Name: Commission Meeting
Uploaded: 2026-08-25T00:00:00Z
Duration: 1 h 29 min 32 s
Description: This issue came up when the special special service district, when they have new residents, those new residents are required to pay a one time fee.

[0:00] August 25th, 2026, commission meeting.

[0:04] Okay, stand up. We're at the city county courthouse on August 25th. Thanks everybody for coming and we'll get started. Celeste Myers is going to give our invocation and then I will leave us in the pledge of allegiance. Please join me in prayer.

[0:29] Your Lord God, we'll call upon your presence today.

[0:33] especially in this room, in our hearts if we will allow it and also all around us

[0:39] helping to guide us, opening our ears so that we might hear each other and our

[0:45] hearts so that we might understand each other, opening our eyes so that we can

[0:51] perceive the intentions and efforts of others. Father please help us to glorify

[0:58] you and everything that we do. All of our words and even our thoughts.

[1:06] Thank you for all of your

[1:08] help and of everything. We need you and we appreciate you. We praise you. Thank you for

[1:19] your son, our Savior, offering salvation and also companionship, guidance, advocacy.

[1:31] Amen.

[1:34] Okay everybody please rest.

[1:37] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

[1:45] One nation and another God in the physical will liberty and justice for all.

[1:54] Okay thank you very much.

[1:56] Okay now I'm going to open it up for public comments of anybody who wants to speak on any subject.

[2:01] Please come up to the microphone.

[2:03] Stay with me and I'll speak for three minutes.

[2:05] Thank you.

[2:07] Hi.

[2:08] Hello.

[2:08] My name is Robert Charbonneau.

[2:10] I'm a trustee for Heritage Actors.

[2:12] I want to address the ordinance change for the RFI zoning.

[2:17] I'm speaking with each of you previously to this meeting, and I send an email to the board

[2:22] previously, but I want to go ahead and ask to speak with you or maybe revise my comments

[2:26] just a little bit.

[2:27] as far as the number of trailers, stuff like that.

[2:32] I think the consensus is a limit of 10

[2:35] and I'm good with that for RFI zoning.

[2:38] I know the concern is for larger parcels

[2:41] and maybe for those parcels, a CUP would be in order

[2:45] to allow based on the land and stuff like that.

[2:48] The other area of concern that I have

[2:51] is the 30-day limit that was opposed in there.

[2:54] And it just seems very difficult to manage.

[2:56] My original comment was to base it seasonally, but I was thinking strictly the mountain, not considering the other five parcels that might be throughout the county.

[3:06] They don't necessarily have a season, so my suggestion would be just to remove that from the ordinance as far as the time limit, because the whole point of the ordinance was to allow for additional failings, because you have additional land.

[3:18] So I think that would fall, and then anything additional might be covered under a CUP.

[3:23] Thank you for your time.

[3:24] Thank you, Robert.

[3:27] Anyone else like to see?

[3:33] Hello, Commissioner.

[3:34] Good morning, and attorney.

[3:36] We just gave you an answer.

[3:38] Thank you.

[3:39] I am Tracy Samford, and I'm also a trustee member of the board for our property on the

[3:45] seat of mountain heritage acres.

[3:48] As Robert pointed out, those are all great points.

[3:52] We are also unique because we are not in this subdivision.

[3:56] I don't know how many five-acre parcels there are that are out in the county that are

[4:02] also under that same umbrella that we are.

[4:05] When this property was purchased back in 1970, it was forest recreation and we are only

[4:11] 600 feet from the forest.

[4:13] Our property has been well-used, well-loved for nearly 50 years.

[4:19] We have cleared the land, improved the land, made it so that it is very accessible for

[4:28] 10 even more traders.

[4:30] We have water and electric hookups for our bees.

[4:36] We have graveled roads.

[4:38] We have a gathering area with picnic tables and a fire department approved fire pit and

[4:45] a family memorial stage.

[4:47] we also have a bathhouse that has a his and her side, two showers, two sinks, two toilets,

[4:53] even a bathtub on the women's. We have loved and cared for this property and used it respectfully,

[4:59] and property rights are part of our constitutional rights. And we need to protect them.

[5:05] And we were told several times by the Planning and Zoning Committee that had our parents

[5:10] gotten a CUP when they purchased the land, that we wouldn't be in the situation we are today

[5:15] restricting us to charities. Now that we know what we know, we need to protect our rights

[5:22] of our future generations. We owe it to them. We owe it to them to be able to continue

[5:27] on with our traditions and our love and our respect for our land. We should be able to enjoy

[5:33] our land just as others are able to join theirs. Thank you. Thank you, Casey.

[5:39] Anybody else?

[5:41] Let's speak on the subject.

[5:46] Okay.

[5:47] We'll close the public comment period.

[5:49] And we'll go on to the consent agenda.

[5:53] I'll note that we approved the checkout report of August 5th, 2026, 697,496,993 cents.

[6:02] And August 12th, 2235,084 cents.

[6:07] And August 9th,

[6:11] 480,866 dollars and 37 cents, and also that we approved our commission meeting minutes

[6:17] for August 4, 2020-26.

[6:20] Any comment?

[6:21] Chair, I think you meant August 19th.

[6:23] What did I say?

[6:24] August 19th.

[6:25] Okay, yes.

[6:26] August 19th.

[6:27] Sorry about that.

[6:28] Okay.

[6:29] Any other comments?

[6:30] No.

[6:31] Okay.

[6:31] All in favour?

[6:32] Aye.

[6:32] Bye.

[6:33] Okay.

[6:34] That's unanimous.

[6:35] Okay, we're going to go on to our regular session.

[6:38] And our first item is we want to recognize J.T.

[6:42] button as our King County Cowboy over here.

[6:46] You want to come up?

[6:49] This, I, J.T., I've known since he was a little kid.

[6:51] He lives across history for me.

[6:53] And I've been so impressed with him his whole life.

[6:56] He is such a hard worker.

[6:58] I remember time when he was just a little kid

[7:02] and they had some girls outside eating some weeds

[7:05] and they got away and they came over to my house and him and his little sister came over there

[7:09] and broke those ghosts, like they were professional catwalks. And Depp and Paul, I was just like,

[7:14] wow, these scares are great. Anyway, he's always working. He's one another time my husband was out

[7:20] home weeks and Jake came over and said, can I help you? And he's wanting to do it because he likes to work.

[7:27] But I see him, you know, all early morning late at night, he's a very hard worker. And I think he

[7:33] he really embodies the full spirit of the Catboy. He's a true Catboy with the

[7:38] Cousin. We just want to recognize him and add him to our plaque. Anybody else

[7:44] want to say anything? Oh, I'm just going to give a little history. So up and

[7:48] off then they do a binder rodeo and they ask every county to nominate a cowboy of

[7:52] the year and so this year it is JT button. So we have made a plaque and this

[7:58] His name will go on the clock.

[8:01] We've got back as far as we knew the names.

[8:03] Our next order of business, we gotta figure out

[8:06] where we're hanging this for the sunset in our office.

[8:08] We will get it hung on the wall this year.

[8:11] So anyway, JT's name and then we have a couple

[8:15] just a little gift that we appreciate these two.

[8:19] Maybe your wish can come up, we'll take a picture.

[8:21] Let's see you guys, come on.

[8:22] Thank you so much.

[8:23] I appreciate it.

[8:23] I want you to get a picture.

[8:29] I know we got a new paper guy so let's get hired some more to work in the market for a moment.

[8:35] Hey!

[8:41] We're so lucky.

