[0:28] Okay, I like to call to order this
[0:30] commission Grant County Commission
[0:32] meeting on April 21st
[0:34] at 4:00. In attendance we have
[0:37] Commissioner Trish Vadine, Commissioner
[0:38] Jacque Chandler,
[0:40] Commissioner Brian Martinez,
[0:41] Commissioner Mary McCann, Commissioner
[0:43] Mike McCurdy, Commissioner Bill
[0:44] Winfield, and myself, Commissioner
[0:47] Elodie McChallice, and with our County
[0:48] Attorney Steven Stocks, our Commission
[0:51] Administrator Mark Tyner,
[0:53] our Associate Commission Administrator
[0:55] Quinn is here, and then we also have our
[0:57] Clerk Auditor Gabriel Woitas.
[1:00] And we I just wanted to clear um
[1:03] a couple things information to the
[1:05] public
[1:06] is that the scene rezone
[1:09] has been postponed by the applicant, and
[1:12] number six on the agenda tonight also
[1:15] has been postponed. That's the
[1:17] development agreement with the Moab City
[1:19] for the water tank.
[1:21] All right. So, we'll go ahead and do the
[1:23] Pledge of Allegiance.
[1:28] I pledge allegiance to the flag
[1:30] of the United States of America, and to
[1:33] the republic for which it stands, one
[1:35] nation under God, indivisible, with
[1:38] liberty and justice for all.
[1:45] Okay, I was leaving a spot at the
[1:47] beginning of the meeting for our elected
[1:49] officials our other elected officials in
[1:50] case they wanted to pop in, but I don't
[1:52] see anybody
[1:53] here or online, so we'll move along to
[1:56] our 4:00 citizens to be heard. Is there
[1:59] anyone that would like to speak today?
[2:06] Next.
[2:11] Oh, come on, Allison.
[2:18] Is there a easy way to stand?
[2:20] You can sit or stand.
[2:23] It's up to you.
[2:24] Is the speaker um that little uh
[2:27] the rectangular box? Yeah. I can't see
[2:28] it from here, but that's the best you
[2:30] can do with the seating.
[2:39] All right. As usual, I am here to
[2:41] exercise my First Amendment rights to
[2:43] petition the government for a redress of
[2:45] grievances. I will very briefly note is
[2:48] that I've still not heard a response
[2:49] from Attorney Stocks on this matter, of
[2:52] which I think is a grave importance.
[2:55] Uh my comments today are going to be
[2:56] about the uh shuttle pilot uh summary
[2:59] that was released. I submitted these in
[3:02] writing. This will be an abbreviated of
[3:04] that. And um I think that the summary proposal or
[3:10] the summary basically proved the point
[3:13] that Commissioner McGinn was making was
[3:16] that it is not feasible to do a um
[3:19] uh
[3:20] shuttle bus system based on the cost.
[3:23] So, in other words, I have 3 million
[3:25] facts that I'm bringing to your
[3:27] attention. Basically, that is dollars.
[3:30] Uh
[3:31] Commissioner McGinn's comments were what
[3:34] she saw was that it would cost $2.5
[3:36] million to do a study. Their their pilot
[3:39] has 3 million. That's a good 20% higher.
[3:42] And also, the other thing they did not
[3:45] include during the discussion last time
[3:47] is the number of people that it could
[3:48] potentially bring into the park and the
[3:51] number that it could uh displays. I used
[3:54] the very limited information in that
[3:56] summary of which two buses entering the
[3:59] park per hour with 15 maximum capacity
[4:02] of 15 each. That's a maximum of 30
[4:04] people per hour. That's for an 11-hour
[4:08] of which I believe time to tree was last
[4:10] year or that was the number I got off of
[4:12] Park Service uh website. That's grand
[4:14] total of 330 people a day. That would
[4:17] decrease 8.3 vehicles per hour using the
[4:21] National Park Service's factor of 2.9
[4:24] vehicles or people to per car. Is that
[4:27] going to make a difference? I don't
[4:28] think so. Uh National Park Service data
[4:30] says during the middle part of the day
[4:32] more than 800 vehicles are in the park
[4:35] um at a given time and that's during the
[4:37] uh um peak time. And also, what would be
[4:39] the cost of bringing people into into
[4:42] the park? If you use the $3 million, you
[4:45] use the two shuttle buses entering the
[4:47] park. I'm not talking about the other
[4:49] routes because in my opinion, what
[4:50] matters is the people it's bringing into
[4:53] the park. The number of people it's
[4:55] bringing into the park needs
[4:57] 11 hours per day, full buses, which is
[5:00] not a reasonable assumption, uh and
[5:03] extending the pilot to the end of
[5:04] October, which was the ending date was
[5:07] not in the summary, would be $54.44
[5:11] cents per person to bring people into
[5:13] the park. If you they are 75% full,
[5:16] which is still quite full for a shuttle
[5:18] bus uh throughout the day, it's $72.58.
[5:21] If you um
[5:25] uh run the buses 15 hours a day and then
[5:28] October it's dark for many of those
[5:30] hours, it only gets down to $39.92
[5:34] per day. The economics do not work.
[5:37] Sure, would a shuttle bus system be
[5:38] great? Yes, but there's a math problem
[5:41] which Mr. Martinez and Mr. Winfield have
[5:44] not surpassed. You cannot do it for a
[5:47] reasonable amount of money, particularly
[5:49] when you put it into perspective of
[5:51] what's known as OMPS funding, which is
[5:53] the MPS green book for 2025. Archer's
[5:57] green book funding was 2.55 million.
[5:59] They're going to spend more on a shuttle
[6:01] system for 5 and 1/2 months serving
[6:03] about 55,000 people than it costs to run
[6:06] the entire park, including resource
[6:07] management, maintenance, and everything
[6:09] else for an entire year. Thank you.
[6:15] All right.
[6:16] Pete, did you want to come talk?
[6:25] My name is Pete Gross. I thought you
[6:26] knew that, but for the record.
[6:29] Um
[6:31] I'd like to revisit an issue that was
[6:33] part of the last meeting.
[6:35] Um
[6:36] well, but backing up to this body sent a
[6:39] letter demanding that Laura Long resign
[6:42] from the planning commission because of
[6:44] a conflict of an alleged conflict of
[6:46] interest, even though she pledged and
[6:49] honored that pledge to recuse herself
[6:51] from any vote discussion relating to
[6:54] Cane Creek, now rebranded as Echo Canyon
[6:57] because Cane Creek has become a toxic
[6:59] name for the company.
[7:01] Um
[7:02] Last year,
[7:04] the interim zoning director, Chrissy
[7:06] Hauffline, at the planning commission
[7:08] meeting presented I I didn't know who
[7:11] she was. I happened to be at that
[7:13] meeting, and I listened. I thought,
[7:14] "Wow, that's pretty compelling arguments
[7:16] to deny the rezone of the Steen
[7:19] property."
[7:20] And
[7:21] at the end of that discussion, the vote,
[7:23] if I remember correctly, was
[7:25] six to zero, six people opposed to the
[7:29] rezone, one abstention.
[7:32] Okay? So
[7:34] and and
[7:35] subsequent to that, Chrissy Hauffline
[7:37] was removed from her position as zoning
[7:40] director, even though it was only an
[7:42] interim position, was going to only last
[7:43] a few more months. And you appointed a
[7:45] temporary guy who,
[7:47] you know, probably didn't have certainly
[7:49] not the breadth of experience that she
[7:51] did dealing with the issue.
[7:53] Uh what else? So, um
[7:57] Yeah, that I'm just baffled.
[8:00] Then, um and as you saw the previous
[8:02] meeting, public opposition was
[8:04] [clears throat]
[8:05] pretty unanimous in opposition to the
[8:07] rezone for compelling reasons.
[8:09] Bog Springs Ranch was one of the
[8:11] reasons, and the planning commission,
[8:13] after you like um refused
[8:16] their unanimous slate of people to
[8:19] appoint to the commission. I remember
[8:20] Jen Ziadis was one of the ones that you
[8:22] replaced with somebody else.
[8:23] One of the most eminently qualified
[8:25] people in the whole community.
[8:27] Um sorry, I'm kind of a little bit of
[8:29] all over the place here. I still haven't
[8:31] had
[8:33] Then,
[8:34] we have um
[8:36] the ASL alternative,
[8:38] which, at the time at least,
[8:40] one of your commissioners who presented
[8:42] it claims to be the author. Seems like
[8:45] it was probably multiple people. Um did
[8:47] not recuse himself, even though at the
[8:49] time he was employed by a company who's
[8:51] concessionaire in Arch just
[8:53] So,
[8:54] um
[8:55] oh, and then even more recently
[8:57] regarding the shuttle, um
[8:59] one of your commissioners was happy
[9:01] would have happily served on that that
[9:04] board to with the shuttle pilot program
[9:07] recommendations, and was referred to as
[9:10] obstructionist.
[9:11] And
[9:13] I can only see that as just a pejorative
[9:15] for someone who might be a reality
[9:17] check. For like, just as the previous
[9:20] commenter pointed out, it really doesn't
[9:23] make economic sense. And it seems to me
[9:25] that's the kind of voice you would want
[9:26] on on that board. Anyway, thank you for
[9:28] your time. I have 2 seconds left.
[9:33] Okay, do we have anyone else who wants
[9:34] to come speak?
[9:37] No, and I don't think there's anybody on
[9:38] mine, so we will move along
[9:41] to
[9:45] our number
[9:46] our joint Moab. So, we had a joint Moab
[9:48] City Council and Grand County Commission
[9:51] meeting
[9:52] last Friday, and I was going to run down
[9:54] a recap of that, and then if there's
[9:55] anything that I missed, then any other
[9:57] commissioners could hop in and say
[10:00] something. So,
[10:02] it was just
[10:04] this was just a
[10:06] first step in formalizing some
[10:08] collaboration between the city and the
[10:09] county on shared community issues. We
[10:11] didn't
[10:12] touch [clears throat] on all of them,
[10:13] obviously. We just got a few there. So,
[10:16] the goal was to combine resources and
[10:18] ensure that we have consistent support
[10:20] for the community as a whole.
[10:22] Uh the first thing we talked about was
[10:24] the site futures plan. We had Sax and
[10:27] Sharp and Mary Bethan for that.
[10:31] They um discussion centered obviously on
[10:34] the Amtra and futures site plan. It went
[10:37] through the last three different groups
[10:40] that have done that, and well, they're
[10:41] getting ready to do an additional
[10:43] plan on on that. And then there was We
[10:47] talked about We have a memorandum of of
[10:49] understanding between the city and the
[10:51] county right now, and it's kind of
[10:54] defunct, I guess you could say. And so,
[10:56] we definitely are going to be revisiting
[10:58] that as it gets closer to having the
[11:01] property transferred. Um the mayor did
[11:03] mention that as the land gets closer to
[11:05] transfer, that there was a possible
[11:06] grant for feasibility study for the site
[11:08] planning that could be like 1.2 to 2
[11:10] million dollars, and I think that that
[11:12] is something we'd want to work together
[11:13] on.
