two things for the
Recorder's Office. Um, it'll it uses,
[53:33] um,
it's used as a backup. So we'll have a a
[53:36] separate online
issue so that when things happen, like
[53:40] what happened in August, the the title
industry will still have a second option
[53:44] that's cloud-based
to be able to still do their
[53:48] um title searches and things and keep
that economy moving.
[53:52] Um so that was the biggest reason that
we wanted to go with them.
[53:55] The second reason was to They provide
They take all of our historical
[54:00] documents that we now have scanned, and
they will
[54:04] using AI index all that information and
put it in, which will significantly
[54:08] reduce
the cost to the county. Other
[54:12] um An important
thing to note is that other groups that
[54:17] that can do this would cost the county a
dollar per
[54:20] document to do that, and with so many
historical things that would be a huge
[54:23] cost.
The nice thing about this company is
[54:26] that there's no cost to the county.
Their Their money in this is all through
[54:32] the title searches that they provide,
and and any copies that are made from
[54:36] that go back to
the the county at the normal fee that we
[54:41] have in our fee structure. Um so with
the fact it doesn't cost us any money,
[54:46] we get all the benefit from that. That's
and we get the backup option.
[54:51] That That's why I'm asking the
commission to
[54:55] go with this agreement with Common
Ground.
[54:57] » So I mean do they have any guarantees
that in the event of a hack that their
[55:01] cloud-based system will protect you?
>> So it's a it's a completely separate
[55:07] thing, so we only we upload once a week.
And so there's not a continual
[55:13] connection there.
>> network then.
[55:14] » No, and so it's completely separate. So
that's one of the things, and we had the
[55:19] contract reviewed by the attorney's
office, and they made sure that those
[55:23] kind of things were the important things
were included in that, but with that
[55:27] separation where it's not a constant
communication, if one or the other goes
[55:31] down, it should not affect the other.
And that was an important thing for us
[55:35] as well.
>> Yeah.
[55:38] » Okay, well, I will make a motion that we
approve the Common Chain LLC agreement
[55:43] number 26-13.
>> I'll second it.
[55:46] » We have a motion by Commissioner Bingham
Bingham and a second by Commissioner
[55:50] Perry to approve the Common Chain LLC
agreement number 26-13 as presented by
[55:56] Chad Montgomery.
If there's no further discussion, all in
[55:59] favor say I.
>> I.
[56:01] » Motion passes. Thanks, Chad. Appreciate
you.
[56:06] All right, under the Treasurer's office,
request of forgiveness on interest and
[56:11] penalties for the unpaid property tax on
parcel 05
[56:16] 0-53-01
[56:19] 09, Heather Murphy.
>> Hi.
[56:22] » How are you? You going to come Can you
You want to come up?
[56:26] » Sorry.
>> Sean's going to come.
[56:30] We just want to have you up there with
us.
[56:32] » Do you want all that papers?
[56:39] Um
Um my 2025
[56:42] taxes just got done this morning.
>> Yeah, tell us who you are. Yeah, we need
[56:45] to know who you are.
>> Hi, I'm Heather Murphy [clears throat]
[56:48] and I used to live in Box Elder County a
couple and while I was living here a
[56:51] couple decades ago, my
paternal grandparents passed away and
[56:55] instead of paying down my mortgage on my
house, I decided to purchase a small
[56:58] building on Main Street in Tremonton
across from the old bell tower on the
[57:03] same street that my dad was born on in
1940. It was a good thing I did buy that
[57:10] um
commercial building because the rent
[57:13] from it has kept me and my five kids
afloat when my husband left us 10 years
[57:16] ago when my baby was youngest and I had
no job or training.
[57:20] I'm here today because I failed to pay
my property tax on the building in 2022
[57:26] through 2025.
And
[57:29] how in the world did I not notice that I
didn't pay it?
[57:34] I will tell you.
Um
[57:37] I went I remarried in 2022 and moved and
failed to contact the tax collector
[57:44] county to get my property tax bill
address changed and so where I wasn't
[57:49] receiving the notice
I didn't notice plus I wasn't um
[57:55] at my my second husband was paying our
taxes and
[58:00] I didn't, you know, didn't notice that I
mean
[58:03] he was doing our taxes and he didn't
notice that
[58:06] we weren't paying and um
and I was having a a lot of challenges
[58:12] with my second marriage
and at the beginning of 2025 I went
[58:17] through a divorce and now I'm in the
[58:22] process of rebuilding and taking full
responsibility of my finances and tax
[58:25] obligations again.
As part of that I recently became aware
[58:29] of the unpaid taxes while preparing my
2025 filings.
[58:34] And I am working to get everything
caught up as quickly as possible.
[58:38] Since my divorce my income has decreased
significantly which makes the
[58:42] accumulated penalties and interest a
much greater financial hardship at this
[58:45] time.
I take responsibility for not catching
[58:49] this sooner and I'm committed to
ensuring
[58:52] that all future tax notices
are properly received and monitored so
[58:56] this doesn't happen again.
So given the circumstances specifically
[59:01] the lack of notice due to the address
change, the significant life transitions
[59:05] of moving and getting married and all
those things um and my current financial
[59:09] hardship I I respectfully request that
the county consider waving or reducing
[59:14] the penalties and interest that have
occurred.