[8:48] Thank you so much.

[9:00] Thank you T.

[9:02] Thank you T.

[9:03] Thank you T.

[9:08] Thank you T.

[9:12] Thank you.

[9:24] Okay.

[9:25] We'll move on to our next agenda item which is Discussing Building on a 5,000.

[9:29] We have Governor's Office of Economic Development, Rural County Development, Grant Beach,

[9:34] Elecated to King County, Farm Bureau for Workforce Development, Recruitment, Education, and

[9:39] Training.

[9:41] I guess this is Commissioner Mayer.

[9:44] Thank you.

[9:44] So I just, so we have as a practice taken by a thousand dollars a year to pass along to

[9:52] the King County Farm Bureau, and that's very much in line with our outlook and our priorities

[10:00] for the county.

[10:02] I just had the idea that maybe we would instead of taking it out of the general taxpayer fund

[10:09] Um, instead, uh, proposed that that money come from the came, excuse me, the governor's

[10:17] office of economic development, the governor's office allocates 200,000 a year, um, that

[10:25] we ask for and then steward that money and make decisions about how it will be invested regarding

[10:32] workforce development, education, business infrastructure, things like that.

[10:37] and so this is basically same amount of commitment and investment just from a

[10:43] different source. So I did speak with the Kane County Farm Bureau President,

[10:49] Shane Saltler, just to let him know about this and invite him to come if he wanted.

[10:54] And the CEO board recommended, I believe unanimously, this change. And I spoke today

[11:04] with Farm Bureau member Chris Heaton, and just explain what the thought process was.

[11:11] And then now at this point, we'll bring it to a vote of the county commission to see

[11:17] if the county commission also approves of taking $5,000 of the $200,000 for the Farm Bureau.

[11:26] My intent is that this would be an annual allocation, sort of like an year mark almost.

[11:32] But if either of you have a rug about that, you know, I want to hear what you have to say.

[11:40] I think it's a good idea.

[11:41] I support it.

[11:42] Yeah, I think it's great to anything we can use other funds for besides the general fund.

[11:47] Yeah.

[11:48] We're a very general fund for us.

[11:52] Okay, so if you're ready, y'all.

[11:54] Yeah.

[11:54] Chair, I move that we allocate $5,000 of the governor's office of economic development

[12:00] rural county development grant being allocated to King County Farm Bureau for workforce development

[12:07] recruitment, education and training and in the packet there's, um, it lays out exactly

[12:14] what the money would be used for such as education abuse and workforce development, et cetera,

[12:22] and Kelly Stool, our economic development contact point put together that proposal on behalf of the Farm Bureau.

[12:30] Yeah, and I think Farm Bureau does a great job.

[12:33] We really appreciate them, so I think it's great to do any other discussion on this motion.

[12:38] No.

[12:38] Okay, all in favor?

[12:40] Hi.

[12:41] All right, thank you.

[12:42] Okay, that's unanimous.

[12:44] Okay, the next item is Discussing about King County Ordnance 2026-21 and Ordnance

[12:52] Reguising King County Building Code and Regulations, 8-1-3 and the Land Use Ordnance Titleline

[12:59] Chapter 21 Subdivision Regulations, 9-21B-1 and 9-31-3.

[13:06] world improved unimproved applications of King County. Do you want to explain this, Shannon?

[13:14] I think Jack might be better. Or, Jack, you don't want to be on that way, you can explain to the

[13:18] life. Yes, so what this ordinance would do is it would require an applicant to provide

[13:29] I will serve letters for me service district that provides services to the property before the county land use department would issue a building permit or through a subdivision application.

[13:44] This issue came up when the special special service district, when they have new residents, those new residents are required to pay a one time fee.

[13:58] when they move in or if they are building new dwellings.

[14:04] And so the idea was that that special service district

[14:10] will provide, it will sort of let us say, yeah,

[14:13] we are going to provide fire service to this property

[14:16] and they are out to date on those initial fees

[14:19] therefore they should be able to build.

[14:23] This applies to all special service districts

[14:25] not just them, but that was a specific scenario that got us thinking about this word.

[14:30] And if I always do want to put on the record that, I'll use the attorney for that, especially

[14:36] specific, because you're also a word.

[14:39] And so there are some, we are helping them, these districts as well, this is to help them

[14:49] so that they don't have to pursue legal means to go after those fees, they can get those

[14:54] These are French to save them time and money in that aspect.

[15:00] But yes, I'm playing to have spiritual and clarify that, because I could be seen in the conflict, but I want to make sure we'll lose that. Thank you. Do you want to say anything, Jan? No, he did great. Okay, I just want to say that I want very clear that the reason we are charging the $900 is because can have city is required, and we have to pay them. Not the county, but the service district has to pay the city so that we collect it. And I think it makes

[15:29] way more than to get it up front than for them to have to go out if they don't pay

[15:34] to try to go after it later. I think it's easier and cleaner and it's just the

[15:38] perfect way to go.

[15:42] Anybody else want to say anything?

[15:44] Yeah, and I like that if the service district doesn't want to require they don't

[15:48] have to. So we're not telling the service district what they have to do. We're just

[15:51] giving them the ability to do that. So we'll require it unless they tell us.

[15:56] No. No. Does this apply because garcane is not a special service district.

[16:01] So this is just special service districts in the water

[16:03] conservancy. Correct.

[16:05] But they, although with the service district that the

[16:09] county does ask for a little service.

[16:12] That's somewhere else in the ordinance.

[16:14] We're talking about them. It does.

[16:16] I don't know if it does for building permits, but I know it does for

[16:19] subdivisions. Yeah, and that's already in place.

[16:22] I just haven't already got lots of letters from them for everything that's built so far.

[16:28] I think it's really smart.

[16:30] I like what both of you said.

[16:31] I think it makes sense.

[16:33] It takes up our process a little bit, provides sincerity.

[16:37] Right.

[16:37] It makes it simple.

[16:38] That's what I like.

[16:39] It makes it simple.

[16:41] Okay.

[16:42] Any other discussion?

[16:44] Does somebody want to make motion?

[16:48] Or I can do it?

[16:50] I'll make a motion that we approve.

[16:51] of King County, ordinance 20, 0, 20, 26, 21.

[16:57] I don't know if it's revising King County,

[16:59] billy culture regulations,

[17:01] eight dashes, one dash three.

[17:02] I'm not used to ordinance Title IX, Chapter 21,

[17:04] subdivision regulation nine.

[17:06] Dash 21, B, dash one, and nine dashes, 21, K,

[17:10] dash three, rural, but increased blood applications

[17:12] of King County as presented by the New Orleans.

[17:18] That we presented.

[17:19] So Colin, Baker, or any other comment?

[17:23] No, no.

[17:24] Okay, Ella Davis.

[17:25] Hi.

[17:26] Thank you.

[17:27] Okay.

[17:28] Now we move on to the next one, which is also an ordinance.

[17:33] Discussing board on ordinance 2026-22.

[17:36] An ordinance revising King County Land Use ordinance,

[17:39] Title IX, Chapter 6, Residential Regulations, Article V,

[17:43] Recreational Vehicle Regulations within residential zones,

[17:47] changes to be contemplated.

[17:50] Okay.

[17:50] Okay, this has been a big deal for a long time.

[17:53] We've been trying to work out, you know, what's the best way to go about allowing someone

[18:00] to have more, like, right now they can't, kind of, or miss, only allows two RVs on any

[18:05] long in the county, and we want to make it for, like, special occasions that they can have

[18:10] more for a certain amount, a lot of time, not all the time.