[11:14] And then we also talked We've been
[11:16] talking with Amtra. Um there's been
[11:18] multiple commissioners here, as well as
[11:21] leadership from Amtra and the Department
[11:23] of Energy and other
[11:25] community members talking about the
[11:26] infrastructure that is out at Amtra
[11:28] right now and what we might want, and we
[11:30] will be bringing that before the
[11:32] commission on our May 19th meeting as a
[11:35] you know, just to let you guys know what
[11:36] we're going to ask for on that June 1st
[11:39] meeting.
[11:41] Then we moved on to economic
[11:42] development.
[11:44] The city talked about wanting to put a
[11:46] sidewalk between the liquor store and
[11:50] well, from
[11:52] the city limits, which is our general
[11:54] endpoint S out to the liquor store and
[11:56] Dan Hinckley from UDOT was there and he
[11:59] spoke about
[12:01] that they would pay for the curb and the
[12:02] gutter and the asphalt tie-in. The city,
[12:05] I think, mentioned that they would pay
[12:06] for the concrete for the sidewalks and
[12:07] they were asking the county to pay for
[12:09] the design. And so, I know that we have
[12:11] admin reaching out to research what that
[12:15] cost would be and that will come before
[12:16] us in the next few meetings.
[12:20] Talked about the senior about senior
[12:21] services
[12:23] and the Moab Area Partnership for
[12:24] Seniors project that I've been working
[12:26] on with the Council of Aging and the
[12:28] Canyonlands Healthcare Special Service
[12:30] District. We just put out a RFP for that
[12:32] design. There's also a
[12:36] um [clears throat]
[12:38] comprehensive elder adults
[12:42] older adults survey going around the
[12:44] community and that'd be great. We need
[12:46] to get as many people to fill that out.
[12:47] You fill it out for your friends, your
[12:49] neighbors, just someone and and even
[12:50] yourselves.
[12:52] Um even if you're not an older adult,
[12:54] we're going to all be there one day and
[12:55] so, it's we need to get that information
[12:57] because we can use this for future planning, future grants, future
[13:04] requests from the legislature for money
[13:05] for our community. So,
[13:07] um
[13:08] and then we talked about the downtown
[13:11] plan that has not been updated since
[13:12] 2017.
[13:14] They're creating a multi-jurisdictional
[13:16] committee and so, they've asked the
[13:17] county to be have a seat at the table. I
[13:19] don't know which one of us commissioners
[13:20] will be there yet, but they're going to
[13:22] invite someone from tourism, the local
[13:24] business community and other, you know,
[13:27] roads, parking, other people to be part
[13:29] of that master plan for downtown.
[13:32] And then we also had an update on the
[13:33] golf course and what
[13:36] the RFPs that have gone out to
[13:39] do a master plan for the golf course.
[13:40] And that was paid for by the rural
[13:42] community grant from the county. And the
[13:44] city also donated $25,000 towards that.
[13:47] They got the lease signed at the golf
[13:48] course, which is great. I think it's a
[13:49] 15-year lease, so
[13:51] that's a I think that's a first step.
[13:53] It's been a while since that lease has
[13:55] been updated, so that's a really good
[13:56] step to keep that golf course here for
[13:58] the community.
[14:00] And then our last conversation piece was
[14:03] the water conservation and the city
[14:07] talked about what they're planning for
[14:09] conservation. Of course, they're asking
[14:10] everybody to water in the mornings and
[14:12] the evenings and
[14:15] water to keep your grass alive, not
[14:17] thriving. So, alive not thriving this
[14:19] year. Water your trees. We are in a slow
[14:22] water year. And then Brian updated us on
[14:25] the water conservancy plan from Winter
[14:26] Park, which is very similar, and he also
[14:28] updated about water issues around the
[14:30] state regarding and regarding the
[14:31] Colorado River.
[14:33] So, anyways, this is a continued
[14:35] partnership, so the next meeting is
[14:36] going to be scheduled for August 18th
[14:38] here at the Grand County Commission.
[14:39] We'll start our meeting a little earlier
[14:41] that day.
[14:42] And that's all I have. So, does anyone
[14:44] else want to comment or yeah, add
[14:46] anything? Good. Good to know, Trisha.
[14:48] Thank you for host or setting that up.
[14:52] Yeah, I'll comment, Trisha. No. Okay.
[14:54] We're good.
[14:55] No, just I have future considerations
[14:56] when you get there.
[14:57] >> Okay, we're almost there. Yes. So, Thank
[14:59] you. Um, we are at yes, general business
[15:01] action items discussion and
[15:03] consideration and approval. So, number
[15:05] one is our commission member disclosures
[15:07] and future considerations.
[15:09] Mike? Uh, my wife works for the
[15:11] sheriff's department. Okay.
[15:13] Bill? Um, I've got several. Um, just a
[15:16] short clarification regarding a vote of
[15:18] the CIB. I was appointed to that board
[15:21] by SERDA. That's where my
[15:24] first obligation is is to the
[15:27] Southeastern Rural Development Agency
[15:29] that put me on that board rather than
[15:31] some confusion around the fact that it
[15:33] might have been a requirement as a
[15:35] commissioner. [laughter]
[15:37] Grand County's letter.
[15:40] Um number two, I've requested some open
[15:42] meeting training from the county
[15:45] attorney. There's um information going
[15:48] out mainly through social media that
[15:51] needs to be clarified.
[15:53] I don't believe um four or five
[15:55] commissioners showing up at the
[15:57] Christmas parade constitutes a quorum of
[16:00] a county meeting.
[16:02] Uh also, I've requested a memo from the
[16:05] county commissioner, excuse me, the
[16:08] county attorney regarding board liaison
[16:11] positions and and the difference between
[16:15] boards that we get appointed to
[16:17] by other entities. So, hopefully we'll
[16:20] see those in the future. And then the
[16:21] third item I'd like on the next agenda
[16:24] would be
[16:25] a letter [clears throat] of support that
[16:27] I would like to do for SITLA on the sale
[16:30] of a large block of land to the DWR
[16:34] up in the Book Cliffs. And possibly
[16:36] Commissioner Hedin might want to work on
[16:38] that with me. More than glad to do that,
[16:41] but it's a
[16:43] chunk of land that will
[16:44] protect it for the public and keep it in
[16:47] the public's hands into the future.
[16:49] It'll also support our school districts
[16:51] and it will
[16:54] Uh let's see. It's in a Book Cliffs road
[16:57] roadless area up there. So, we'd like to
[16:59] get a letter on that next one. Their
[17:01] meeting, I want to say, is
[17:04] following our meeting. So, a letter of
[17:06] support for the SITLA would be great to
[17:08] have before they go into their meeting
[17:10] on May 21st.
[17:13] That's all I've got.
[17:15] Okay.
[17:16] Thank you.
[17:17] Uh Brian was up then you
[17:19] >> Go ahead, Brian. I just started paying
[17:20] attention. I didn't raise my hand.
[17:23] Okay, I have clarification. So you said
[17:25] May 21st [clears throat]
[17:27] will be the day that the DEW arm meeting
[17:29] is? Yes, ma'am. Following our May 21st?
[17:32] Following our May I'm asking for it to
[17:35] be on the next May meeting. Oh, okay.
[17:37] That's right.
[17:39] That's it. That is the fifth. Okay.
[17:41] There I got a little Okay.
[17:43] Thank you for the clarification.
[17:45] >> [clears throat]
[17:47] >> Go ahead, Brian.
[17:48] Yeah, I'd just like to bring up that the
[17:50] I'd like to see the right-of-ways from
[17:51] the
[17:53] Spanish Valley pathway and continue to
[17:55] move that forward to see where that's
[17:56] at.
[17:57] I know I asked for this not this meeting
[17:59] but the meeting before to try to get
[18:01] some clarification and we're still
[18:03] waiting on that. So I'd like to see just
[18:04] a little bit I'd like to see where we're
[18:06] at with that right there. And then I'd
[18:08] also like to request at the next meeting
[18:09] that we have a quarterly financial
[18:11] report.
[18:14] Okay, the right-of-ways aren't ready
[18:16] yet. So that's why they're not hit on
[18:17] here.
[18:19] That's what I was told anyways.
[18:23] >> [laughter]
[18:24] >> Okay, Trish. Um so and and I know
[18:28] Melody that I reached out to you about
[18:30] this but I think a number of
[18:31] commissioners so Sam Wayner from CNHA
[18:34] has reached out to talk about the
[18:37] upgrading the bathrooms at the Moab
[18:39] Information Center and I I hopefully it
[18:41] is something we can broach sooner than
[18:43] later.
[18:45] And and I know anyways I just wanted to
[18:47] kind of put that out cuz I know I sent a
[18:49] email just to Mel but maybe he's talked
[18:51] to other commissioners about that.
[18:54] I do think we need to think about I was
[18:56] on a meeting this morning and maybe
[18:58] other commissioners were also with the
[19:00] water
[19:02] Utah Division of Water Resources with
[19:04] the water resource drought coordinator
[19:07] Laura Haskell. And one thing that she
[19:10] recommended was possibly considering a
[19:12] drought declaration at a county level.
[19:15] San Juan County has done that, and what
[19:18] that provides is just a it opens up some
[19:21] resources specifically for ranchers and
[19:24] farmers. So, it it if possible, and
[19:27] maybe I'm directing, I don't know, Mark
[19:29] to talk to Kate about that within
[19:32] emergency management. I would assume
[19:33] that would come out of her department.
[19:36] So, something to consider.
[19:38] I'm just looking into what it would it
[19:40] open up, but I definitely think it opens
[19:41] up quite a bit for
[19:43] farmers and ranchers. [clears throat]
[19:45] It's when the state makes the
[19:46] declaration, when the county makes the
[19:48] declaration, it was more for the
[19:51] awareness.
[19:52] >> you definitely does open up some stuff
[19:53] through UDAF.
[19:55] This also meeting.
[19:57] >> Oh, are you done, Ms. Trisha? Sorry. And
[19:59] then the last, and I know we've talked
[20:00] about this previously, and I actually
[20:02] think it somewhat dovetails on what I
[20:04] just talked about, but I know that Mary
[20:06] asked that we look into providing a
[20:09] moratorium on new applications within
[20:11] planning and zoning during the land use
[20:13] code update. And so, I'm going to just
[20:15] ask again that hopefully we're looking
[20:18] at that.
[20:20] You got it. Okay, thank you.