[59:21] » Sure. Sean, you want to tell us what the
penalties and interest are that we're
[59:24] talking about?
>> Yeah. So this is I just to make clear
[59:28] it's not a tax sale property.
Uh
[59:31] penalties and interest
uh amount to a total of $1,005.35.
[59:39] » Okay. And
can you substantiate to me the fact that
[59:43] we sent the letters out where we do we
know if we were getting them getting
[59:46] letters coming back to us or did they
just
[59:49] » Probably or else the person that was
receiving them just threw them away, but
[59:53] » Okay.
>> Yeah, they were going to the wrong
[59:55] address.
>> So it is they were not getting to her
[59:57] and that's so the
>> Yeah, they weren't getting to her. They
[1:00:00] had the wrong address on. They had the
previous address, right?
[1:00:02] » Okay.
>> So Shawn, because you're saying it's not
[1:00:05] a tax sale, that means we haven't
reached 5-year limit?
[1:00:08] » That's right. It's 4 years delinquent at
this point.
[1:00:12] » So I have a question for you.
So if if we decide to
[1:00:17] do away with the penalty and the
interest, are you going to be able to
[1:00:19] catch up on your taxes?
>> Yes, I have a a HELOC that's a 8%
[1:00:23] currently 8% interest rate and I will um
pay that. I will get caught up today.
[1:00:30] I will take use that loan to
to get caught up.
[1:00:33] » That's that's awesome. That's what I
That's what I like to hear actually, the
[1:00:35] fact you're going to catch up on your
taxes. That's great.
[1:00:37] » I'm really embarrassed.
>> Well, that that is the fact you're
[1:00:40] willing to to do what you've done to go
out and get a HELOC to get take care of
[1:00:43] your taxes is impressive. We sometimes
don't always see that either, so I'm
[1:00:47] impressed that you're willing to do
that. With that, I would make a motion
[1:00:49] that we do forgive the interest and
penalties on the unpaid property taxes
[1:00:53] for parcel 50-53-0109.
[1:00:58] » I'll second that.
>> We have a
[1:01:01] motion by Commissioner Perry and a
second by Commissioner Bingham to waive
[1:01:05] the uh interest and penalties on the
unpaid property tax on parcel
[1:01:09] 050-53-0109,
[1:01:14] Heather Murphy, as
uh presented. Is there any further
[1:01:18] discussion? All in favor, say aye.
>> Aye.
[1:01:20] » Motion passes.
Thank you.
[1:01:22] » Thank you so much.
[1:01:26] » Okay,
request forgiveness on interest and
[1:01:30] penalties for the unpaid property tax on
parcel 031-25-0103,
[1:01:37] Larry Stevens.
[1:01:44] » [snorts]
[1:02:01] » Yes, it is.
>> My name is Larry Stevens and I'm the
[1:02:06] owner of this. My mother-in-law actually
gave it to my wife. My wife has been in
[1:02:11] the hospital for quite a big time now
and I'm legally blind
[1:02:17] and so I haven't had a
uh
[1:02:22] way to pay all these things and
everything because of all the situations
[1:02:25] anyway. Long story short is I was trying
to wave that where I will pay the whole
[1:02:29] amount. I just wanted to see if I could
get the
[1:02:33] wave the uh fees and the interest rate
for it so I can come up with the rest of
[1:02:38] the amount. I have the money for that
but
[1:02:42] » What is the penalties and interest,
Shawn? Can you tell us that?
[1:02:46] » Yeah. Um
This is a tax sale property.
[1:02:51] And uh it's also a secondary residence
which makes the taxes quite a bit higher
[1:02:57] than a primary residence. The taxes
uh well, the penalties and interest
[1:03:03] combined are $3,374.47.
[1:03:14] » How much are the taxes?
[1:03:17] » You know, taxes are almost twice as much
what they
[1:03:21] of what they would be if it was a
primary residence. So, the taxes the
[1:03:25] total taxes owing for 5 years is
$14,775.13.
[1:03:30] » We do I live there about 6 months of the
year.
[1:03:34] So, we go back and forth and down there.
Whenever we have to do
[1:03:38] different
situations.
[1:03:40] » And the primary residence is in
Clearfield, is that right?
[1:03:43] » Primary I have in Clearfield.
So.
[1:03:46] » So, Mr. Stevens, do you
>> there about 6 months a year.
[1:03:50] » So, Mr. Stevens, you said that you you
can take care of the the taxes without
[1:03:54] the penalties and the interest?
>> Yeah.
[1:03:56] » And you can do that today?
>> Well, it'll be
[1:03:59] » Yeah, you can do it today.
>> Can you do it today? Okay, you can do it
[1:04:01] today.
Okay, with that uh
[1:04:04] agreement, I I make a motion that we um
approve the request for forgiving on
[1:04:09] interest and penalties for the
unpaid property tax on parcel 031
[1:04:15] -25-0103
for Larry Stevens.
[1:04:18] » I'll second it.
>> We have a motion by Commissioner Bingham
[1:04:22] and a second by Commissioner Perry to
approve the
[1:04:27] uh removing removing the interest and
penalties for the unpaid property tax on
[1:04:31] parcel 050-53-0
[1:04:36] No, excuse me.