[18:14] Do you want to explain it more, Shannon?

[18:16] Sure.

[18:16] And I want to answer Commissioner Myers' questions.

[18:19] She asked me how many RFI zones and I defer to Taylor Glover, and he got that answered

[18:26] very quickly.

[18:28] So we have 21,754 parcels in King County.

[18:33] Out of that, there are 283 that are zoned RFI.

[18:37] And then out of that, there's even less that would be outside of a sector that we're talking

[18:42] about.

[18:42] So I wanted that in the whole mix as we're talking about this and then I'm going to defer to Jeff because I think he can explain it

[18:49] Yeah, I'll talk about maybe the text inside a road and then the channel would be great to help with the context

[18:55] But so right now

[18:59] without this ordinance

[19:00] If you want more than two additional

[19:04] Arbis then you get a temporary use permit and that applies to all residential

[19:10] with this ordinance, you still can access that temporities

[19:16] crewman, all residential zones can still go that route.

[19:20] This process allows for a second way to get more than two parties,

[19:26] and that's through ACUP, and it only allows it to be R5 non-so-conditioned,

[19:32] and that specific C of e. The meat or all of the substitute changes are in letter C,

[19:41] if you don't mind scrolling down, and it's letter C, and it's basically that one and two, the ion level ion.

[19:50] So if you pass this as written, it will allow just an R5's non-subdivided, so just parcels.

[19:59] It will allow someone to apply for a conditionally used permit, which stays with it from.

[20:06] They don't apply once.

[20:07] They can keep it busy forever as long as they comply with conditions versus the temporary

[20:11] use, which would fill in trouble for the land use each time they need it.

[20:15] I can't remember what it said exactly, but yeah, it's more, it takes more effort.

[20:20] If they get the CUP, then they can have an additional two per acre.

[20:25] I do want to recommend removing the word additional and let if I to clarify that it's to per acre and maybe not for the first acre and to after that, I just want to clarify that.

[20:40] And then the second part is the part I've seen comments on from the public. This is a maximum time allowed for additional RVs. It's a very beautiful place per calendar year.

[20:50] And so you guys will need to have a discussion, if that's important, do you want it to be basically a 30-year for like a one-time Iranian or do you want to allow 30 additional days per RV that's about the two.

[21:09] So someone could stay at 30 days in one RV and another RV could come later that year and spend up to 30 days in another RV.

[21:17] So you guys will need to decide what to do there.

[21:21] Or then there's a mill ground as you could keep it to where it's just 30 or keep it to where it applies to all the extra.

[21:28] So 30 days applies to all of the extra of these accumulative.

[21:32] You could extend that to 45 days or 60 days.

[21:35] So there's a few options you have there, because that seems to be the main issue at least

[21:42] with some of the phones.

[21:45] Okay, Shen, do you have anything to add?

[21:47] No, I think you.

[21:49] I don't know, really.

[21:50] If you have questions, you can ask me, but I think I explained it really well.

[21:54] Okay.

[21:55] I just see this as really messy.

[21:57] Turns to count the 30 days.

[22:01] Who's going to do that?

[22:02] We don't have someone up there watching every RV and no one how many days are there.

[22:06] And we don't have anyone who can send it.

[22:08] That's it just couldn't happen that we could accurately keep track of the 30-day thing.

[22:13] I just don't see that.

[22:16] But, unfortunately, I don't think we, I don't want to allow, I mean, like, we have to get

[22:24] some RF, RF-5 zone, you know, properties.

[22:28] Some RF-5 properties have a lot more than 5 acres.

[22:31] and then we can end up having, you know, 20 RVs there.

[22:36] And, you know, if it's right next to a subdivision,

[22:38] that's really disturbing to the neighbors.

[22:42] And I just don't think that's fair.

[22:44] I personally think that we don't need this ordinance,

[22:47] that the way it is is fine.

[22:48] They can, for a reunion or something,

[22:51] I'm happy that they can do that.

[22:53] And they should be able to do that,

[22:55] have their reunions up there,

[22:56] and have, you know, additional RVs

[22:59] RVs for a certain amount of time, but I don't think, to me, I don't know, I don't think

[23:04] it's that big a deal to give a temporary use permit. And if they just do that as regularly

[23:09] as part of their planning their reunion, they could come and get that every year, you know,

[23:14] ahead of time. Like, I just don't think, see a name for this ordinance at all.

[23:22] Okay, let's go question the left turning. So regarding the step back portion of the ordinance

[23:26] It talks about that it needs to follow the setbacks.

[23:30] And I'm wondering is that residential setbacks

[23:33] is that setbacks for a shed?

[23:36] Well, what is that setback requirement?

[23:42] It's residential setback, OK?

[23:46] Yeah, so it's on, you're talking about number four.

[23:49] So the C of A and the temporaries permit

[23:53] and we both have to follow in your requirements

[23:56] that backs with the zone.

[23:59] So I don't think there are, it specifically says

[24:02] RVs need to set back, the idea would be,

[24:04] like Shannon says, if they were to build a house,

[24:06] same set backs, didn't follow the same set backs,

[24:09] is it going around?

[24:11] Well, yes, right.

[24:12] Actually, we've had to red tag some RVs

[24:14] because they're so close to the road

[24:16] that we felt like it was a dangerous situation

[24:19] and we've had complaints, so we require them to stay

[24:23] within the resident to set vaccine with Arby's.

[24:26] That's what I was thinking about.

[24:27] And with that, CUP, those conditions will be on my mind.

[24:35] But if some of this, a CUP is not required,

[24:39] our temporary use just to have to, this is probably getting off

[24:44] of what the harder the matter, but as I dug into it,

[24:47] there were some things that if, kind of like you changed

[24:51] You know, we find it, I think we should just clean it up a little if there's some confusion

[24:55] on some of these things, but perhaps when we say setbacks, we should say residential

[24:59] and then put a link to where they can find that, because if somebody's reading and they

[25:03] said, what is a setback?

[25:05] What is a setback?

[25:06] And how do I find where the setback is?

[25:10] There's different kinds of setbacks, if it's for a house, that's different than a just

[25:14] a property line or a solicitor should, I don't know what the other commissioners think

[25:20] about, but it might be helpful for the citizens to know what's that doctor talking about.

[25:27] Yeah, I guess I would propose that no matter what we decide, whether we just keep the

[25:32] ordinance as it is generally except for a few little changes, or we change the ordinance

[25:37] that we should clean up that portion just to make it more clear, and maybe provide some

[25:43] comfort to the neighbors as well. I think setbacks are what are they 20 feet from the property

[25:49] line for the non-frontage and a 30 feet 10, 10, 10, 10. Oh, 10, 10, 10, yeah. So at least

[25:56] they would have it right up on their property line no matter how many are allowed or they

[26:04] have some recourse. One other just small housekeeping matter. I noticed a lot of conditions like

[26:12] It needs to be winterized and the RV needs to be winterized, they need to be able to

[26:18] be mobilized, et cetera.

[26:22] What do you all think of adding that they need to have their, what's it called, registration

[26:33] up to date?

[26:36] I would not.

[26:37] What would that be?

[26:38] We're not the police that go, do you, do you?

[26:40] Well, they may be.