[20:22] Jock. I'd hate to be left out since
[20:23] we're all uh
[20:24] >> [laughter]
[20:25] >> Good night.
[20:26] >> For the future considerations, um I'd
[20:28] like to based on a couple of agenda
[20:30] items on this agenda and and previous
[20:32] ones, I'd like to consider rescinding
[20:34] the hiring freeze.
[20:36] Um
[20:37] because uh we haven't denied one yet. Um
[20:41] I think it's to the point where it's
[20:42] kind of placing undue stress on on staff
[20:45] to have to
[20:47] come in here and justify their um their
[20:49] hires when they're just kind of rolling
[20:51] through regular
[20:52] um
[20:54] regular replacement hires or or even
[20:56] grant-funded hires. So, it's uh seems
[21:00] like that might be a good idea.
[21:03] We can talk about it later. Okay.
[21:06] Mary. I just want to reiterate. I do
[21:08] really think it's important. It's been
[21:10] done in the past. It's done
[21:13] primary in almost every
[21:16] you know, many many counties and many
[21:18] cities when they're doing an update to
[21:20] their land use or something they put a
[21:23] moratorium on applications.
[21:26] So that uh the applications will then
[21:30] uh
[21:32] when people have the applications will
[21:34] be under the new
[21:36] they will be following the updated code.
[21:39] So are we asking for an agenda item to
[21:42] vote on this?
[21:44] >> Well, I'd like some research and and I'd
[21:46] like yeah, agenda item would be a good
[21:48] idea. Or it's normal
[21:50] >> [clears throat]
[21:50] >> you know, I'm not how do I don't
[21:51] remember how we did it in the past. We
[21:53] have done it. We've done it twice in the
[21:55] past.
[21:56] Once when we did uh
[21:58] when we're working on an an Well, what
[22:01] he's shaking his head no. There's been a couple different ones.
[22:04] >> Yeah, and and it's you know, especially
[22:06] where we're expediting this uh
[22:10] plan
[22:11] then I think it's you know, makes sense
[22:14] it would be
[22:15] to make sure we
[22:17] have our upcoming plans be underneath
[22:20] the new codes.
[22:23] I'm sure. Yes.
[22:25] Commissioners of course can put out
[22:26] agenda items on if they they'd like. Uh
[22:29] this might be something you may want to
[22:30] look at parameters
[22:32] either workshop setting or a discussion
[22:35] setting might help uh ahead of time but
[22:38] if if the commissioners want to put that
[22:39] on,
[22:40] um it's probably going to take a little
[22:41] bit of time uh to talk to Andrew and try
[22:44] to see if Bart can come to the next
[22:45] meeting and and get everybody as much
[22:47] information as possible.
[22:49] Um
[22:50] so that's that's an option but if you
[22:52] guys put it on for an agenda item, it's
[22:53] just harder. So if if the commissioners
[22:56] want, I can look at Bart's schedule
[22:58] set a time and and have a meeting but
[23:01] I'm just trying to be helpful. Okay,
[23:03] I'll reach out with an email tomorrow to admin and you, Stephen.
[23:08] I just need to research it. Okay, yeah,
[23:10] that'd be great. Sure. If I may, I just
[23:12] if we're going to go to all the trouble
[23:13] to do all the research, then we need to
[23:15] put it on and have a vote.
[23:18] Sure. But the only the only difference
[23:20] would be is
[23:21] >> [clears throat]
[23:21] >> it might be a bit of presentation heavy,
[23:24] and so
[23:25] if you want to vote on the same day, you
[23:27] can, but if there are any it's usually a
[23:29] nightmare if we do a workshop and then
[23:31] make changes to the to whatever it is
[23:33] planned, and then to come back in a
[23:35] couple hours and do that. It's a lot of
[23:36] work. If we do a workshop and we have
[23:39] success and people say, "Yeah, we want
[23:40] to do it."
[23:41] That might be better if we do the
[23:43] workshop and it doesn't seem like
[23:45] there's as much interest, then maybe we
[23:46] don't do that or maybe we re-approach
[23:48] it, so. Maybe we have it on on the
[23:50] agenda with
[23:52] knowledge that we might pull it. Sure.
[23:54] Yeah, I'm going to stick with a workshop
[23:55] first and then we'll put it on the next
[23:57] agenda if we So, we'll just leave it
[23:59] with Okay. he'll send them an email from
[24:01] Stephen and he'll set that up with Bart,
[24:02] figure out what
[24:05] We'll follow up from there. Do a mini class on on moratoriums, what
[24:08] options are and and then see what
[24:10] different flavors are.
[24:12] Cuz they can only be there's there's
[24:13] some restrictions on how many times you
[24:15] can extend them. Six months, isn't that
[24:17] the Yeah, I think we did a six month.
[24:18] That's what I think it is. Yeah. You can
[24:20] ask for an extension, but people you
[24:22] know, it's hard. Yeah.
[24:24] Six months is
[24:27] which we would have would be plenty.
[24:29] Okay, we're going to move along. So, the
[24:31] next one is approval of consent agenda
[24:34] items.
[24:35] The approval of the meeting minutes for
[24:37] April 7th and April 17th, 2026.
[24:40] Ratification of the payment of bills,
[24:42] total bills of 2 million
[24:44] 4
[24:45] 2 million
[24:46] 4,423
[24:48] dollars and 11 cents. The total payroll
[24:50] of 165,099
[24:52] dollars and 34 cents.
[24:54] So, the The bills and payroll is
[24:56] $2,169,522.35.
[25:01] C is the ratification of exemption for
[25:03] environmental review for a crossing
[25:06] phase four. D is the ratification of EMP
[25:09] grant award letter for emergency
[25:11] management.
[25:13] E is the ratification of Moab Office of
[25:15] Tourism logo logo over edge.
[25:18] F is the ratification of letter of final
[25:20] payment invoice for the RCOG grant
[25:23] closeout for Ware Crossing.
[25:26] That's exciting. G letter of support
[25:29] from the Moab Office of Tourism
[25:30] supporting the BLM's nomination of the
[25:32] Poison Spider Mesa Trail as part of the
[25:34] National Recreation Trail System.
[25:37] H is a contract with Certa for the
[25:38] renewal of Grand County Small Business
[25:40] Revolving Loan Fund Administration
[25:42] Agreement.
[25:44] And I is the ratification of the ICA
[25:47] with Babcock Design for Public Safety
[25:49] Complex Feasibility Study.
[25:51] Dock. Uh motion to presume uh motion to
[25:54] approve consent agenda as presented.
[25:57] And Bill?
[25:58] All right. All in favor? I.
[26:01] That passes 7-0.
[26:03] Thank you. So, number three is award bid
[26:06] for the concrete portion of the
[26:07] playground and pickleball project at the
[26:09] Old Spanish Trail Arena. And that is
[26:11] with our Old Spanish Trail
[26:13] director, Angela Hook.
[26:17] Hello.
[26:22] » [clears throat]
[26:22] >> So, tonight um I bring to you the
[26:26] bids for the concrete portion of the
[26:27] concrete for the playground and
[26:30] pickleball
[26:31] uh
[26:32] project at the OST.
[26:34] We had four bids that were submitted
[26:37] um all together.
[26:39] And
[26:41] were
[26:42] the board um
[26:43] well, it was really a board. The
[26:45] committee that was put together to
[26:46] review the bids
[26:48] um
[26:49] reviewed them all and are actually
[26:52] submitting two
[26:54] um to the committee to the commission to
[26:57] review
[26:58] um
[27:02] to be awarded. The reason why we're
[27:04] submitting two, one is a non-local
[27:06] contractor and one is a local
[27:07] contractor. They're pretty close in
[27:09] price but one is cheaper. The cheaper
[27:12] one is um a non-local
[27:14] contractor.
[27:15] So,
[27:16] um
[27:18] I did
[27:19] write up a synopsis of everything
[27:23] um scope of work. I can go over the
[27:25] detail if you like or
[27:28] I What are the exact uh
[27:31] quotes for both the two bids proposed?
[27:33] Um so, the non-local came in at $76,610
[27:38] and the local contractor came in at
[27:41] $83,815.
[27:45] Did we give a previous
[27:47] This This is Stephen gave
[27:50] Did we give a previous amount that we
[27:51] would lean towards as a percentage
[27:53] amount that we would lean?
[27:56] >> Correct. Under 50,000. Under 50,000 we
[27:58] have a local preference. 10% but since
[28:01] this is over 50,000, I think we're
[28:02] obligated to go with the low bid. Yeah.
[28:07] » [clears throat]
[28:08] >> And also Oh, sorry. Either contract
[28:10] either one that we choose it will put
[28:12] this project over budget.
[28:17] Are the funds coming out of the general
[28:18] fund for this? No.
[28:21] This This isn't not This This isn't part
[28:24] of the grant, right? Correct. Okay.
[28:28] I would assume
[28:30] funds come from
[28:33] uh
[28:33] >> capital capital projects. Yeah.
[28:35] Yep.
[28:36] What were the What were the names of the
[28:38] um
[28:39] the non-local and local?
[28:41] So, the non-local is Crown Point
[28:42] Construction and the local would be
[28:45] Harrison. Okay.
[28:51] Go ahead, Jacques.
[28:52] Um uh generally I I I would prefer to go
[28:55] with the local. I think
[28:58] it
[29:00] It's a the difference is a little over
[29:02] $7,000 and as this project's already
[29:04] over
[29:06] priced, I would make a motion
[29:08] to award the grant contract to Pronghorn
[29:13] at um 76 610.
[29:17] I'll second that.
[29:18] No, I'll go ahead and second. Sorry. Um
[29:21] all right.
[29:21] That's
[29:22] >> [laughter]
[29:23] >> Any other um
[29:26] Yeah, discussion?
[29:27] Go.
[29:28] ahead, Mike. I know we spoke
[29:29] previously about uh
[29:33] trying to lean more local. I understand
[29:35] it's over budget and I understand the
[29:37] choice for Pronghorns.
[29:39] They you got my vote there, so.
[29:41] But I do still prefer that we still look
[29:43] towards
[29:45] uh local contractors.
[29:46] Yeah, I agree.
[29:47] >> [laughter]
[29:50] » Okay.
[29:51] All right, we'll go ahead and call for a
[29:52] vote. All in favor of Jacques's motion.
[29:55] I. I.
[29:57] That passes 7-0.
[29:59] And all right, I think you can just stay
[30:00] right there. Is Is um
[30:02] Is Jenabeth coming in, too?
[30:06] We're moving along to pass for her. Oh,
[30:08] there she is.
[30:09] She's sprinting. You're good.
[30:13] All right, so our number four is special
[30:15] events or high-impact events
[30:18] that are ready to review for our second
[30:19] quarter with Jenabeth Jones, our chief
[30:21] deputy clerk, and Angela Booker,
[30:22] [clears throat] our old special trailer
[30:23] event director.