031-25
[1:04:41] -0103
Larry Stevens. All in favor, say aye.
[1:04:46] » Aye.
>> Motion passes.
[1:04:48] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[1:04:50] » Thank you.
Okay, under human resources
[1:04:55] » [clears throat]
[1:04:59] » Jenica's going to come and visit with us
for a few minutes.
[1:05:03] About policy 28.
[1:05:10] » Okay, so we are in need of a new policy.
The state legislature passed a new law
[1:05:15] that goes into effect on May 6th of this
year
[1:05:19] that states that we as an employer are
not allowed to ask for an employee to
[1:05:23] pay for a medical exam up front when
it's work related.
[1:05:27] We have to just automatically pay for
it. We can't pay them, so we can't have
[1:05:32] them pay for it and then reimburse them,
which we have done with some in the
[1:05:36] past, so
this would just make it so that
[1:05:38] effective today, we wouldn't do that
practice anymore. We would just pay the
[1:05:42] bills directly.
[1:05:45] » So that that would become part of their
benefit package or
[1:05:49] » of already is, so um these are things
like uh CDL medical cards or a fit for
[1:05:55] duty exam, which we already pay directly
anyway.
[1:05:58] Um we mostly have been reimbursing the
medical cards for CDLs.
[1:06:03] So that's where you're going to see the
biggest impact, but we've already been
[1:06:06] paying it, so this just means I can't
have the employee pay up front and then
[1:06:10] reimburse them. We just have to pay
directly.
[1:06:12] » Pay directly.
>> Yep. We have two providers that are
[1:06:15] contracted to do that already, so should
be easy.
[1:06:20] » I make a motion that we adopt policy 28
employee medical examinations.
[1:06:24] » Second.
>> We have a We have a motion by
[1:06:26] Commissioner Perry to adopt policy 28
and second by Commissioner Bingham.
[1:06:31] There's no further discussions. All in
favor say I.
[1:06:34] » I.
>> Motion passes. Thank you.
[1:06:37] » Thanks, Janet. Appreciate it.
Okay, we're to the public comment period
[1:06:41] of our meeting. Those wishing to make
public comment shall sign the comment
[1:06:46] roll and be responsible for the
following rules outlined in the county
[1:06:50] commissioner rules and procedures.
Speakers will have one 3-minute
[1:06:56] opportunity to speak regardless of the
number of items they wish to address.
[1:07:00] Speakers shall address their comments to
the county commission only. There is
[1:07:06] This is a time to be heard. There will
be no back and forth dialogue with the
[1:07:10] commissioners.
Speakers may file copies of the remarks
[1:07:15] or supporting information with the
county clerk. The county clerk will make
[1:07:19] the information uh
available to the county commission.
[1:07:25] And we will start with
[1:07:29] Kent Hyer.
[1:07:43] » My name is Kent Hyer. Uh we are property
owners in the Blue Creek area.
[1:07:48] About 2,000 acres there and I came
specifically because of Mayda. I didn't
[1:07:55] know what it was. Suddenly I heard about
it this week and came to find out that
[1:08:00] you only learned about it 2 weeks ago.
So, it's not so confusing.
[1:08:05] But, I'm concerned about three things.
First, the amount of traffic this is
[1:08:11] going to bring into the area because we
are after all a rural area. And we're
[1:08:15] talking about 2,000 employees that are
going to have to travel up and down the
[1:08:20] Highway 84 to get to Hansel Valley
unless they're living in Hansel Valley.
[1:08:25] And that wasn't addressed in what he
said about Mayda. Secondly, um the power
[1:08:30] that's being used they say is coming
from
[1:08:34] the
Rhu
[1:08:36] pipeline?
I don't even know what that is.
[1:08:39] So, is that natural gas?
>> Yes.
[1:08:41] » Okay.
I thought as much.
[1:08:45] So, [snorts] it will not raise our
electrical
[1:08:48] prices at all, which is great. Um the
third thing when they talked about
[1:08:52] taking the briny water from the
Locomotive Springs and cleaning it and
[1:08:56] using it for cooling and then putting it
back in the aquifer.
[1:09:01] Do we know how far the aquifer reaches?
Does it reach out
[1:09:06] to Blue Creek from Hansel Valley?
I mean, I've heard stories the aquifer
[1:09:12] reaches to
um what was Thiokol, now it's whatever
[1:09:16] it's called.
But, I'm wondering if that's going to
[1:09:20] affect the aquifer or not.
They talked about putting it into the
[1:09:24] Great Salt Lake, which would be great to
increase the water level there cuz it
[1:09:28] desperately needs to be maintained.
But, those are the kinds of concerns I
[1:09:33] had when I came to this meeting. At
least I got some responses. I was
[1:09:37] worried that it was going to be just a
for-profit
[1:09:40] um
[1:09:42] mining facility [snorts] not
related to the government at all,
[1:09:46] especially after I heard that one of the
people from Shark Tank is involved in
[1:09:51] the project
So, yeah, I just hope you consider
[1:09:57] the people around the area, not just
those immediately affected in Hansel
[1:10:02] Valley when you consider what to do with
the mine of project, okay? That's all
[1:10:07] I've got to say.
>> Thank you, Kent. Appreciate it.
