[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

4.21.26 Commission Meeting

Transcript