[30:26] All right, so I've got two events on the
[30:28] agenda for you.
[30:31] First, we have Raptors on the Rocks,
[30:35] which is April 29th through May 2nd. We
[30:38] have about 100 motorized vehicles
[30:41] estimated. It is a recurring event for 5
[30:44] years. Um,
[30:45] it's an event that's targeted at foreign
[30:48] Raptor owners.
[30:49] And then the Grenadier Gathering, which
[30:52] is the same dates, April 29th through
[30:54] May 2nd.
[30:56] Um, they're estimating about 150
[30:59] vehicles.
[31:01] It's been recurring for 3 years.
[31:03] And it's just the Grenadier vehicles um
[31:06] that come to into Moab. Um, so the issue
[31:10] we're running into here obviously is
[31:12] that they're both the same dates and
[31:14] they are both
[31:15] wanting to
[31:17] um, rent out Hostah, which is why I'm
[31:20] here.
[31:21] Um.
[31:24] So,
[31:25] I guess anyway, that's that's our issue.
[31:30] Do you want to speak to it at all,
[31:31] Heather, or do you want to skip
[31:32] questions asked?
[31:34] >> [laughter]
[31:34] >> Whichever works, but uh Grenadier is uh
[31:37] they held the dates for 3 years in a
[31:40] row. Um.
[31:42] Raptors has traditionally been on the
[31:45] Mother's Day weekend. I know that
[31:47] they're looking to switch their dates.
[31:50] Um.
[31:51] And that first weekend of May is a
[31:54] popular um
[31:56] date that's sought after.
[31:58] Um.
[32:00] And it just happens to be the week that
[32:02] Grenadier currently holds. So.
[32:06] That was a good question.
[32:07] Mike. Uh in that with roughly 250
[32:12] vehicles uh estimated roughly 250
[32:14] vehicles and
[32:15] 425 attendees, are we able to hold both?
[32:19] They both use the same
[32:22] facility but in different ways. Okay.
[32:24] So, technically, no. Um, Grenadier rents
[32:27] the stage also and they set the stage up
[32:30] inside the arena. Yeah. Um, and they use
[32:33] the whole inside of the arena.
[32:36] Um,
[32:36] they set it as a expo.
[32:39] Um,
[32:39] they do their banquet inside.
[32:42] And then Raptors base stage inside. So,
[32:46] they're actually setting up and then
[32:48] leaving from inside the arena.
[32:51] Understood. Have
[32:52] uh
[32:53] in that same is has both
[32:57] promoters event promoters been asked
[33:00] if they can hold each other at the same
[33:01] time? They they haven't, but I can I can
[33:04] pretty much answer to that.
[33:06] It's worth it.
[33:07] Okay. I know it would be a no.
[33:10] Sure. I mean, to me it seems fair that
[33:13] the people that have been holding those
[33:14] dates hold those dates, you know. And I
[33:17] think if you want to move your your
[33:19] event, you're winging it, right? Yeah.
[33:22] That seems fair to me. Arena Deer should
[33:25] hold that date.
[33:26] Yeah.
[33:27] Do you have any other dates
[33:30] next [clears throat] year? I know last time we talked about your
[33:33] dates and then we looked at other
[33:34] events. Like
[33:35] >> [snorts]
[33:35] >> Oco still was booked all the way. So, if
[33:38] they traditionally held Mother's Day
[33:39] weekend, which would be the next
[33:40] weekend,
[33:42] well, I don't know. This year is that
[33:43] weekend, but I don't know about next
[33:44] year. I'm not that far. Um,
[33:47] is that weekend available for them? If
[33:49] they Like the the weekend that they hold
[33:51] is like the weekend that's
[33:53] available. And is the weekend that's
[33:55] available? I mean, it's normally it's
[33:56] like the same Yeah. like pattern
[33:59] [clears throat] just
[34:00] They haven't
[34:01] Yeah. gained that that date.
[34:04] It's still available.
[34:06] Okay, so it's still available if we deny
[34:08] them this one. All right, go ahead,
[34:09] Stephen. Just just a note for policy
[34:11] decision eventually, this is something
[34:13] that I I've mentioned it
[34:15] to Quinn in the past. There will come a
[34:17] day where people continue to start
[34:19] competing for Oco on certain days. Just
[34:21] because somebody's utilized a facility,
[34:23] that may or may not be a factor for them
[34:25] to permanently utilizing it. There may
[34:27] be a point in time where the commission
[34:29] wants to sit down and to out what we do
[34:32] when have competing interests for the
[34:33] Grand Center or hosted, etc.
[34:37] Is it whoever applies first? There may
[34:39] be some metrics or perhaps utilizing it
[34:41] X number of years in a row would
[34:42] disqualify for the future. I think
[34:44] you're probably going to see more of
[34:46] these applications in the future.
[34:48] I'm not super helpful in this particular
[34:50] decision, but just something to think
[34:52] about going forward and and that's
[34:53] something that Angie probably wants to
[34:55] figure out because somebody can make the
[34:56] argument just because they've utilized
[34:58] it for a long time at a certain point.
[35:00] >> They they could raise the question of
[35:01] access and permits, etc. And it does
[35:04] change year to year like if there's a
[35:06] leap year, if there's an extra week in
[35:09] the year or a month, it does change and
[35:11] like Jeep Safari is always on Easter.
[35:15] Like Rodeo is always the weekend after
[35:17] Memorial Day,
[35:19] which kind of messes
[35:20] Yeah. with way things fall.
[35:23] So we have to look at
[35:25] the weeks like that.
[35:28] Uh So it does push dates out.
[35:30] Same with Cruise Moab because Cruise Moab is always after Jeep Safari.
[35:35] So sometimes they can come in the Monday
[35:38] after
[35:40] Jeep Safari and then sometimes they
[35:41] can't because we they have their safety
[35:43] meeting and getting into the weeds of
[35:45] things, but
[35:47] when they're booking things 10 years
[35:48] out,
[35:50] we have to look at that.
[35:51] Sure.
[35:53] So.
[35:54] Okay.
[35:54] >> Just for clarification, which which
[35:56] [clears throat] Sorry about that. No,
[35:57] you can go ahead.
[35:58] >> Uh which event was moving their dates
[36:00] from normal? Uh
[36:02] Raptor
[36:03] >> Raptor was moving.
[36:04] a week earlier. that Red Rock
[36:06] historically has.
[36:09] Um I think Brian had sent it first.
[36:11] Yeah, and just just for your operations,
[36:14] is there a lot of switching the grounds
[36:16] between these events?
[36:18] I mean as as the way things fall, are
[36:20] there are they are they set up in a way
[36:22] to where it's efficient or are you
[36:25] changing the grounds up quite a bit in
[36:26] between these events. I think that's
[36:28] something Yeah, sometimes. So, like if a
[36:30] barrel race wanted to come in, say, like
[36:32] next weekend, it couldn't happen cuz
[36:34] we're hard compacted. There's no way to
[36:36] get the arena ground worked and safe
[36:38] enough for a barrel race to come in.
[36:41] Okay, thanks. And these two would be
[36:43] very similar. No, I Yeah,
[36:45] correct. Yeah, cuz the ground's already
[36:47] hard compacted. Yeah, but my question
[36:49] was more if we were moving towards a
[36:50] policy of what we would do is trying to
[36:53] take that into consideration as well.
[36:55] The work that would have to go into
[36:56] switching events. Yeah, yeah. That's why
[36:58] we look at the events of meeting people
[37:00] just to see what they're looking at,
[37:02] what they're doing just at the stage
[37:04] that the
[37:05] arena is currently at.
[37:10] Okay, Mike, go ahead. I know many tough
[37:12] questions here. Um
[37:16] Are you available to host Rap on the
[37:17] Rocks if the event host was reached out
[37:20] to and wanted to go with the Mother's
[37:23] Day weekend for usual? Mhm. Yeah,
[37:26] [clears throat] I don't I don't think
[37:26] so. And if they wanted like maybe a
[37:28] different part of the facility, that
[37:29] could be an option too, which
[37:31] I know they want the indoor. But that's
[37:36] I think that would be an option.
[37:39] It's a hard hard press to switch up
[37:41] timelines.
[37:42] Did they say why they wanted to change,
[37:44] first of all? Cuz it's Mother's Day
[37:46] weekend. Cuz it's Mother's Day weekend.
[37:48] Yeah,
[37:49] it's a tough one. Um
[37:50] And so, Grenadiers has had three
[37:52] straight and then Rap on the Rocks has
[37:54] had Mother's Day weekend for five
[37:55] straight. So, they're Yeah, I think
[37:57] they're they're dug in a little bit.
[38:00] Um do we need a motion on this one to
[38:04] approve or Yeah. Okay.
[38:06] I'll I'll move to approve
[38:08] um
[38:09] the Grenadiers event for to to hold the
[38:11] weekend that they've held the the first
[38:13] weekend in May and offer the Raps on the
[38:17] Rocks the traditional weekend that
[38:20] they've utilized at least this year.
[38:24] Did [clears throat] I miss that?
[38:25] Okay, so that I'm just clarifying. So we
[38:27] are going to
[38:28] just pass it. Bend O Deer will be on
[38:30] that weekend and then Jenny Beth do you
[38:33] reach out to Raptors on the Rocks for
[38:34] that to let them know that and then it
[38:36] doesn't need to come back before us if
[38:38] they take that weekend
[38:40] because that will be in the motion. But
[38:41] if they don't want that weekend and they
[38:43] want to figure out something else and
[38:44] they have to come back before us.
[38:46] They can contact Andy and see if there
[38:49] is a way to make it work that weekend if
[38:50] they were willing and and she was
[38:52] willing but that was a lot that really I
[38:53] feel like that's on her as the director
[38:56] to
[38:57] decide if that's something she could
[38:58] take on. But if if they were willing and
[39:00] they and then she was willing to take it
[39:01] on. So I any other discussion?
[39:06] Okay, so that would be a Bend O Deer
[39:08] will have the
[39:10] weeks that they requested and Raptors
[39:11] can have the next weekend.
[39:13] All in favor.
[39:15] I. I.
[39:16] Okay, that passes 7-0. Perfect. Thank
[39:18] you. Thank you.
[39:19] No new ones came in, huh? We had them
[39:21] last time. That was it. Thank you.
[39:23] Thanks for being here cuz yeah, got to
[39:24] make that decision.
[39:25] >> [laughter]
[39:29] » Don't be thinking you're going to get a
[39:30] unanimous all across the board now.
[39:32] Today? No. Running down.
[39:36] I know you're looking hopeful and you're
[39:37] smiling.
[39:40] >> [laughter]
[39:40] >> And um let's see.