[1:10:09] » [clears throat]
>> Okay, Deanna Hardy.
[1:10:24] » [clears throat]
[1:10:26] » Okay.
Deanna Hardy Brigham.
[1:10:30] The Box Elder Committee of Liberty is
concerned that several times our
[1:10:33] comments have been incorrect in the
County Commission meeting minutes.
[1:10:37] When we submit our com- comments in
written form to the commission,
[1:10:41] a correction of the minutes of March
25th should reflect that our committee
[1:10:45] believes that zoning should only be
implemented when a property owner is
[1:10:50] doing something immoral or dangerous
with their property.
[1:10:54] In the minutes of March 25th, it only
stated immoral.
[1:10:59] Commissioner Perry reported to the
convention at the convention that the
[1:11:03] commissioners cut 4% from each county
develop-
[1:11:06] each county department, but failed to
inform the people of the large salary
[1:11:10] increases for elected representatives.
The sheriff received 17,594
[1:11:16] increase for 2025
and 4,391
[1:11:20] for 26.
County attorney received 7,098 increase
[1:11:24] for 25 and 4,785
for 26.
[1:11:29] Judge, 6,388 increase
for 25 and 4,308 for 26.
[1:11:38] The assessor, auditor, clerk, recorder,
treasurer each received 4,840
[1:11:43] increase for 25 and 3,271
for 26.
[1:11:49] The citizens do not receive an increase
in salary every year.
[1:11:52] They keep getting their money taken away
every year.
[1:11:56] The citizens' cries to our
representatives not to raise taxes were
[1:12:00] ignored.
The citizens have every right to protect
[1:12:03] their property by not paying tax
increases that were not consented to by
[1:12:08] the governed.
Grateful for all the citizens that
[1:12:11] stood, even if it was just for a little
while.
[1:12:14] And for those citizens that are
continuing to stand in resistance
[1:12:18] against the tax increases.
Quote, "A every major increase in
[1:12:24] liberty in our country's history has
been the result of people showing
[1:12:28] disobedience against bad laws.
Disobedience is the true foundation of
[1:12:33] liberty." Henry David Thoreau.
The citizens are being forced to turn
[1:12:38] over their hard-earned money so that
elected representatives can have larger
[1:12:42] salaries and to fund unconstitutional
socialist government programs.
[1:12:47] Our elected representatives are showing
no respect or concern for their
[1:12:51] constituents.
It was also reported county purchased an
[1:12:55] ambulance at a reduced rate. Why is our
county purchasing an ambulance?
[1:13:00] This should be the hospital's purchase
and part of the free market system.
[1:13:04] The citizens are double taxed with being
forced to pay into this service and then
[1:13:09] when the citizen actually use the
service, they are billed at an enormous
[1:13:13] rate, which is a double taxation.
Solution, restore the free market
[1:13:18] system.
Commissioner Bingham reported that he is
[1:13:21] for property rights but is trying to
zone all of the county's property, which
[1:13:25] is unconstitutional.
This country was founded on private
[1:13:29] property rights and representatives are
supposed to be protecting this right.
[1:13:33] » Okay, your time is up.
>> Okay, thank you.
[1:13:35] » Yep.
>> I'll let you read the rest of it.
[1:13:38] » Luanne Adams.
[1:13:52] » What is this for?
>> That's for you to snuggle with it if you
[1:13:55] » It's a comfort bunny.
>> Yeah, you just squeeze it if you get
[1:13:57] really upset.
>> [laughter]
[1:14:02] » It does it does hug back, so be careful.
>> My notes says spread kindness.
[1:14:08] Anyway, my name's Luanne Adams and I'm
I'm here um our family has property in
[1:14:14] the Salt Wells area and we're affected
by this
[1:14:17] um
this Myton deal.
[1:14:21] I was called some time ago um about the
property and and we let him know that we
[1:14:26] are a working ranch and
our ranch, let me just tell you a little
[1:14:30] bit about our ranch. It's historic
property, it goes back to um Bob's
[1:14:35] grandfather
and um we've put a lot of work into
[1:14:39] that. We have a seed business there,
forage kosher, and we have cattle on it.
[1:14:44] In in the wintertime, it's a good place
to to have your cattle because you don't
[1:14:48] have to feed a lot of hay. It's kind of
a open winter, so it's it's really great
[1:14:54] for that. And because we don't use a lot
of hay, it helps with this alfalfa that
[1:14:58] everybody's talking about. Um
They don't want farmers to raise.
[1:15:03] Anyway, we want to keep ranching. We
have I have my son is also here and his
[1:15:09] his son is. So, we got several
generations coming and there's we we
[1:15:14] couldn't take the money that they gave
us and turn around and find property
[1:15:17] that we have for winter range. And that
it is our good winter range. And um I
[1:15:23] learned a lot today. When they called
me, they first of all, they wanted
[1:15:27] 20,000 acres. Now, it's 40,000. They
didn't say the government was involved.
[1:15:31] They didn't say it was just the private,
the Shark Tank guy, you know, and and um
[1:15:36] so, and I didn't know it was going to be
an economic development. So, is
[1:15:40] is our property going to be involved in
that? And and how will we be affected by
[1:15:45] all that? I know they wanted a
non-attainment area and there's reasons
[1:15:49] why they want non-attainment. How is
that going to affect us? Um
[1:15:54] because it will. And um
with pollution and and other things,
[1:16:00] these um AI plants have loud noise.