[26:41] I just got, I would take that whole thing because we're not, what, when somebody has

[26:46] have an RV on their property. So that's why the two RVs are not even talking about their

[26:50] special use permit. Are we going to go around and check everybody's license plate and make

[26:55] sure it's winterized and all those things and you don't winterize it in the summer time

[26:59] so it says when it's not going to occupy, you have to winterize it which doesn't make sense

[27:03] either to me. Kind of chime in just to give you a little history of how this has worked in

[27:08] the past with our red text because when we first got this we did have to do a lot of red

[27:13] the text, but the reason that we had that in there is if they weren't worthy, that means

[27:20] that it's going to stay on the property, and it can go get broken up and all of that,

[27:28] the snowfall on it, and we're having problems with that, so the attorney at the time, that's

[27:33] why we have that it has to be.

[27:35] We do make sure they have their license up to date with the motor vehicle, because that would

[27:41] be the only way we would know that they're not removing it because if they can't drive it

[27:46] off of the property because they're not keeping their license plates up to date, then that

[27:52] was a way that we could red-tag them because some of these go from year to year. We've had

[27:59] them to where they have completely fallen apart and we've had to have them remove that army

[28:03] because it became a safety hazard like a small child could get in. So we've had situations

[28:09] like that that we have replied on their license plates being renewed just so

[28:15] that we would know that this trailer hasn't moved off of here, it hasn't had the

[28:19] license plate renewed in 10 years so we definitely know that it's not up to

[28:25] the regulations and that was just to help us when we do have to re-attack the

[28:29] trailer. Yeah, but if it's in storage it doesn't have to move. I mean in that, but

[28:34] But there's somewhere else that talks about that, like if it's industry parity, it's covered

[28:39] somewhere else in this ordinance besides it's covered multiple times.

[28:45] I think would give us enough teeth if somebody has one in disarray that says if you think

[28:50] it more than six months.

[28:51] I understand what you're saying, well you can kind of figure out if they don't have a tag

[28:54] on it that it has a movement six months.

[28:58] But that's occupied for six months, you can have it on your property longer, you can have it

[29:02] forever under property, you have to two of them.

[29:05] You can, and we've relied on neighbors,

[29:07] and that's who's called us and stuff.

[29:09] And so that's where we start to look at record.

[29:11] And we can call the motor vehicle, and hey,

[29:13] have they redid this license, and that gives us

[29:15] a good indicator, because kind of like me,

[29:18] I have an RV, but I keep it road worthy,

[29:20] because I take it out, some extent.

[29:23] So that's good indicator that this RV's staying on the property.

[29:27] And if somebody's living in it, and when we get complaints,

[29:30] That's what triggers it like if you have a RV on property and destroying it nobody's staying in it

[29:35] It doesn't ever really trigger any concerns from anybody

[29:38] So most of all of our complaints are because somebody's living in that RV staying in it for

[29:46] So it's here what I'm hearing you say is it's not an issue to the general public that their neighbor has an RV part of their property

[29:54] That's good to know. I didn't realize that. Yeah

[29:56] Okay, unless it's on the part in district care.

[30:23] But otherwise, no.

[30:24] It would be one measurable objective, anybody could look at that and see if the ties are

[30:30] expired or not.

[30:31] And so it would be easily enforceable, not rely on neighbors complaining thing.

[30:41] And yeah, we're probably not going to enforce it, just like, I mean, in most cases, we're

[30:46] not going to be going around checking everyone's thing.

[30:49] It just provides an objective measure and a little bit of teeth.

[30:52] I'm not heavily invested into whether or not we add that to the list of requirements.

[30:58] I'd also be just as happy as if we removed some of those requirements and simply kept

[31:04] it at if it's in this repair.

[31:09] So I just want to have a conversation while we have this book open.

[31:14] I also just have a, I don't, the idea of the CUP because it goes with the property, no matter

[31:20] who owns the property, that kind of bothers me too because he never know what the next owner

[31:26] is for me to do. I think everything should be individualized. Like I said, I really just

[31:30] didn't appreciate it. I mean, we don't want a bunch of RVs on any property for a long

[31:36] time. And then if we just, they have to have a special permit to do it, I don't think

[31:40] that's that big of a deal. Is there a cost for a spent that temporary permit? Yes, there

[31:46] It's like $100.

[31:48] Maybe the weekdays like we did that,

[31:51] or some sort of make it not a big deal for them

[31:53] to get one every year, or even even made.

[31:55] I mean, instead of, I would not try to do that,

[31:59] then did the seat appear out.

[32:01] I just, and yeah, I, I guess for me,

[32:06] we have to go back to why we're gonna have

[32:08] in this discussion, and it has to do with

[32:10] like zone changes that happen in the county

[32:12] when there were so many zones,

[32:14] and they didn't know what to do with some,

[32:15] so they threw them in residential from the recreation, they threw them in ag if they were over 10.

[32:21] And we were trying to clean that up. At least that's been for me since I've been a commissioner

[32:26] and was aware of this specific situation and it might apply to other properties out there.

[32:32] And so we asked the planning and zoning, can you look at it, come up with it, the attorney worked with it.

[32:39] But I really, but I don't like is the 30 accumulative days because right now if they get a temporary

[32:46] use they can keep them there for six months.

[32:48] So why is it more punishing to have a CUP?

[32:51] To me it's more punishing.

[32:53] You know, if they want to have five o'clock or four, whatever property, like it's not that big of a deal.

[32:59] It's just cleaner to say for that category of five acres non-residential you can have one or

[33:07] or two per acre, it's for the season one, which is defined as consecutive.

[33:15] I came with it first.

[33:19] Well I don't like to, I mean like he said they, if they had temperate,

[33:22] they could have it up there for six months.

[33:26] I think that should be a limited time too.

[33:29] I don't think six months is what it should be.

[33:33] For dairy that, for whatever, you know, I don't think...

[33:37] I just felt like the idea of having 10 RVs out there, or if you have 10 acres, you could

[33:45] have 20 RVs out there.

[33:46] If you're right next to a subdivision and neighbors, it's just not, I just don't think

[33:52] that it's the right thing to do.

[33:57] Yeah, I'm thinking about things from legal perspective.

[34:01] So for one thing, I'm adverse to CUPs just because they are problematic.

[34:09] I feel like they leave too much opportunity for litigation and too much discretion in weird places and liability.

[34:21] And so I would like to get away from the CUP portion of things.

[34:25] I also am not in favor of temporary use permits.

[34:30] I think that's just an administrative hurdle and red tape.

[34:34] And so as much as possible, just in general, I think we should go toward a policy of permitted

[34:40] or not permitted use and leave out the discretion and the haggling and the extra working considerations

[34:49] that go into CUP's and permits.

[34:51] And similarly to how we did with the roof lines, I think we came up with something that

[34:57] was very workable, reasonable, and widely applicable.

[35:02] And I think we should have the same objective here.

[35:06] I also am thinking about enforceability and limited staff and efficient use of taxpayer

[35:14] dollars.

[35:15] and the more we have complicated rules that involve the constituents complaining about

[35:27] each other, the more problematic it becomes.

[35:30] And so I agree with you about what the problems are with CUP and difficulty in enforcing.

[35:39] I'm just coming through a very different solution.

[35:41] My solution would be that we get rid of the CUP, we get rid of the temporary use permit.

[35:48] We build an ordinance that allows for a higher level of client enjoyment of property.

[35:56] And when I say that, there's lots of different ways to interpret client enjoyment of property.

[36:03] So one way would be that it's a quiet enjoyment, meaning it's settled, it's legally settled.

[36:11] It's not in contests.

[36:13] You don't have to keep coming back and begging the government to, please let me use your

[36:17] property.

[36:18] You get the quiet enjoyment of your, you know, uncontested enjoyment.

[36:22] That's one.