[39:44] Today?
[39:45] I am going to have you you know I know
[39:46] that you had a you were going to make a
[39:48] comment Sean when we were talking about
[39:51] future considerations. So if you want to
[39:53] come up right now and talk about that
[39:55] cuz I forgot to go back to you. I'm
[39:56] sorry.
[39:57] >> We'll go tomorrow. Sorry Tess. I'll just
[39:59] keep it brief. I wanted
[40:00] >> And the right-of-ways that are usually
[40:01] what he has concerns and I've had the
[40:03] same concerns
[40:04] uh with right-of-way and invariably
[40:06] because the the requirements are so
[40:08] strict is like getting an appraisal on a house they have to
[40:12] follow certain strict criteria
[40:14] and because it's
[40:16] um there's just so very few appraisers
[40:21] that date kept getting pushed back. But
[40:23] I will say that I received seven emails
[40:25] within half an hour before the
[40:27] commission meeting.
[40:28] Um each with 120 or so page
[40:32] very thorough appraisal.
[40:35] Um starting with the Finster's and then
[40:36] just kind of moving up up the road
[40:38] there.
[40:39] Um so those will be ready for
[40:41] your um review and ratification at the
[40:44] next meeting.
[40:45] Thank you so much, John. You're welcome.
[40:46] And then in the meantime there's three
[40:47] or four property owners that uh
[40:50] you know, got got new to the projects.
[40:52] They they really want to know
[40:53] specifically what's going to happen kind
[40:55] of like with
[40:56] um
[40:57] with the bottle wall.
[40:59] They just want [clears throat] to know
[40:59] the status of that. Um
[41:02] So our designer has reached out to those
[41:04] three or four individuals and talked to
[41:05] them specifically about what their
[41:07] concerns are.
[41:09] Whether they might be chain link fences,
[41:11] landscape, things like that.
[41:13] And the appraisals are so detailed that
[41:15] they're actually compensating these
[41:17] owners for taking out a fence, taking
[41:19] out a gate.
[41:20] Um
[41:21] And of course once this
[41:24] If the commission decides to go ahead
[41:26] and give Judy Larson the approval to
[41:29] make initial offers on these properties.
[41:32] Um
[41:33] then that's that's the initial offer and
[41:35] then I'm sure there's quite a little bit
[41:36] of back and forth after that.
[41:39] I I apologize for the long timeline on
[41:41] that.
[41:44] No, thanks. I appreciate it. I just want
[41:45] to make sure because there are some
[41:46] opportunities where we're going to start
[41:48] looking for the funding because there's
[41:49] going to be a funding gap. And so just
[41:51] understanding that timeline is I think
[41:53] is going to be paramount here in the
[41:55] next in the next month. Yes. So I just
[41:57] want to make sure that we're that we're
[41:58] staying on track to get this project
[42:00] completed. And so that the folks that
[42:02] are out looking for funding can can
[42:04] relate to the people that hey, we're now
[42:05] on track. This is where we're at.
[42:08] forward with this. So here we we We
[42:10] forward to having a menu a menu of
[42:12] options, with prioritized storm drain
[42:14] storm water projects in the next meeting
[42:16] to to give the commission a menu of
[42:18] different options and priorities to
[42:19] choose from.
[42:22] Bethany, I know this would be a rush,
[42:23] but is there anything that we any
[42:25] information that we could have maybe by
[42:26] end of week? Um, I think it would be
[42:28] helpful as well. And so, even if it's
[42:30] just even if it's just a rough draft, I
[42:32] think anything that we have end of week
[42:34] could be helpful. Yeah. Thanks.
[42:37] I'll provide that.
[42:38] Thanks, Tom.
[42:40] Okay, [clears throat] now moving on to
[42:41] number five, and that's a position
[42:43] backfill request with the Roads and
[42:44] Bridges Department with Tess, our
[42:46] personnel director service director. And
[42:49] I'm going to be yes.
[42:51] Cody McKinney, our roads supervisor.
[42:54] Roads and bridges supervisor. All right.
[42:56] >> [clears throat]
[42:57] >> Good evening, everyone. Uh, so we are
[42:59] here this evening to request the
[43:01] backfill of two road labor positions.
[43:04] For some additional context and
[43:05] background, both of these road labor
[43:08] positions, as well as the assistant
[43:09] supervisor position, have been vacant
[43:11] within the Roads Department for all of
[43:13] 2026 thus far.
[43:15] With the recent departure of one of our
[43:17] operators, however, at this time the
[43:19] roads staff really need to backfill
[43:21] these labor positions so they can get
[43:23] their operators back to their regular
[43:24] course of duties and to try to offset
[43:27] some of that short staffing that they
[43:28] have been scheduling around and
[43:29] navigating throughout 26 so far.
[43:33] And these positions were both budgeted
[43:35] for in the approved 26 budget.
[43:40] So.
[43:41] I move to approve the backfill of two
[43:43] road labor positions under the Roads and
[43:45] Bridges Department effective
[43:47] immediately.
[43:49] Seconded by Mike.
[43:51] Okay. Any other questions or discussion?
[43:56] Okay, all in favor.
[43:58] >> [clears throat]
[44:00] » All right, there you go. Thank you all
[44:02] very much.
[44:03] Thank you. Thank you, commission.
[44:05] And so, number six was the postponed
[44:08] item.
[44:09] We're going to move on to number seven.
[44:11] Where is Andrew Andrew Jackson, our
[44:13] planning zoning director? The ordinance
[44:15] selling tax amendment outfitters as a
[44:17] permitted use in light industrial zone.
[44:19] We had a public hearing last meeting.
[44:24] I'm Andrew Jackson. I'm a planning
[44:27] director here at Grand County.
[44:29] I was in a planning conference
[44:32] uh 2 weeks ago and this is just a uh
[44:35] half plain English summaries of the
[44:39] staff reports. It's all got all
[44:41] technical stuff, but I'm going with the
[44:44] plain English summary first. If you want
[44:46] me to get into the technical stuff, I
[44:48] can.
[44:49] This proposal would change the county's
[44:52] land use code to allow non-ATV outfitter
[44:56] and guide businesses as a permitted use
[44:59] in the light industrial zone.
[45:02] The request comes from a property owner
[45:04] running an e-bike business on Cane Creek
[45:07] Boulevard, which is similar to an
[45:09] outfitter's use. Staff found that this
[45:12] type of business fits well with other
[45:14] uses already allowed in the light
[45:16] industrial zone. Both staff and the
[45:19] planning commission recommend approval
[45:21] of the change. And included as backup
[45:23] material, I have the ordinances uh that
[45:26] also identifies the change being made to
[45:30] 3.1 use table of the the code.
[45:34] >> [clears throat]
[45:39] » Thanks.
[45:40] I'm looking for what I need to read to
[45:42] the board.
[45:43] It's It's down at the bottom of that
[45:44] first page. Planning commission
[45:46] recommended motion. recommends The only question that I would The only
[45:50] item that I was going to mention is how
[45:52] many light industrial zones are there in the county? Light industrial zones
[45:56] light industrial properties? I'm sorry,
[45:58] properties. Four.
[46:00] So there's There's one on Cane Creek.
[46:02] There's one that's a batch plant or
[46:04] something. The construction. And there's
[46:08] an additional one, plus currently all of
[46:12] the open area is light industrial.
[46:19] All right.
[46:21] Having considered the staff report and
[46:24] recommendation, planning commission
[46:26] recommendation, public comments,
[46:28] testimony, and the land use code, and
[46:30] finding that McValentine
[46:33] request for outfitters, guide services,
[46:36] and facilities, non-ATV
[46:39] outfitters, guide services, and rental
[46:41] businesses is similar to other permitted
[46:44] uses in the light industrial zone, I
[46:47] recommend approval of the ordinance to
[46:49] the county commission.
[46:50] >> It seeks approval. It seeks approval,
[46:53] yeah, without the to the county
[46:55] commission.
[46:57] Okay.
[47:00] Right?
[47:01] So, we have a first by Bill and a second
[47:03] by Brian.
[47:04] All right. Any more discussion? Go
[47:05] ahead, Trish. Uh so, I'm not going to
[47:08] vote for this, and there's many reasons
[47:10] why, and I hope that it's just more of a
[47:12] precautionary tale for the future.
[47:15] So, first of all, we are now in the
[47:16] midst of a land use code update. So, to
[47:19] be manipulating the current land use
[47:21] code,
[47:22] it just doesn't make any sense to me. Um
[47:26] you know,
[47:28] I would have recommended that this
[47:30] property owner just wait, and if if we know if we saw that we wanted non-ATV
[47:36] outfitters in that zone, we could have
[47:38] applied that to the future land use
[47:40] code, and off we went. Um
[47:44] the other problem with this is we're simply manipulating the land use
[47:48] table, but there's all these correlating
[47:50] standards. So, when you manipulate the
[47:53] table,
[47:54] you then have to manipulate all of the
[47:57] standards and this is why our land use
[47:59] code is such a hot mess. It's because
[48:02] over the years, and I don't know, you
[48:04] know, Mary O'Hagan would know how long
[48:06] we've had our current land use code, but
[48:09] this is how it got broken. By trying to
[48:13] appease this maybe a certain property
[48:16] owner, whatever it might be, but it's it it just it breaks it. Because you're
[48:22] manipulating a part but not not you're
[48:24] not doing it holistically. And so again,
[48:27] I realize I'm not going to win this
[48:28] vote, but what I'm trying to point out
[48:30] is we can't continue to do this,
[48:32] especially when we have an updated land
[48:35] use code coming up, and then if we
[48:36] immediately start breaking it again,
[48:39] you know, it's it's just a it's just bad
[48:41] practice. And then and then lastly, I
[48:44] think it's a really bad it's bad
[48:46] practice to change the land use table
[48:49] for one property owner.
[48:51] Um
[48:53] you know, that individual bought that
[48:55] property knowing they bought light
[48:56] industrial.
[48:59] I mean, I always struggle with that.
[49:01] It's like when you buy property, if I
[49:02] buy rural residential,
[49:04] I should expect that I get to build a
[49:06] house and an ADU, that I'm not going to
[49:08] eventually say, "Well, I'm going to chop
[49:10] it up into"
[49:10] >> [clears throat]
[49:10] >> So, I I just I I struggle with the
[49:14] concept of of changing our land use code
[49:17] for one property owner. Again, I know
[49:19] I'm not going to win this vote, but I
[49:21] want to I am like trying to lay out
[49:24] the future and what we don't want to be
[49:27] doing when we have that refreshed land
[49:29] use code.