If you've got on the internet, they're
[1:16:06] they're loud noises.
And water pollution, I'm I'm concerned
[1:16:11] about the water pollution and and um
when I talked to um
[1:16:18] the Holmgrens earlier, they thought that
the water was they were going to use it,
[1:16:23] they were going to recharge it, put it
back, and then they were going to be
[1:16:26] able to use it. Now, it's all going to
the Great Salt Lake.
[1:16:29] We're we're concerned about even
watering our cattle. I know it's
[1:16:33] brackish water, but our cattle uses
brackish water to that um
[1:16:37] you know, salty water, it's okay.
Um we're concerned about roads. On the
[1:16:43] roads of Salt Wells Road. If I I hope
they don't use that. It's got a lot of
[1:16:46] blind corners in it. And also even
coming out from Northrop Grumman from
[1:16:52] Brigham City, that road is getting worse
and worse. There's so much traffic on it
[1:16:57] and it will be an impact um going
forward. I guess we just want to know
[1:17:03] I know you guys didn't I think you kind
of learned from us in 10 months about
[1:17:07] this project. We did know earlier. They
said don't tell anybody. Don't tell
[1:17:12] anybody. We got some property owners
that you you know just don't tell. So
[1:17:17] I kept it to to myself for a little
while and then um anyway
[1:17:21] Um, we're we're not interested in in
selling our property this time and we
[1:17:26] want to be protected for what we have in
the future. So
[1:17:30] » up.
>> Thank you.
[1:17:31] » Thank you, LuAnn. Appreciate it.
>> [clears throat]
[1:17:34] » Okay, Suzanne Reese.
>> Um, they're going to give me a
[1:17:39] microphone cuz I can't stand and walk up
there.
[1:17:42] But
LuAnn just expressed my biggest concern
[1:17:46] concern. [clears throat] We own property
down in Salt
[1:17:49] » till the microphone for just 1 second so
we can record it?
[1:17:51] » Oh, okay. Now,
LuAnn expressed what I'm really
[1:17:55] concerned about, too,
is [clears throat] the roads that uh it
[1:18:00] it's really kind of a dangerous place
out there. The blind corners and up and
[1:18:05] down. And I'm concerned about 2,000
employees traveling those roads that
[1:18:12] could create a real hazard. And the
other thing I'm really concerned about
[1:18:16] is why this was kept so hush-hush and
not talked about. My grandson came home
[1:18:22] from college saying it was talked about
in his college class. And that's how we
[1:18:26] became aware of what was going on.
Because nobody else was supposed to
[1:18:30] know, but it was talked about over at
Utah State. But anyway, my My concern is
[1:18:36] the roads. It's pretty dangerous on
those roads right now, and you add
[1:18:40] another 2,000 people, it's going to be
life-threatening. Thank you.
[1:18:45] » Thank you. Appreciate that, Suzanne.
Tim Munns.
[1:18:51] » I thought we were
going in order of who was coming. It was
[1:18:54] a lottery. You drawing them out of a
hat, who's next?
[1:18:57] » You're it.
>> I only got 3 minutes, Commissioner.
[1:19:00] Thank you. Tim Munns, Hansel Valley.
Yeah, this thing is going to be huge.
[1:19:05] You get right to my 3 minutes. Change.
The only one who enjoys change is a
[1:19:09] baby, and that's the way it is. It
Nobody wants change in the name of
[1:19:13] progress, development. We've got to
manage what we're doing, but
[1:19:18] I get pretty wound up, and I did get
wound up. That's like Luann said, all my
[1:19:23] neighbors called me
for months. Have they talked to you? Did
[1:19:26] he talk to you? I think I'm the last
guy, the landowner on the list, me and
[1:19:30] my son Bud, to know what I shouldn't say
what the hell is going on, but that was
[1:19:35] a fact. And then the And then so
immediately after Austin called me,
[1:19:39] running by me, I chastised him a little
for being
[1:19:42] late to the game. He He had his reason
why he did, but
[1:19:47] it's going to make a huge impact on this
county, this state, and especially the
[1:19:51] valley, Hansel Valley.
[1:19:55] Unlike a lot of the red ranchers there,
which are all my neighbors, all my
[1:19:59] friends, we all respect each other's
opinion, but
[1:20:03] me and my son Bud have lived there. I've
been there 49 years as of last week.
[1:20:07] As anybody's going to be impacted in
this county,
[1:20:10] it's going to be us that actually live
there. It's been our residence, which
[1:20:14] that's no brag, that's fact, and ain't
debatable.
[1:20:19] And when something sounds too good to be
true, probably isn't.
[1:20:23] But given all the the short time with
just the digest the information we had,
[1:20:28] I got information on that. The first
call Austin was on a Thursday night. The
[1:20:32] next morning I was sitting at the
state capital building at 6:00 a.m. to
[1:20:37] ask every elected official there what
they knew about it.
[1:20:41] And I just got that kind of a blank
stare. Called the county commissioner on
[1:20:44] the way, they knew nothing about it. So,
one of our
[1:20:49] whatever word you want to use was
coming late to the game.