[36:23] Another one is you're not being noisy to your neighbors, you're quietly enjoying your property.

[36:29] In my opinion, parking RVs on a large lot, not in the subdivision is meets both of those

[36:37] definitions.

[36:39] So, I feel like 10 on 5 acre is reasonable and I'm honestly for year-round and especially

[36:50] in the unincorporated areas of the county, not in the subdivision, not in an HOA, not in

[36:56] a city.

[36:57] I think there should be a greater level of opportunities to enjoy one's land in different

[37:06] ways in the unincorporated areas, and I also believe we should have fewer regulations.

[37:12] And I also think we should have lower tax burden.

[37:16] And that's very important to me, and one thing that I think people should consider when

[37:23] and they decide whether or not to live in an HOA,

[37:25] whether or not to live in a subdivision,

[37:27] whether or not to live in a town.

[37:29] What are the trade-offs that they're getting?

[37:32] I want them to know that those are the trade-offs

[37:34] and make their decision accordingly.

[37:37] And I do agree with you also that if it's more than five acres,

[37:44] even if it's zone to R5,

[37:46] that they shouldn't get more than 10

[37:49] until they have five additional full acres.

[37:52] So, let's say for the first five acres of metrics is 2 per RV, and then they don't get

[38:01] any more than 10 unless they have 15 acres, and then they get one more.

[38:06] And if they have 20 acres, they get two more, so 11, 12, you know, up until indefinitely.

[38:15] And I think also another thing that's going to mitigate any potential issues is that residential

[38:22] step back, and there's going to be, like currently, if you have two parts you're around right,

[38:30] or seasonally. Seasonally around. You're around. You can have two year round on a half acre.

[38:37] So if we were to puff out those metrics, we could have 20 out of five acre lot. So I think it's reasonable

[38:44] that 10 on a five acre lot. I live in a neighborhood that has five acre lots on both sides of me.

[38:51] across the street and it's no problem at all for my neighbors to have a

[38:58] busily and a RV's and storage units and courses and all kinds of livestock

[39:06] and outbuildings and busy roads and it's just totally fine for me because

[39:12] five acres is a big plot of land. So all that to say thank you for listening

[39:17] First of all, and second of all, I propose no CUP, no temporary use permit, year-round

[39:25] ability, residential clarification, and if it's over five acres, then they don't get

[39:32] another RP until an additional five acres is on the property size.

[39:39] I just want to clarify, it's still seasonal, you can't really do that.

[39:46] Well, that's a little bit of a limit.

[39:48] You can store it.

[39:51] May I have a rebuttal?

[39:53] Like I said, I would say on that.

[39:55] So I have been here for 17 years.

[39:58] My theory is, don't fix it unless it's broke.

[40:01] CUPs.

[40:02] I have been complimented by my grandfather when they come to our county because it is spelled

[40:09] out it's right there and they've said it's the easiest government to work with. And in my

[40:14] trainings that's why our conditional use permit it's listed to keep us out of mitigation,

[40:19] litigation. In the 17 years I've been here we have never denied a CUP and CUP's actually get

[40:26] more rights because the planning is owning if you take it to the whether it's permitted or conditional

[40:31] they're going to take them out.

[40:33] And so as far as staff, we have those safeguards in our ordinances, one there's noise.

[40:42] Like when we had our gravel pit out at Nubaria, I went out at 10-30 in the evening to make

[40:47] sure that it wasn't noisy.

[40:49] It hasn't been a burden because the sheriff and previous PNZs and our attorney did the nuisance

[40:55] ordinance.

[40:56] So the sheriff has been called out on noise ordinances and stuff.

[40:59] of those would stay even without the CUP.

[41:02] What a CUP does is put it in writing,

[41:05] they have to sign it, and we give it to them.

[41:08] And it can be revoked.

[41:09] And I've never had to revoke a CUP,

[41:12] but I've red-tagged them.

[41:13] And they get right on it,

[41:15] just kind of like her camp kayak thing

[41:16] when they know that it could get revoked.

[41:19] So I just want to clarify within my experience

[41:22] a regulating CUP's and ordinances for 17 years,

[41:27] It's been a wonderful process and I feel like we have a lot more rights than some of the counties and the city years ago when Robert Houston was the mayor, he was also on our

[41:37] PNZ and there was a big training about CUTs and litigation and I feel like our ordinance is in a good place because I think 17 years with no litigation is a good track record.

[41:49] So, I wanted to just kind of give you guys the history of, I really am proud of King County

[41:55] and the ordinances and the rights that they actually do give, because we do have a lot

[42:00] of more uses than a lot of counties.

[42:03] I like here, if an agro boom picks it, that's what I'm saying.

[42:08] I think it's fine the way it is, but also, the problems that we had, all the neighbors that

[42:15] pay here and protested it, or because they didn't want ten parties there, you know, I'm

[42:22] a big protector of people that the neighbors do. I don't pay. We all have property rights

[42:28] as true, but everybody has property rights, and they got up there not expecting to have

[42:33] ten RVs next to them having parties or whatever they do, you know. So I think we have to protect

[42:42] everybody's right, not just owners of the five-acre property. So I don't think

[42:49] it's wrong, I think we need it, it should leave it as. Well, Chair, just to be clear,

[42:57] it's already illegal to have a loud party, or whatever, and I was at all of

[43:02] those meetings with the neighbors, and I didn't really hear any of them saying

[43:06] the 10 RVs is the problem. I heard them saying there's a, you know, safety concern. Maybe

[43:13] the fire was not authorized. Complaints about the RVs and the, I'm assuming the ATVs and

[43:20] the dust. Like, I heard a lot of different things. I did not hear any of them saying, and there

[43:24] were just too many RVs I didn't like looking at it. No, but I think that, that's what all the

[43:30] people are there. The 10 RVs are there because there's so many people there. And, you know,

[43:34] people coming on to their property, and like you said, driving in the dust and blocking

[43:39] the world ways.

[43:40] And when there's that many people there, that's the kind of problems we have.

[43:43] So I think it would be a big mistake to allow that around, you know.

[43:48] Well, I think they can already use their property around.

[43:51] Really, we're not discussing an event or they had to have a permit for their reunion.

[43:56] They could have reunions many times here.

[43:59] It's just they wanted more RVs on their property.

[44:02] They're not limited to a hundred people in their property.

[44:06] The county, I think, specifically hasn't put anything in place to limit family reunions

[44:11] and the number of people that can gather.

[44:13] We don't have a special use permit for that.

[44:16] We have temporary uses to have RVs on their property above and beyond what our ordinance allows.

[44:24] So the other things in place with fire hazard, noise, those are already still in place.

[44:31] like whether we change it so they can have the 10 without having to get it

[44:35] permitted every year. They're still the safeguards. I think it's not going to do

[44:41] away with a family reunion where there's dust. Yeah, nobody's trying to do what

[44:45] with family reunion. I do something the way it happened. I mean all they have to do

[44:49] is go out there and get a permit. And if we take away the fee, that is not a problem at all.

[44:54] I know I wouldn't if I was in that position. You don't know it's all depending on

[44:59] You

[45:00] So, if they desire to grant them one, like it's not a given, it's not a right to have that temporary use, it could be cancelled. Now, if it's cancelled because they didn't follow all the boundaries and the rules, and that's one thing, if it's cancelled just because somebody decides they don't like it, then I'd be unsettling for me, if my family every year had to be on pins and needles, are we gonna get it this year? Are we gonna get it this year? I'm not saying that ours would do that,

[45:29] but that's what they're up to.