[49:32] I agree about that, when we get the new
[49:34] land use code, but I think with that
[49:36] only being four
[49:38] parcels in our community and one of them
[49:40] being Almtra,
[49:41] that it's not really like I mean, we are
[49:44] doing it for one person, and if we make
[49:46] him wait until the land use code is
[49:48] updated, we are hindering him from revenue and from growing his
[49:52] business already running his business
[49:54] And and he's already running his
[49:55] business he made that very clear.
[49:57] You know, so said that. For me, you
[50:00] know, I I think that it's it's I
[50:02] understand all of the pieces of land use
[50:04] code and it'll get fixed in a few months
[50:07] and it's not affecting a lot of spaces in our community. It's a
[50:12] very small amount.
[50:14] So, but I point taken for sure. Anybody
[50:16] else have comments? Brian, go ahead.
[50:18] >> [clears throat]
[50:20] >> Yeah, so you know, I had a conversation
[50:22] a couple of weeks ago with Robert
[50:24] talking about our economy.
[50:26] And deciding
[50:28] where what we want our economy to be.
[50:31] Um and whatever we decide that we want
[50:33] our economy to be it's going to have to
[50:34] be an export. That's one of the things
[50:36] that he said. All right, whatever you
[50:37] want it's going to have to be an export
[50:39] if we're going to go ahead and uh have
[50:41] and and have something that's going to
[50:43] be successful. You know, whether that's
[50:45] tourism, mining, agriculture, whatever
[50:47] it is it's going to have to be an export
[50:49] that comes out of here.
[50:51] You know, from the recent studies that
[50:52] have been done tourism is what we have.
[50:55] So, if tourism is what we have we're
[50:57] going to have to figure out how we're
[50:58] going to diversify [clears throat]
[50:59] tourism. Right? That should be one of
[51:01] the things that this body
[51:03] prioritize is diversifying tourism. And
[51:07] if you were to look out right now at our
[51:09] commercial real estate there are very
[51:11] few places where you can go ahead and
[51:13] start a new tourism business. So, what
[51:16] we've are essentially doing is we are
[51:18] stopping
[51:20] any type of growth that keeps us
[51:22] relevant as a tourism destination.
[51:26] And and and and I and I said it before
[51:27] in the planning commission and I'll say
[51:29] it again. Our job is not to stand in the
[51:32] way of business. Right? We need to make
[51:34] sure that we're removing these
[51:35] regulations for our economy so that it
[51:37] can thrive.
[51:39] Um stopping and and and putting this off
[51:41] to for another 6 months while we rewrite
[51:44] the land use code might seem reasonable
[51:46] when you're sitting up here as this
[51:48] body, but when you're over there on a
[51:50] piece of property trying to make ends
[51:52] meet with inflation going up and
[51:54] everything else that's happening in the
[51:55] private world, right? It's it's it's an
[51:58] eternity waiting for that. And then I
[52:00] also just want to get out is how many
[52:02] times have we said that to business? How
[52:04] many times have we said, "Let's wait
[52:06] until we have the future land use map.
[52:08] Let's wait until this is accomplished.
[52:10] Just go ahead and wait until this is
[52:12] done." The wait is over. Let's go ahead.
[52:14] Let's move remove these restrictions.
[52:16] Let's allow business to go ahead and
[52:18] drive. Let's support our tourism
[52:20] economy, and and let's keep moving.
[52:22] Thanks.
[52:25] Okay. Any other comments?
[52:26] No. Yeah, I'll just make a quick one. Um
[52:29] I understand that you're not supportive
[52:32] of it, Commissioner Haddeen, but what I take offense to a little bit is
[52:37] the fact that you sit here and you say
[52:39] that this is bad practices. That
[52:41] trickles down to staff first. You're
[52:43] basically saying staff is not doing a
[52:46] good job. And so I I really think that
[52:48] words matter. Did I say that? You said
[52:51] that.
[52:51] >> I said bad practices.
[52:52] >> Yes. And so I'm just saying and then
[52:54] also we've got a board that also
[52:56] approved this. So we we just have to be
[52:58] real careful in the words that we use
[53:00] because we have good staff at the
[53:02] county, and I'm just asking that we
[53:04] consider that in the future.
[53:06] Okay.
[53:07] Mike?
[53:08] >> [clears throat]
[53:09] >> Did I miss a motion? Excuse me.
[53:10] >> Yeah, we already have a motion. I think
[53:12] you got up in the middle of it. You're
[53:13] not supposed to. No. You're supposed to
[53:15] I ran before you guys did it. To
[53:17] [laughter] be quick. Oh, yeah. We got
[53:18] it. Yeah, you you left it in the queue.
[53:19] There's a motion and a second. Yeah, we
[53:21] have a motion and a second. So, we're
[53:22] going to go ahead and call for a vote.
[53:24] So, those in favor of the
[53:27] text amendment zoning ordinance change.
[53:29] I.
[53:31] And those opposed?
[53:33] All right. It passes 6 to 1 with
[53:36] Commissioner Haddeen in opposition.
[53:38] Of course it does. And number eight.
[53:41] Cody. All right. I'll take that. We're
[53:43] going to go on to consent agenda.
[53:44] >> off.
[53:47] » [laughter]
[53:48] >> I'll Prince coming up to help you out.
[53:49] I'm going to put on the consent agenda,
[53:51] but when it was going to talk about the
[53:53] pathway we left it. So, I'm sorry to
[53:55] make you stick around.
[53:56] >> We got a few little changes we want to
[53:58] Well, this is exciting.
[53:59] >> I lied to The community wants to know.
[54:01] Yeah, so I think that our ultimate ask
[54:03] then is that the commission postpone
[54:05] this until May 5th.
[54:06] Um
[54:07] The reason being that the um commitment
[54:09] letter for the UDOT TAP grant matches
[54:11] $450,000 of road department money for
[54:14] $300,000 worth of TAP grant money and we
[54:17] were going to use that for the shoulder
[54:18] widening between
[54:19] Spanish Trail Drive and Resource
[54:22] Boulevard.
[54:23] But, we are considering shifting that
[54:27] and making that part of the Spanish
[54:29] Trail Drive multi-use pathway as a way
[54:30] to close that gap funding. So, it uses
[54:32] less of the storm water mitigation fund.
[54:36] So, anyway, we're splitting up a few
[54:37] different options for May May
[54:41] for the May 5th meeting. And so, that I
[54:43] just wanted to let you guys know that we were working on that, but we
[54:45] we're going to kind of shift gears on
[54:47] this. So,
[54:49] if you guys
[54:50] No action keeps it going.
[54:52] I I just want to make one more point.
[54:54] One reason we're doing this is to try to
[54:56] diversify the funding. This project with
[54:58] the Spanish Trail Drive multi-use path
[55:01] incorporates
[55:02] not only just road safety trail, but
[55:05] there's a huge storm water perspective
[55:07] of it. Um it's a it's a high priority
[55:10] storm water problem area.
[55:13] The widening Spanish Trail Drive,
[55:15] although that's awesome and it and it's
[55:16] great, I can do that a lot easier in
[55:19] house than I can a multi-use path
[55:21] project that incorporates
[55:23] a tremendous amount of storm drain.
[55:25] So, that's that's one reason that
[55:27] possibly the shift would be more
[55:28] advantageous for the community in that
[55:30] area.
[55:32] That's great. We don't need a motion to
[55:33] postpone it, so unless you you had any
[55:35] more questions.
[55:36] >> No, I was just going to say I I totally
[55:38] agree. I remember when you when you
[55:39] widened the the one section I I thought it was awesome cuz I remember
[55:43] like down there all the time, but I
[55:44] thought it would also be great to to
[55:47] incorporate aspects of the pathway into
[55:48] that, too, and just kind of kill two
[55:50] birds with one stone instead of doing
[55:51] it. And I think I think we can bite
[55:53] those off in small chunks as we go
[55:55] rather than a bunch of cap funding to
[55:58] fund something that we maybe can handle
[56:00] in-house easier.
[56:03] So, we don't need a motion. No, we don't
[56:04] need a motion carried. Go ahead.
[56:06] >> I just wanted to tell Cody I'd had two
[56:08] phone calls this week
[56:10] commending the road department on the
[56:12] work you've been doing. They have said
[56:15] it's just beautiful and it has really
[56:18] improved safety and I said I would make
[56:21] sure I tell you and now I get to tell
[56:23] you in public so everyone can hear it.
[56:25] Well, I I appreciate the public's input.
[56:27] That's that's good to hear.
[56:30] Yeah, I I know that in in past meetings
[56:32] we've talked about maybe spending
[56:33] virtually all of the storm water
[56:34] mitigation fund. I think that if we were
[56:36] to move this and this will be a decision
[56:37] you guys can make on May 5th, but if we
[56:39] were to move some of this funding over
[56:40] to that it decreases the spend in the
[56:43] storm water mitigation fund and allows
[56:45] that to remain with some
[56:48] level of cushion. I'm not going to
[56:49] commit to a number right now, but it's
[56:51] about a half million dollars that would
[56:52] stay in there, so.
[56:54] And I appreciate you guys
[56:57] doing the background work.
[57:00] » [laughter]
[57:00] >> One more.
[57:01] I want to make just one more comment.
[57:03] I'd like to see those numbers on the
[57:05] storm mitigation when it comes forward
[57:07] because if we can do both projects, I
[57:09] know that we're working on a cushion
[57:11] there, but I don't want to hold up
[57:14] Jackson Street if at all possible. I
[57:16] mean, we've been waiting a long time on
[57:18] that one. So, I just would like to see
[57:20] all of that laid out. I will say that is
[57:22] one of the three options that we had and Cody and Maddie and Charlotte met
[57:24] this morning about this.
[57:26] Um first option that we kind of
[57:28] considered was
[57:30] Jackson Street, Spanish Village Drive,
[57:33] and the shoulder widening. And that
[57:35] takes stormwater mitigation to the
[57:36] negative. We'd have to commit some
[57:38] capital improvements money from that.
[57:40] The second option that we considered
[57:43] was just Spanish Valley Drive and
[57:47] Jackson Street.
[57:49] And that would leave a cushion in
[57:50] stormwater.
[57:52] So, Jackson's Jackson
[57:53] >> Jackson's on the list. That's That's
[57:56] Okay. Yeah. We We already have a bidder.
[57:59] We're just waiting to award that based
[58:01] off of just trying to figure out what
[58:04] not completely exhausting stormwater for
[58:07] one project and then you can't complete
[58:08] others. Right. And the other component
[58:10] of that that I wanted to move this to
[58:11] May 5th for that Thank you, Cody, cuz
[58:13] I'm just I'm remembering this now is the
[58:15] design of the sidewalk between Dollar
[58:17] General and liquor store. But, I'm going
[58:19] to try to get Dan to get us a bid on
[58:20] that so that we'll know how much
[58:24] that the design could cost on that. So,
[58:26] we'll
[58:26] partner with the city on that project.