[1:20:53] Now,
it doesn't matter now.
[1:20:56] We've been informed
it's going to be an economic boom for
[1:20:59] the county if we can believe what
they're telling us and what and I got no
[1:21:03] reason not to.
It's going to be a massive
[1:21:07] increase in the budget for the county,
the school district, and others.
[1:21:11] It's going to affect us
immensely. It's going to affect all of
[1:21:15] my neighbors down there.
[1:21:19] I don't I I guess the tipping point on
that deal was was the might aspect of
[1:21:24] it.
Was the military, the Department of
[1:21:26] Defense, the need for this data center.
I still don't comprehend why we need it
[1:21:32] why it's got to be so giant, but
after weighing all the information, my
[1:21:36] two sons are in the ranching business
with me. We
[1:21:39] I told Austin money isn't the object. We
want to just continue doing what we're
[1:21:42] doing. We're happy with what we're
doing, but like I said, change is
[1:21:45] inevitable. Progress is going to come.
Who would ever agreed with that Ruby
[1:21:49] went through? We did not own that
personal land that it's going but we own
[1:21:53] a substantial piece. We've been blessed
to no end. The 49 years
[1:21:57] » [clears throat]
>> I told you I'd get emotional. We even
[1:21:59] know We've been there. We've been
blessed to no end. To expand that thing
[1:22:02] tenfold over. It's going to be less than
5% of the land we own
[1:22:07] currently that they've
approached us about purchasing. The
[1:22:11] sliver right beside of the
of the state. So, we're not selling out,
[1:22:15] but we are on the team.
We are on board with this project.
[1:22:21] I wouldn't say like Paul said it was a
welcome with open arms. Hell no, we
[1:22:26] we had a lot of unanswered questions,
just like the commission did and like
[1:22:30] everybody did.
And I think you know that but after
[1:22:33] weighing
if or not it could be stopped by the
[1:22:37] time we come in there this
this goose was hatched and this turkey
[1:22:41] was cooked. It looked like to me and we
it was either watch what's happening or
[1:22:45] be involved. So we chose to be involved.
We're supporting the project right now.
[1:22:50] » Okay, Tim, your time's up.
>> Is it?
[1:22:52] » Thank you.
>> Yeah.
[1:22:54] » I know it's unbelievable but it is.
Thanks, Tim.
[1:22:56] » [laughter]
>> I had a thought when you said welcome
[1:22:59] with open arms but this is not the place
to tell it so
[1:23:04] » Rick Ellis.
[1:23:14] » Rick Ellis, Howell Valley.
Um
[1:23:17] we don't have any idea of the scope of
this project. I've seen several of these
[1:23:21] across the country.
Uh it's mind-boggling.
[1:23:25] Good or bad, I'm for it and I'm and I'm
against it.
[1:23:29] It's going to change Box Elder County
and our areas out there forever.
[1:23:34] The lack of transparency really concerns
me.
[1:23:37] And the $15 million that they're
offering
[1:23:41] Box Elder County is a drop in the bucket
of what the infrastructure is going to
[1:23:45] cost us.
Where's that money going to come from?
[1:23:49] Uh like I said, I'm not not for and
against it. I've got interests both
[1:23:54] ways.
Um but it is going to change what we're
[1:23:57] doing forever and we need to look at it
very carefully and structure it
[1:24:02] to where it's going to benefit Box Elder
County
[1:24:05] and the residents.
We've we've heard the sales pitch, the
[1:24:08] patriotic heartstrings.
That's all fine and great
[1:24:12] but we need to make darn sure that it
benefits us.
[1:24:17] Thank you.
>> Thanks, Rick. Appreciate that.
[1:24:23] Douglas Holland
[1:24:36] » My name is Douglas Holland. I'm one of
the landowners in uh
[1:24:40] the MIDA area.
Um
[1:24:45] I just wanted to thank the county
commission,
[1:24:48] uh MIDA representatives, and
and the developers and the information
[1:24:54] that they have been able to provide for
us.
[1:24:57] And the due diligence that the
commission seems to be doing.
[1:25:00] Um
it's all important.
[1:25:03] I've been in meetings with
some of the county commissioners, with
[1:25:07] the MIDA representatives,
and the local landowners that are
[1:25:12] directly impacted with purchase of the
properties.
[1:25:17] And both the commission and the MIDA
representatives
[1:25:21] were
very interested in mitigating any of the
[1:25:27] potential impacts
to the area, not only just that valley,
[1:25:32] Hansel Valley, but the local the entire
area in the county.
[1:25:37] And I just wanted to thank the
commission
[1:25:39] and the MIDA representatives and the
developers for their willingness to
[1:25:44] mitigate whatever problems there are
and for the landowners and the local
[1:25:48] representatives.
Thank you.
[1:25:51] » Thank you. Appreciate that.
[1:25:56] Ann Varner
[1:26:02] Hi, Ann.
>> Hi. I'm Ann Varner and we are one of the
[1:26:06] landowners in Hansel Valley where this
has been talked about today for the data
[1:26:10] center and we feel like this is a
once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
[1:26:15] We feel like this will help the impact
of the state of Utah and Box Elder and
[1:26:20] um
Doug is one of the who just barely spoke
[1:26:24] is
also said the way I feel we're for it.