[45:31] We don't know who's always gonna be in that control

[45:34] of that decision.

[45:35] Well, you don't have the, I mean,

[45:36] you don't decide whether because you like her or not,

[45:39] I mean, it's the planning and zoning that occurs.

[45:42] Because they decided they like it or not.

[45:43] I really don't take no one's going to deny it

[45:48] just because they don't like that person

[45:50] or like what they're doing.

[45:51] And I don't see that as a problem at all.

[45:54] And I want to just clarify,

[45:56] CUPs can't be revoked too, so like if I get complaints just like on a temporary use permit, we have to go up and make sure so that we can have the language in there also, so comparing apples with apples.

[46:10] So were we able to know how many RFIs are not in a subdivision? I know there's 283.

[46:16] That's right, and he could come. He does have that.

[46:19] That's a question for you, is there a way of mechanism to find out the parcels that aren't in a subdivision that are archived still?

[46:31] It's okay. It can be very low.

[46:34] I know it's less than 283.

[46:37] It's exactly because they're like way more in a subdivision.

[46:40] So that's not.

[46:41] Yeah.

[46:49] Okay, is it going to be out 17? Say Shannon, do you have anything else on? No?

[46:54] Hold up. Like, just from my clarity, this is adding a new CUP process. It's not preserving

[47:03] an existing CUP process. No, it would be allowing a CUP in the R5 zone. And then what I also have

[47:12] to do correct me if I'm wrong attorney is make sure it's in a lot that's not in a subdivision

[47:20] when they come to get to see me correct because it's only if it's not in a subdivision that they

[47:27] can have more than the two RVs. Well that clarifying language being the ordinance for me directly

[47:34] but that way, then we're on the lead in the straight.

[47:39] Yeah, I guess I don't know.

[47:40] Are you asking just about R5 or just temporary?

[47:43] Like, the Commissioner Myers was asking as far as, like,

[47:48] when I permitted, like, I wouldn't be able to do the conditional

[47:53] use permit with just an R5.

[47:55] Like, Palomar is R5, but it's a subdivision.

[47:58] So if somebody came in to get a conditional use permit

[48:01] to have more than two RVs, they don't apply because they don't have, they're in the subdivision.

[48:10] The only way they can get a conditional use permit is if they're in a parcel,

[48:14] that's not the subdivision that was written in the US.

[48:17] Thank you.

[48:17] But there was that answer, what you were asking.

[48:20] Yes.

[48:22] So, I guess I have changed my position.

[48:25] I'm still not in favor of adding more CUPs, and in general, I would like to have less CUPs.

[48:31] But there will still be a temporary use, so if somebody is in a subdivision, they want

[48:36] to have an event, they want to have four RVs for the weekend or whatever, that's still

[48:40] available through this order.

[48:43] Yes, that's true.

[48:44] It's actually a CUP for five acres, outside of the suburbs.

[48:51] And as the boners said, if the original property owners would have come in and got a conditional

[48:58] use permit, it was allowed at that time because it was

[49:00] forced recreation, they would be able to do what they're doing today.

[49:07] So I mean, like she just said, if there is a division they'd have to give

[49:11] a temporary permit, so to me that they're not as though this should be the same.

[49:16] I think we should just leave it and make it simple and not try to,

[49:19] there's too many things to try to police who got to police what they're,

[49:25] you know, how many days old you were here two days last month and now you're

[49:28] Therefore, if their case is not going to happen, it's just not going to happen.

[49:33] And I do feel like it hasn't been working out completely smoothly as it was for a number of reasons.

[49:39] And one of them is that it creates sort of its surfaces, user complex and neighbor complex.

[49:49] Like we've been doing it, like we've been doing it, and it hasn't been sort of like there's been hurt feelings and neighbors and

[49:58] and neighbors, and people sending in pictures,

[50:00] and people trying to do the best they can,

[50:03] and people stressed out, and people paying tons of money,

[50:05] and people having to appeal it.

[50:08] And the planning and zoning thing,

[50:11] this issue over and over again,

[50:12] the county commission's using this issue over and over again,

[50:15] like the reason that I think there were,

[50:17] that we're to this point is an acknowledgement

[50:21] that what we're doing maybe isn't working so great,

[50:25] and that maybe we do need to look at something different.

[50:27] I'd like to clarify, the only reason this is on the docket is a new neighbor moved in and called me.

[50:36] It had been happening for decades. It was actually a new neighbor that called and asked about it.

[50:42] So they've been doing this for 40 years, I think, before anybody complained and it was a new neighbor that barely had built a home.

[50:50] So, and I don't have these kind of complaints with any other RV project, this is the only one and it was in 2021.

[51:01] Just want to clarify with this process, Heritage Acres is the only one. We've had other temporary permits that have allowed more than two.

[51:09] You know that being on the PNZ and I have never had complaints, this is the only one.

[51:14] So we're we're we're looking at one project here and wanting to change a whole ordinance on one project

[51:20] That concerns me that there's my point totally. That's it. I don't think we should be changing ordinances for one

[51:28] Situations

[51:28] Sure, I don't feel we're changing it for one situation. There might be more out there

[51:34] We just don't know of them, but

[51:37] Nobody wanted to change the whole

[51:39] Ordinance either, so to me this was kind of a win-win, like how do we, by not allowing it in subdivisions,

[51:46] yeah, it is very specific, but it goes back to what put him in this position, it was a blanket zone change.

[51:52] The commissioner did look at every single lot and said, well, this should be this, and this should be that.

[51:56] They like, no, anything under 10 will be residential, over 10 will be ag.

[52:01] And so to me, we're just trying to deal with some of the aftermath of that.

[52:06] There hasn't been much. She seems like it was a great thing when it happened.

[52:11] I want to clarify because I keep hearing it coming up just so you can

[52:14] understand. Ag are 10 acres and above. And this

[52:18] doesn't apply to act. We don't regulate our fees on ag.

[52:22] So to have an RFI zone that's like 20 acres, I don't see it happening

[52:26] I could because we've had some developers get a zone change and not

[52:30] subdued by their property. But it would be very, very rare.

[52:33] So R5 is a residential five and it's usually that they can have five acres.

[52:38] They usually don't have more.

[52:39] So in ag, we're not regulating all of our big parcels or any tonight that this is just

[52:44] truly residential zones.

[52:48] Thank you.

[52:49] Yeah, like you said, it's been working for many, many years with only this one, because

[52:54] like, I'm one of the reasons it did study, you know, they had problems, it's one year they

[52:58] forgot to get, they didn't go gift or temporary use for it, but that's, that's not something

[53:02] to do with the ordinance that they just didn't do it.

[53:07] So, that's what brought, from being out of Chinese only,

[53:10] that's what I remember is that they just forgot to do it.

[53:13] So, it's not the county's issue.

[53:16] It's that they didn't do it.

[53:17] And it's worked for many, many years, and yeah,

[53:22] I, we try to complicate everything

[53:24] that isn't that complicated.

[53:27] And I think that's all we're doing here

[53:28] is making it way more complicated than it should be.

[53:31] I

[53:34] can't understand Commissioner Myers wanting not wanting to do a CUP, but the same like

[53:42] our county has a pretty good track record.

[53:44] You know, if we haven't had litigation, sometimes I've heard Jeff say that he doesn't necessarily

[53:48] like CUP's because there's interpretation in there, but if we've had success with it for

[53:55] have for many years without litigation. I feel like how it's written minus the 30

[54:02] accumulative days for calendar year would be what I would want to see just

[54:07] put the seasonal use on it. What do you mean about seasonal use? That's six

[54:13] accumulative months. So what you're saying is keep everything except for remove

[54:21] of the 30-day requirement, where I just put it season-leaves, which is the final

[54:26] phase at the beginning.