[58:28] So, that's why I just wanted to have
[58:29] this discussion and then push it to May
[58:31] 5th so we can get answers on all that
[58:32] stuff.
[58:34] Good figures. Thank you. So, once again,
[58:36] that's the three projects and we got the
[58:38] Spanish Valley Drive uh pathway, Jackson
[58:41] Street, and then the sidewalk. Is there
[58:42] something else that I was missing in
[58:43] there?
[58:44] The sidewalk's different because that
[58:46] would be being a change order on the
[58:47] Jackson Street project. And then the
[58:50] shoulder widening from Spanish Valley
[58:51] Trail back to Resource that I think we
[58:53] have have talked about amongst ourselves
[58:55] and and this will come back to you guys
[58:56] on May 5th, but uh
[58:58] we think Cody could do that in-house.
[58:59] So.
[59:00] We just want to discuss a little bit and
[59:02] see where our finances are before we
[59:04] commit to that extension. But, that
[59:05] would end up not It doesn't end up
[59:08] happening this year, it'll happen next
[59:09] year. So.
[59:11] Thanks.
[59:12] Okay. Thank you. Cody, you stay in the
[59:14] hot seat there is for number nine, which
[59:16] is the Jones
[59:17] Boulder Avenue lower stormwater drainage
[59:20] line from Pass Highway 191 to Pack
[59:22] Creek.
[59:24] Yeah, this does align with what what him
[59:26] were just talking about.
[59:28] Um
[59:29] Okay. Pump the brakes a little bit. The,
[59:32] you know, trying to ensure some of these
[59:33] storm water projects that we have
[59:35] dedicated quite a bit of time and
[59:38] finances into design.
[59:40] Um
[59:42] The Boulder project is another
[59:44] multi-million dollar project if you
[59:46] tried to do it from the base and all the
[59:47] way to Pack Creek. Um something that's
[59:49] going to be bigger than the road
[59:50] department's going to be able to take
[59:51] on.
[59:52] Contract. Um
[59:55] >> [clears throat and cough]
[59:55] >> We kind of already went into
[59:58] a little bit of an agreement with the
[59:59] Desert Rivers Credit Union to try to
[1:00:01] bring that 48-in pipe that came under
[1:00:03] the highway
[1:00:04] in the '90s, connect that, at least get
[1:00:06] it through the Desert Rivers
[1:00:07] infrastructure into kind of the Rick's
[1:00:09] Glass Vacant's area to where we can
[1:00:11] easily tie onto that to maybe split this
[1:00:15] into phases.
[1:00:16] Um the phase that I'm looking at is
[1:00:18] maybe trying to do Highway 191 north
[1:00:22] because we already have the
[1:00:24] 100
[1:00:25] 70 ft 200 ft of pipe that's under the
[1:00:27] Desert Rivers corridor.
[1:00:29] Being able to tie onto that,
[1:00:31] get some easements and right-of-way with
[1:00:34] um Rick Thompson at Rick's Glass to
[1:00:36] where we can go through their parking
[1:00:37] lot, which is in the master storm drain
[1:00:39] plan. I mean, that's kind of the way the
[1:00:40] drainage goes.
[1:00:42] Um but then get that down to Antiquity
[1:00:43] Lane under Bittle and then be able to
[1:00:45] take it on down to Pack Creek
[1:00:47] with a
[1:00:48] um stream alteration permit to dump it
[1:00:50] into Pack Creek there.
[1:00:52] I think that is something that could
[1:00:54] reasonably be bid off rather than
[1:00:56] looking at a full-scale project of
[1:00:58] Boulder all the way down Boulder with
[1:01:00] all the right-of-way.
[1:01:02] Of course, pipe's already under the
[1:01:03] highway, but I'm I'm just thinking maybe
[1:01:05] we can split this into a couple of
[1:01:07] phases. The lower would benefit sooner
[1:01:09] because you can put water into it
[1:01:11] because it'll have an outlet into Pack
[1:01:12] Creek.
[1:01:13] Instead of starting at the top and then
[1:01:16] you don't have anywhere to take the
[1:01:17] water.
[1:01:19] So, in doing this, I'm sorry, the the
[1:01:21] cost on this,
[1:01:22] um we have Jones and Demille with an
[1:01:24] assignment order. I haven't pulled the
[1:01:25] trigger on this yet, but it's I think we
[1:01:28] had about 30 30 to 50,000 we kind of had
[1:01:31] set aside. This comes in at 20 26,020
[1:01:34] dollars for the kind of initial
[1:01:36] assessment of pipe storm drain boxes and
[1:01:39] then of course right away and all that
[1:01:41] stuff would be on top of that once we
[1:01:42] get more of a design. Mine says 28,020
[1:01:44] dollars.
[1:01:46] Oh, does it say 28? Do I have it on
[1:01:47] there?
[1:01:50] Oh, 28,020. This is 28,020 dollars. I
[1:01:53] apologize. I just printed this out.
[1:01:57] 28,020 dollars.
[1:02:00] Okay, Mike, go ahead. I move to approve
[1:02:02] the task order for the Bolder Avenue
[1:02:04] lower storm drain line design for Jones
[1:02:07] and Demille in the fiscal impact 28,000
[1:02:10] 20 dollars.
[1:02:11] Okay.
[1:02:12] And do I have a second?
[1:02:15] Any discussion questions?
[1:02:19] Okay. I'll go ahead and call for a vote.
[1:02:21] All in favor?
[1:02:23] That passes 7-0.
[1:02:25] Thank you.
[1:02:25] >> Appreciate you guys all bringing this
[1:02:26] back when I have some firm figures and
[1:02:28] we can put together a plan for the
[1:02:29] project. So, it sounds like we'll see
[1:02:31] you next meeting anyways. Yes,
[1:02:33] hopefully.
[1:02:35] All right, number 10 is our 2026-2027
[1:02:39] CIB list prioritization.
[1:02:42] Mission Administrator
[1:02:44] can talk to us about this one. Yes.
[1:02:46] Okay. Um, we have a listing of nine
[1:02:50] different projects.
[1:02:52] Uh, the first is Grand County's uh,
[1:02:54] Spanish Valley multi-use pathway.
[1:02:57] Uh, number two is solid waste Grand
[1:02:58] County transfer station expansion.
[1:03:01] Number three is Canyonlands Regional
[1:03:03] Airport for a utilities master plan.
[1:03:07] Number four is healthcare special
[1:03:08] service district Moab area partnership
[1:03:11] for seniors.
[1:03:12] Number five is Castle Valley Fire
[1:03:14] Department for a fire vehicle purchase.
[1:03:17] Number six is Thompson Springs Special
[1:03:19] Service District planning grant for
[1:03:21] utilities.
[1:03:23] Number seven is Moab Valley Fire
[1:03:25] Protection District for a fire vehicle
[1:03:27] purchase.
[1:03:28] Number eight is Grand Water and Sewer
[1:03:30] Service Agency for a planning grant for
[1:03:33] utilities at the Umtrax site. And number
[1:03:36] nine, the final, is Grand Water and
[1:03:38] Sewer Service Agency for a vac sewer
[1:03:40] jetter truck purchase.
[1:03:43] Good job. Um well, I think I I I like
[1:03:46] this process. We all got a chance to
[1:03:47] weigh in on this and then and rank it.
[1:03:49] So, the rankings are a reflection of the
[1:03:52] commission as a whole.
[1:03:53] And on that note, I would move to
[1:03:55] approve the 2026 to 2027 CIB county
[1:03:58] priority list as presented. Okay.
[1:04:01] Sorry, Mike. I didn't see your hand cuz
[1:04:03] you're okay.
[1:04:04] All right, he's good. I'll second or
[1:04:06] we're going to get married the second.
[1:04:08] Just some provided information. I don't
[1:04:09] know if everyone was in the room. Me,
[1:04:11] Trish, Bill
[1:04:13] were in the room. We were provided with
[1:04:14] some information that
[1:04:16] uh to quote uh
[1:04:19] our rankings doesn't mean does not mean
[1:04:21] diddly squat uh to the CIB.
[1:04:25] Our rankings will be uh based on
[1:04:27] we can base some other decisions off
[1:04:29] that, but our rankings don't
[1:04:32] uh
[1:04:34] That's what Todd
[1:04:34] >> adjust their position. Yeah.
[1:04:38] So, but they just take them into
[1:04:39] consideration. I mean, this is like a
[1:04:41] support letter Yeah, just a support
[1:04:42] letter. Okay, so we had a second by Mary
[1:04:44] and then he had a comment. No, that was
[1:04:46] it. That was it.
[1:04:46] >> [laughter]
[1:04:47] >> All right, any other good discussion?
[1:04:50] Okay, let's call for a vote on the
[1:04:53] CIB list. All in favor?
[1:04:56] Aye, that passes 7-0.
[1:04:59] And our last one for tonight
[1:05:02] is number 11 and this is the resolution
[1:05:04] amending the bylaws of the Canyonlands
[1:05:06] Health Care Special Service District and
[1:05:08] I am the liaison for that district.
[1:05:13] And they just did some cleanup on their
[1:05:14] bylaws.
[1:05:15] Um
[1:05:17] one thing to note is we couldn't find
[1:05:19] the resolution that approved the the
[1:05:22] bylaws that they currently were acting
[1:05:24] under. And so I don't know if those ever
[1:05:26] came before the board and they might not
[1:05:28] have known that they needed to do that.
[1:05:30] But anyways, so that's noted in the um
[1:05:34] resolution. And the we have the current
[1:05:37] bylaws that were they were acting under.
[1:05:40] Um and then the changes and those
[1:05:42] changes are listed in the agenda
[1:05:44] summary. It was they were minor so they
[1:05:46] added a phrase um the the document we
[1:05:49] reflect the name change of us, the
[1:05:52] council to commission, and then some
[1:05:54] term expiration dates.
[1:05:56] The chief administrative officer, a
[1:05:58] privacy officer,
[1:06:00] um a couple representatives that they've
[1:06:02] added this year. And then we moved our
[1:06:06] meetings to some other another location.
[1:06:09] And they didn't prepare the signature
[1:06:11] portion and then they just standardized
[1:06:13] the formatting. So it wasn't a lot of
[1:06:15] changes to this particular one.
[1:06:18] Mike.
[1:06:19] I'd like to make the motion. I move to
[1:06:21] approve the resolution amending the
[1:06:22] bylaws of the Canyonlands Health Care
[1:06:24] Special Service District.
[1:06:26] And second by Brian. Okay. Any other
[1:06:29] discussion?
[1:06:32] Okay. All in favor?
[1:06:34] And that passes unanimously.