[1:26:28] And thank you for your time.
>> Okay, thank you Anne. Appreciate that.
[1:26:37] Becky Miller
[1:26:49] » Okay, I'm
I'm Becky Miller and I'm also one of the
[1:26:54] landowners. Um we live on the property
with Anne and Doug and I feel like um
[1:27:01] it's going to be a great economic thing
for
[1:27:03] um this county or I wouldn't um be
supporting it. I I I feel like it will
[1:27:07] be a positive thing with not a lot of
impact. I'm sure to the people who live
[1:27:12] here of course but with
um some of the other things that they've
[1:27:15] been saying they say that it should be
fine. So, um I just give my support to
[1:27:19] the project.
>> Okay, thank you.
[1:27:23] Matt Tubbs
[1:27:29] » [clears throat]
[1:27:33] » Commissioners, my name is Matt Tubbs. Um
I own property
[1:27:38] that's within the bounds of the Stratus
area project. Um I just want to
[1:27:43] uh let you know that I do support that
project and am in favor of Mayda.
[1:27:49] Um I've been working with the Westgen
Co. team for
[1:27:53] a few months now and they've been uh
very transparent and they only want
[1:27:58] what's best for the county and the
landowner. So, I I do support the
[1:28:02] project. Thank you.
>> Thank you so much.
[1:28:08] Russell Boyer
[1:28:20] » Yes, my name's Russ Boyer, landowner
Locomotive
[1:28:24] Springs there.
We are in support of this project, the
[1:28:29] Stratus project.
Uh my family has ranched there since
[1:28:33] late 1800s down there in Locomotive.
Also based in Idaho, and so we're very
[1:28:40] familiar with the ground.
My family is also employed at Northrop
[1:28:44] Grumman.
And I feel this project is needed. This
[1:28:49] pipeline was put through on us with the
Ruby pipeline. I think it was in
[1:28:54] 2010.
And there's not been much use for the
[1:28:57] county here.
And the economic gain that can be gained
[1:29:01] from this and the jobs, we need it. For
the race to space and everything else in
[1:29:07] our military.
Uh with all the conflicts we have going
[1:29:11] on in the world, it is a data
based driven race and this is the
[1:29:16] current technology we're using and so
our family's in support of it with our
[1:29:21] ground.
>> Thank you very much.
[1:29:25] Ken Eliason?
[1:29:35] » Hello. Ken Ken Eliason.
>> Eliason.
[1:29:38] » And I ranch down there with uh
Locomotive Springs area, too. My
[1:29:42] grandfather's been there
75 years ago and along with other
[1:29:47] ranchers and uh
me and my two sons, we still ranch there
[1:29:52] with private ground and on private
ground and BLM ground.
[1:29:56] And the first thought I had when it came
when I heard about it was uh you know,
[1:30:01] no way, you know, wasn't for it, but
more I learned about it, uh
[1:30:06] for us it'd just be a small part on
in our area. I am concerned about the
[1:30:11] roads, the traffic.
Uh but uh they've eased, you know, our
[1:30:16] concerns with with the technology that
they say that they have.
[1:30:20] Uh not using a lot of water, but uh
I am in in favor of it and I
[1:30:27] I think it'll be a big boon for Curlew
Valley, the up the valley up north there
[1:30:32] for employment and other things. Uh but
yes, I that's where I'm at, so.
[1:30:38] » Okay, Ken, thank you so much. Appreciate
it.
[1:30:43] » Bud Munns.
[1:30:57] Gentlemen, thank [clears throat] you for
your time.
[1:30:58] I'd like to thank you that the
commissioners for holding this hearing
[1:31:01] and and hearing out what we have to say.
Uh just for the record, I am for the
[1:31:04] MIDA application the MIDA application
specifically. I I think it is a
[1:31:08] is a good thing. Um
or you know, back My name is Bud Munns.
[1:31:12] I'm an I'm a property owner that's
actually in the proposed MIDA area. You
[1:31:17] guys have seen the proposed map,
correct? I'm I'm assuming, yeah. Um
[1:31:22] The impacts, we know there's going to be
some negatives
[1:31:25] and there's going to be some positives.
I'm in favor because as long as we show
[1:31:29] a net positive to the locals, like the
direct locals,
[1:31:33] and the surrounding areas that are
around that, the neighboring ranches,
[1:31:36] and then to our county specifically, and
I think the the benefits are there. Um
[1:31:41] and should go forward with that. Um
as far as the military aspect goes, I
[1:31:46] can speak to that personally.
Um
[1:31:50] We're behind
>> [clears throat]
[1:31:52] » in our computing power. It is what it
is. I'm a realist. I know that
[1:31:56] humanity has got to move on and and if
not us, then who? You know, this could
[1:32:00] move on to a different state, and we
could move we could lose the opportunity
[1:32:03] that's right here before us. So, I say
we jump on it and gain it so um we can
[1:32:08] get the benefit from it and I think our
workforce
[1:32:11] can handle it and we can put up a good
product for the military aspect of it.
[1:32:15] Um
I would like to for you to uh the your
[1:32:18] consideration for a local like direct
local to sit on that seven-member might
[1:32:22] aboard that was discussed and I live
there.
[1:32:25] So,
um time is of the essence.