[54:30] And then in addition, take out what Jeff, why not make it a

[54:33] motion with me? Jeff, I wanted to make, take out additional. And then if we added

[54:38] the residential setbacks, put the word residential in there. Do you want to put

[54:45] in that if it's more than five acres, they don't get one per or two per additional

[54:51] anchor. I think that could be an important distinction.

[55:03] Yeah, I was just reading how it

[55:04] read. So right now it would be allowed. I find the limit. With the limit up to 10? Is

[55:11] that kind of what you're thinking? No. Well, they could be that as well, but my proposal

[55:16] was if it's like for the first five acres, it's a formula that we've already discussed. For

[55:22] acres over and above five acres they would only get one more for each

[55:27] additional full five acres. That was my thought. I think it's complicated and to me

[55:31] they can go get a temporary use if they're wanting to do more than 10 or 40

[55:36] acres or something. The other skips people an opportunity not to have to keep

[55:42] renewing they have they they have an assurance that unless they break the rules

[55:47] of that CEP that they'll be able to use their property.

[55:51] What that CEP's allowing is just a different size thing.

[55:55] I really think that can be a good compromise.

[56:03] I mean, they can do it now. They can use their property.

[56:05] They call it, I don't see why it's such a big deal.

[56:08] It's just like anything else in your life.

[56:09] You go register your car once a year.

[56:11] You pay your taxes once a year.

[56:13] You do all that. I don't understand why getting a temporary use permit

[56:17] because it's such a big deal once in a year.

[56:20] Well, some people feel like I feel like it's not

[56:23] such a big deal that people want to have more than two RVs

[56:25] on a five-acre lot.

[56:27] There's no true harm to the neighbors,

[56:28] so it's just, you know,

[56:30] even everyone has a different perspective.

[56:33] Right, you say there's no true harm to the neighbors,

[56:35] but the neighbors disagree.

[56:37] What a person.

[56:38] I'm not saying the actual RV is what I'm saying.

[56:42] All the people that come with it is what I'm saying, so.

[56:49] Okay, I

[56:54] would like to make a motion that we just leave it alone and do not approve

[56:59] We deny ordinance 2026-22. Other comments?

[57:09] Let's roll call.

[57:11] Okay, Maddie?

[57:16] Ney.

[57:17] Aye.

[57:18] Ney.

[57:19] Okay, the...

[57:20] Didn't they sell it?

[57:22] So now I have to make a new motion.

[57:24] How did you want to make it since you basically already said it?

[57:29] Chair, I move that we approve King County ordinance 2026-2222

[57:36] with the changes of a number 4 adding residential to the word setback

[57:46] and I don't know if you can put a link there so it takes into where those are

[57:51] and then taking out additional and the C little I and then under C2 take out 30

[58:05] accumulate days per calendar year and put seasonal use.

[58:15] Okay, any other questions?

[58:17] Okay, I'll be there. We'll do another roll call.

[58:22] Hey.

[58:23] Hi.

[58:24] Hey.

[58:25] Hi.

[58:26] Okay.

[58:27] That motion passes.

[58:31] Thank you.

[58:32] Thank you.

[58:33] Thank you.

[58:34] Thank you.

[58:35] Can I take a quick question on that one?

[58:37] As I was reading it, it seemed like there were one or two places in the unchanged areas that are now going to be in inconsistent with the changed areas.

[58:47] areas. I don't remember exactly what it was, but can you just look at over super

[58:51] good and in motion? Make sure you catch everything.

[58:54] Absolutely.

[58:55] Okay, when we don't go, we'll move on to the next item.

[58:59] Discuss, except the 2026 cooperative marketing grant.

[59:04] 215,750,200. This is cashier.

[59:07] Okay, Janet. Well, Janet come up. So, Janet and her team did the hard

[59:11] work of applying for this grant. It's through the Utah Office of

[59:15] the tourism, I'll let her explain what it is, you know.

[59:18] Now let's take up.

[59:19] Sure, so thank you, Commissioner.

[59:22] And this is the grant we've applied for and received

[59:24] for several years in a row now.

[59:27] It's an opportunity that the state gives

[59:29] to tourism directors and the tourism departments,

[59:33] along with individual entities like, for example,

[59:37] to a con also applies and they can get a grant

[59:41] or the symphony, the Salt Lake Valley West, I believe they also like it anyway.

[59:48] But they have a section for specifically for tourism directors and we applied.

[59:53] It's a matching grant and as you know you guys all sign a letter in the application process.

[1:00:00] I have a letter stating that we would support it, whatever we got awarded that we would do the match. And then also, I had to get letters from the community from other tourism partners. And so I did about five letters, I think, from different tourism partners supporting the ground and the marketing that we can do with it. The grant has to be spent specifically on what we applied for, which in this case, we did marketing for our general marketing campaign, along with balloons and tunes.

[1:00:29] and the PRCA and with that of this grant only 25% can be spent in the state of Utah so it's

[1:00:37] really promoting outside which works really well for us. We primarily will do Phoenix and

[1:00:42] Las Vegas with the grant which is our dried markets which also works really well and we were just

[1:00:49] really happy to receive the amount. I don't know what my heart 157 is.

[1:00:56] Anyway so now we'll be

[1:00:59] following up shortly in the midway I think it says October or September 4th. They'll send us

[1:01:05] an actual contract. I'll run it through Jeff's office as we always do and then we'll accept it and

[1:01:12] then we can apply for 50% of the money now and then I wait and apply for the other 50% at the end of

[1:01:18] So it's already I kind of put it as a budget anticipating that we would get a

[1:01:22] ground. And so we're just happy we got it. Is there any questions? No sounds great.

[1:01:29] Can I ask a couple questions? Sure. So one, the match, does that come from the TRT

[1:01:37] marketing dollars? Yes. Which again, our TRT budget is required to be spent on

[1:01:43] marketing, establishing and promoting. So this is actually money we would have already spent

[1:01:48] doing this, but now we get doubled. And then it frees up, not frees up, but we can just

[1:01:53] use the money like maybe to help in our events or things like that where we've got extra to

[1:01:59] go towards the specific out-of-state marketing. Yeah. And did you say the money came from you

[1:02:04] what? Or from? Yeah, you talked to tourism through, and I don't know which avenue. I mean,

[1:02:09] Okay, it's listed somewhere. I just don't know the top of my head. So it's a good way to maximize our

[1:02:15] spending and get more bang for them up. It really is because we're going to do it anyway.

[1:02:20] Do you know why they gave a little less than then, you know, previous years?

[1:02:25] I don't know. I think it was their cut. You know, they get cut a little bit every year. I do know,

[1:02:31] they sent me a list of every award. I was able to see that. We are always in the top, I don't know,

[1:02:38] I would say five to ten of the counties that get the awards.

[1:02:41] We usually are right in line with the Grand County Moab and what they get, which is again

[1:02:46] the same.

[1:02:47] We're about 3,000 less than Moab this year.

[1:02:50] I know.

[1:02:51] I don't know.

[1:02:51] I mean, yeah.

[1:02:53] Who knows?

[1:02:54] There's a scoring system, and it does say how many points we got, you know, we got 87 points

[1:02:58] or something.

[1:02:58] And so I can go back and look over and see, but yeah, I mean, it's just, I feel, I feel

[1:03:04] It makes me feel good to know that we're in the top percentage of the people getting the grants.