[1:06:37] All right, we don't have any discussion
[1:06:38] items this evening and we are really
[1:06:42] ahead of time, but I'm still not going
[1:06:44] to have us read all of our commissioner
[1:06:46] reports. But if anyone has anything in
[1:06:48] their commissioner report that they find
[1:06:50] is interesting and want to share with
[1:06:51] the commission staff, go ahead and
[1:06:53] start us off.
[1:06:54] Cool. I just wanted to highlight one of
[1:06:56] my things was Spring Spruce Up this
[1:06:58] year. It's in its fourth year.
[1:07:00] Uh I think it's a fantastic event. We
[1:07:02] had over 100 volunteers going out and
[1:07:04] doing various community projects, um
[1:07:06] beautification, trail work. Uh, the one
[1:07:09] I worked on was over at Rotary Park
[1:07:11] planting uh, native species to help
[1:07:13] shore up those banks over there to help
[1:07:14] with with flood mitigation. I had some
[1:07:17] great conversations, met met a couple of
[1:07:20] tourists who were here helping out and
[1:07:21] also members of the community that I
[1:07:22] normally wouldn't um, do that with. And
[1:07:25] so, it's I think it's super cool. Again,
[1:07:28] it's in its fourth year. I think highly
[1:07:29] successful and anyone um,
[1:07:32] is able to participate next year, then I
[1:07:34] would very much recommend it.
[1:07:36] Awesome. Mike.
[1:07:38] Uh,
[1:07:39] continual shameless plug for the county
[1:07:41] fair. I had uh, several businesses uh,
[1:07:44] reach out uh, and has asked uh, they did
[1:07:47] not receive information on how to uh,
[1:07:50] one, be a vendor, two, uh, to donate to
[1:07:53] the county fair. Uh, I do have boxes of
[1:07:56] county fair vendor volunteer experience
[1:07:59] cards to hand out to all commissioners.
[1:08:01] If you do hear this,
[1:08:03] uh, that QR code will actually go to
[1:08:06] uh,
[1:08:07] will actually go to how to uh, sponsor,
[1:08:11] promote, volunteer at the event. Uh, it
[1:08:14] has all the information. So, if you
[1:08:15] could get those out, it would help the
[1:08:17] county fair.
[1:08:19] That'd be great. Mary.
[1:08:21] Just a quick just an interesting uh,
[1:08:24] there has been at the solid waste
[1:08:26] special service district these last few
[1:08:29] months have been the biggest volume
[1:08:32] of uh, solid waste
[1:08:35] in the history.
[1:08:37] It has just
[1:08:39] uh, partly because we've had a very
[1:08:41] you know, good uh, tourists. They got
[1:08:44] you know, they got a lot of tourists and
[1:08:46] the amount of building that's going on.
[1:08:50] I mean it is
[1:08:51] highest
[1:08:53] it's ever been.
[1:08:54] Warm winter. Brian.
[1:08:57] I'll just keep it short.
[1:09:00] Yeah, I I um,
[1:09:02] I wasn't able to get it on my
[1:09:03] commissioner report, but there was a
[1:09:05] Colorado River Authority of Utah meeting
[1:09:08] that had took place at 1:00 today. And
[1:09:11] so, just a couple of updates. So, the first big one is is that the upper
[1:09:15] basin commissioners met this afternoon
[1:09:18] to decide the drill of the drought
[1:09:20] resistance operations that are going to
[1:09:22] be taking place for 2026.
[1:09:25] I'm sorry, for the 2027 water 2026 water
[1:09:28] year. So, starting right now, um the
[1:09:30] Lake Powell has dropped below the level
[1:09:33] of 3525
[1:09:35] um to where the this this bill or this
[1:09:38] um
[1:09:39] this policy will take place. And so,
[1:09:41] what they're going to be talking about
[1:09:42] is two different things. First is going
[1:09:44] to be the releases that are going to be
[1:09:46] required from or from Flaming Gorge. So,
[1:09:49] majority of the releases will be coming
[1:09:51] from Flaming Gorge. And then, the second
[1:09:53] is the reduction in uh um outflow down
[1:09:56] into Lake Powell. So, right now, what I think is probably happened right
[1:10:01] now is we're going to be looking at a
[1:10:02] million acre-feet coming out of the
[1:10:05] Flaming Gorge. And with that, they're
[1:10:07] also looking at using the SEIS SEIS.
[1:10:11] I think that's 6E that follows that. And
[1:10:13] they're going to use that to reduce the
[1:10:15] outflow into Lake down to the lower
[1:10:18] basin down to 6 million acre-feet. Um
[1:10:21] with that
[1:10:23] >> [clears throat]
[1:10:23] >> prediction, it's looks like we'll be
[1:10:26] below the 8250
[1:10:28] um or 82.5 that's uh required on October
[1:10:32] 1st. Um most probably 8125
[1:10:37] come October. And so, that will be the
[1:10:39] multi-million-dollar question of what
[1:10:41] happens when the upper basin does not
[1:10:44] meet the Colorado River Compact.
[1:10:49] Okay, I just have an update from the
[1:10:52] chamber. The golf tournament that they
[1:10:54] have for their annual fundraiser is on
[1:10:56] May 8th, and they still have some spots
[1:10:59] open. So, if anyone wants to do that,
[1:11:02] that's on May 8th.
[1:11:03] And
[1:11:06] I think that that's all.
[1:11:09] So.
[1:11:09] I'll give a quick one. Trisha and I were
[1:11:12] at Canyon Country Partnership
[1:11:14] meeting. I don't remember what day that
[1:11:16] was. It was I do know it was cold and
[1:11:18] windy, but we got to do a little tour.
[1:11:20] It was a lot of history.
[1:11:23] Um part of it was done by Wade Allison
[1:11:26] that um is helping put together our
[1:11:28] motorized trail
[1:11:30] and non-motorized, I think, crew for
[1:11:32] doing the work here. But, Cottonwood
[1:11:34] Wash, we actually got to go out and see
[1:11:36] where they brought the the wagons
[1:11:38] through, where people went in and out of
[1:11:40] the swell.
[1:11:41] And then um a lot of information about
[1:11:44] the Elk Mountain Mission, which was
[1:11:47] basically Moab. It was the the first
[1:11:50] group of
[1:11:51] white settlers, I guess you would call
[1:11:53] them, that came into the valley here.
[1:11:55] But, I I learned a lot. I
[1:11:58] On that ridge, I kind of froze when we
[1:12:00] were there.
[1:12:01] >> [laughter]
[1:12:02] >> He um he has a podcast. I can't remember
[1:12:05] what it's called, but he does have a
[1:12:06] podcast. I'll maybe try to find it and
[1:12:08] pass it on. I've heard it's really good.
[1:12:10] >> It is good.
[1:12:12] He has a lot of history about this area.
[1:12:14] He's given me two or three books um
[1:12:17] In Pursuit of the McCartys, which was a
[1:12:19] gang of bank robbers that came through
[1:12:21] here all the time. And so, he just he's
[1:12:24] quite the historian. And tell us yeah,
[1:12:27] really
[1:12:28] intriguing stories.
[1:12:29] >> Yeah, yeah. He he makes you happy that
[1:12:31] you learn sir. I mean, I learned a lot.
[1:12:34] I had a
[1:12:35] good time at Smith Cabin. I've never
[1:12:37] been to that cabin before out there
[1:12:39] either. And so,
[1:12:41] they had two cabins out there. One kind
[1:12:43] of falling down that was built out of
[1:12:45] old railroad ties, but then the early
[1:12:47] one were hand-hewn logs. That's
[1:12:49] Cottonwood, yeah. It's pretty impressive
[1:12:51] for the time. This off of six out there
[1:12:53] where you wouldn't think there's
[1:12:55] anything and there's just a little
[1:12:56] spring there. So, of course there was a settlement and a school.
[1:13:00] Yeah. Very cool. I think Steven had an
[1:13:01] update for us as well. Yep. Um
[1:13:04] it's the beginning of conference season
[1:13:06] for myself. Um I've been delayed on a
[1:13:09] few different items for the commission.
[1:13:10] I apologize about that. I went on
[1:13:11] vacation and then uh returned and my
[1:13:14] grandfather passed away.
[1:13:16] Um
[1:13:17] and and so uh went to UPC, um Utah
[1:13:21] Prosecution Conference. I'll go to UAC
[1:13:23] next week. In May I have the CJC
[1:13:26] Symposium and then there's the Texas
[1:13:29] I've mentioned a few times the Texas
[1:13:31] outfit called ICCR, which is the
[1:13:33] Institute for Coordinated Community
[1:13:35] Response to Domestic Violence. It's a
[1:13:37] mouthful. Uh they've been providing uh
[1:13:40] trainings and and assistance to us for
[1:13:42] the whole year and brought in speakers.
[1:13:45] They've been phenomenal. That wraps up
[1:13:46] today. If commissioners have requests, I
[1:13:49] will be out I'll be working um while I'm from my trainings. Uh but hopefully
[1:13:53] I'll be able to give you guys an update
[1:13:55] from the attorney's perspective on all
[1:13:57] the legislative changes that have
[1:13:58] happened um over the past year. There's
[1:14:00] been a lot of changes with the
[1:14:01] prosecution elements of it. Um but if
[1:14:04] there's a delay in in getting back to
[1:14:06] everybody, I apologize. I went on
[1:14:08] vacation and we came back and had that
[1:14:10] uh the family matter and so I've been
[1:14:12] behind. I I apologize for you guys. I
[1:14:14] know we've got a couple meetings. If
[1:14:15] commissioners have request to write
[1:14:17] items, let me know. Um I'm not
[1:14:19] intentionally uh not responding to
[1:14:21] folks. So, that's all I got. Okay. How
[1:14:23] about Mark or Gabe? Do you guys have any
[1:14:27] updates, reports?
[1:14:30] We're still working to fill another uh
[1:14:31] building inspector position. So, uh
[1:14:34] we haven't forgotten that. We're just
[1:14:37] Our building inspector's gone again? No, we're still We have another one. We
[1:14:41] have another position that we're working
[1:14:42] >> left yesterday.
[1:14:44] >> [laughter]
[1:14:45] >> Commissioner McAndless, that's correct.
[1:14:48] Okay.
[1:14:49] All right. Do we have Is anybody online
[1:14:50] that wants to have a citizen's view
[1:14:51] here? Nobody.
[1:14:54] Just how it is. Yeah, there's nobody
[1:14:56] here anyway.
[1:14:56] >> Well, nobody's here. I thought if they
[1:14:57] were online and they wanted to talk, I
[1:14:59] would let them talk. Okay. Larry's the
[1:15:01] only one that is. We are Yeah. Well, he
[1:15:04] You don't want to comment today, so all
[1:15:06] right. Well, this meeting is adjourned
[1:15:07] at 5:15 on March 21st.
[1:15:11] I think I record President and only