[1:32:28] It's what they're saying. So,
I know you guys need to gather a lot of
[1:32:32] information
um and I'm not saying that we need to
[1:32:35] bypass anything or take a look at
things.
[1:32:38] Um but
if we delay [clears throat] it, there's
[1:32:41] an opportunity that it could go to a
different county. Um
[1:32:45] We were notified by the yeah, a couple
of months ago when we wrapped our mind
[1:32:48] around it and it'll be
it was what it was um
[1:32:52] but like I say, I I think it's going to
be a positive thing that a lot of
[1:32:55] negatives that were you know, all three
of you know that my concerns and we have
[1:32:59] addressed those and I think from their
end they've uh
[1:33:02] they've appeased me of what what they
need to do and what they can do to
[1:33:05] mitigate those. So, we move forward the
process. Thank you for your time.
[1:33:08] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[1:33:11] » Dustin Mills.
[1:33:19] Dustin Mills,
uh fourth generation rancher also in
[1:33:22] that same area.
Not sure if I consider myself Hansel
[1:33:25] Valley or Promontory. We're about 4
miles south of where the proposed area
[1:33:28] is. Um
Kind of no man's land. But my concern is
[1:33:34] this. I as has been stated, there's
positives and there's negatives. What I
[1:33:37] want to know is as we move forward if
this project go moves forward, what can
[1:33:41] be done to mitigate any negative impacts
that it may have that we don't recognize
[1:33:46] right now. The the proposed site's in
the bottom of a valley. We all have
[1:33:50] water and wells and things that are
above there. If the water impact is
[1:33:53] greater than anticipated and it affects
us, what can what moving forward what
[1:33:58] our What's our recourse? What can we do
to ensure that our livelihood and our
[1:34:02] properties are protected? And number
two, with that on that same note, I
[1:34:07] mean, with the amount of traffic and
things that's going out there, a lot of
[1:34:09] that's open range. Is some of that going
to have to be fenced in order to cause
[1:34:13] to
to stop cattle on car collisions? Who
[1:34:15] pays for that? Who Who pays for the
ongoing impacts that we may not even see
[1:34:20] right now if this goes forward. That's
That's my big concern.
[1:34:24] And then my other concern is and this is
kind of a I realize progress moves
[1:34:29] forward no matter what, but as these
type of things move into our county, the
[1:34:33] land values go up and that's can be a
good thing and that can be a bad thing.
[1:34:37] But as we look at I mean, we're already
at a marginal level in which agriculture
[1:34:42] can support the value of the land. If
this project drives the land values up
[1:34:45] even higher, it's going to have an
impact on the entire portion of the
[1:34:48] western county, which it'll drive the
next generation off their ranches
[1:34:51] because they can't afford to stay there.
That's something I think as a county as
[1:34:54] we look at our heritage and our culture,
we need to consider that. Thanks
[1:34:58] [snorts] for your time.
>> Thank you so much.
[1:35:01] Shayne Holmgren.
[1:35:05] » [snorts]
[1:35:11] » Uh Shayne Holmgren, Bar H Ranch.
Uh
[1:35:15] I'm a
fifth generation
[1:35:18] on our our ranch out there.
I've got
[1:35:22] three kids which are all here with me
today and my wife and we have
[1:35:28] continued on our legacy.
And when Austin approached me with this
[1:35:34] with Gen West Co,
I thought, you want to what? This is
[1:35:38] crazy.
The more we have had family meetings and
[1:35:42] discussed back and forth, we can see
nothing but the pros
[1:35:47] of this
coming versus the cons.
[1:35:52] Uh
I want to use one example
[1:35:57] years ago when bought when Beaver City
was approached by Proctor & Gamble
[1:36:03] to be a part of Beaver City.
The forefathers then shut
[1:36:09] Proctor & Gamble out and said, "We don't
want you."
[1:36:13] They found a way to go around
the loop
[1:36:17] and they still put the building in.
And to this day it says Beaver City, but
[1:36:21] Beaver City doesn't get any revenue.
So, that being said, I think to get on
[1:36:27] board now the county's going to do
great, the state's going to benefit,
[1:36:32] and I'm 100% supportive of this.
Thank you.
[1:36:36] » Thank you. Appreciate it.
[1:36:41] Okay, if there's no other comments,
[1:36:47] we appreciate um
those who spoke to us and
[1:36:51] and uh raised your concerns. We
appreciate being able to hear from you
[1:36:55] today. Um those things have been said we
won't take lightly. That's one of the
[1:36:59] reasons we wanted to visit with you so
we could get your feelings and uh as we
[1:37:04] look at this project and and uh
those issues that it could have on our
[1:37:09] county. So, thank you for being here.
Uh
[1:37:12] » Weren't registered?
>> We just took care of it.
[1:37:14] » Got that done. So, uh
Do we don't have anything in closed
[1:37:19] session, right?
Okay.
[1:37:22] Um
I take a motion to adjourn.
[1:37:26] » I move we adjourn.
>> I second.
[1:37:28] » Have a motion by Commissioner Bingham to
adjourn and and a second by Commissioner
[1:37:32] Perry.
All in favor?
[1:37:34] » Aye.
>> We're adjourned. Thank you.
[1:37:49] » I did.
[1:37:57] » Right. That's actually