[1:03:10] There's like who gets more than us.

[1:03:12] I know Garfield and Davis County for some reason they always, I don't know if they're hitting every box, whatever they're doing, but yeah.

[1:03:20] You could make it less G or T. Garfield gets more.

[1:03:23] Garfield gets less. I'm not sure.

[1:03:26] Davis has to get more because there's a big one now.

[1:03:29] It doesn't take much time.

[1:03:30] And maybe they, you know, everybody does different things.

[1:03:32] You can do a specific project.

[1:03:34] I know, I believe last year, Garfield did a specific

[1:03:38] to Bryce Canyon and they went to, I believe, New York City

[1:03:42] and did a thing with journalists specific

[1:03:45] and maybe they liked that specificness, which we could do

[1:03:49] at some point, which don't have a barbarian park like that.

[1:03:54] Anyway, I'm not sure.

[1:03:56] Yeah, my last question is virtually so for Jeff and if there's some way that we can

[1:04:03] approve everything that we need to now, ending our review and then not have to bring

[1:04:09] it back to a kind of commission.

[1:04:11] Is it going that signs up the chair?

[1:04:17] Well, I think I just signed it and then well, I don't know, we've done different things, but

[1:04:21] whatever.

[1:04:22] So it doesn't have to be a commissioner signing a color draft over from our perspective.

[1:04:27] No, it's dealt with decide when to give the grant, but I don't see it.

[1:04:34] I think you can approve of that either or if you wanted a different name.

[1:04:41] Let me know.

[1:04:43] If you could usually sign it, this is a temporary number over the years, too many grants.

[1:04:48] There's a lot of grants and this is a great one.

[1:04:52] Okay. Thank you. So I guess we just just somebody want to make a motion. Sure. Chair, I move that we accept the 2026 cooperative marketing grant year one for 157,200 with the caveat that we will be reviewed by our attorney and give authority to have our chairs and directors in that are one of the commissioners on.

[1:05:23] I'm going to be able to work on this here.

[1:05:25] Any discussion?

[1:05:27] Okay, all in favor?

[1:05:28] Hi.

[1:05:29] That was unanimous.

[1:05:31] Thank you.

[1:05:32] Thanks, Jenna.

[1:05:34] Okay.

[1:05:35] The next thing is discussed vote on five county association of government's very agency on

[1:05:40] aging for FY27 contract.

[1:05:44] Oh, thank you.

[1:05:44] We're going to sit there.

[1:05:46] We're going to sit there.

[1:05:47] The TRT.

[1:05:49] Oh, I just crossed that out for some time.

[1:05:50] Okay, let's do well. Okay. Discuss vote on expenditure of TRT funds for 110,000 to the King County Water Conservancy District for bathrooms, and shade in pavilions, had the Jackson flat reservoir.

[1:06:05] Did you want to talk about that, Patty? Sure.

[1:06:08] So the two documents I've put in there. One is the budget for the year with the TRT showing that under.

[1:06:17] We had $500,000 budgeted for projects, and when we did the budget last year, we did not

[1:06:21] break that down to all the specific projects.

[1:06:24] So, if you go to the next one, it shows this was information that Shemile had provided

[1:06:30] for Janette and the King County Tax and Charism Board of what been obligated and are in

[1:06:38] the process of being spent.

[1:06:40] Some of this is not just projects, like the EMS is out of a different line in the roads,

[1:06:44] but out of the projects, it was the kiosk, the fairgrounds, the signs, and then this, so

[1:06:54] a system or observatory, the bathrooms are out there where they're building that, that

[1:06:59] was, this is what was voted on by the Kate tourism board, they did think that was a good

[1:07:06] expenditure, so I was just asking, they need that much to finish the contract, or the other

[1:07:12] short that much to finish the contract for their project out at the reservoir.

[1:07:18] And it's owned by the Waterton Service. That's what the money would go to them.

[1:07:24] So we still have, since we budgeted $500, when I counted it, I think we're still at $450,

[1:07:29] even giving this much, like we still have $50,000 left in that budget.

[1:07:36] We haven't overspent that much.

[1:07:44] I have a lot of angst over the years about not wanting to give general taxpayer dollars

[1:07:54] that 75% in general come from businesses to a tax exempt organization who has demonstrated

[1:08:03] in history of attempting to cost businesses more money with prohibitive

[1:08:13] regulations on lighting, not just on new builds, but including retroactively

[1:08:18] on existing builds. And I haven't wanted the discussion to be well, you

[1:08:27] invested in this observatory. So now everyone else in the county has to keep

[1:08:32] their lights low to make up for that. And so kind of the compromise that I felt comfortable

[1:08:42] making was, but it is true, the side of the observatory that bathrooms would be very

[1:08:49] helpful for the general public use. And we would have to have a porta-potty out there.

[1:08:55] and so I guess what I'm saying is I'm okay putting, I know it's not general,

[1:09:04] lunch, but I'm okay putting taxpayer dollars to bathrooms at the water

[1:09:13] conservancy even though I'm generally opposed to a project that would be very

[1:09:24] likely to impede the rights of the other businesses and residents in the area.

[1:09:32] So, especially when there hasn't been a measurable or concrete benefit to those regulations

[1:09:43] and investment.

[1:09:47] So I guess that's a very long way to say I'm okay with this expenditure going for bathrooms

[1:09:53] that everybody can use not just the observatory folks and so basically it's

[1:10:01] money to go to bathrooms.

[1:10:05] Okay.

[1:10:06] Thank you.

[1:10:06] No, I'm just going to say, you know, I see the community coming together, they, you know,

[1:10:11] there's grants from the state, garcane, water, conservancy,

[1:10:17] these, been part of it, but I think

[1:10:20] it will be great asset out on that side of the reservoir if only for bathroom for the shade.

[1:10:25] I agree with that, and I do agree with parts of what, so I'll say it too, but I don't think we ever have to, you know,

[1:10:34] right day might request that we require lower lighting or what, but we don't ever have to improve that.

[1:10:39] So I'm very, just a bathroomist too.

[1:10:43] Okay, does anyone do a motion on that one?

[1:10:46] Chair, I move that we approve an expenditure of 110,000 from our TRT project fund item granted

[1:10:56] to the Cain County Water Conservancy District for bathrooms and a shade of the Pavilion

[1:11:00] of the Jackson Plans.

[1:11:01] All in favor.

[1:11:04] Aye.

[1:11:05] Aye.

[1:11:06] That was unanimous.

[1:11:07] Okay.

[1:11:07] Now we'll move on to the Discussing Board on the 5 County Association of Governments,

[1:11:11] very agency on aging, the FY27 contract, and this is Commissioner Camille.

[1:11:17] Yeah, Jerrica wasn't able to be here.

[1:11:19] We had a change over of cooks, so she's in the process of getting the new cook online,

[1:11:26] so she will come and present.

[1:11:28] She usually comes in as a beautiful presentation on what's happening with active living

[1:11:33] centers and the council on aging and with how the money's being used, so basically this

[1:11:39] is a grant that we get every year, goes through the five county, one of the reasons we can use

[1:11:44] five counties. We don't have to do all this paperwork ourselves. It has been reviewed by Jeff.

[1:11:50] I've tried to read through it. I don't know how Jeff reads through legal things because there's a lot

[1:11:54] of legal stuff in the special right hand, but yeah, I can't say I write everything, go work.

[1:12:01] But basically, we get money for the meals on wheels where we deliver the food and we get subsidized

[1:12:07] to provide meals in this congregate, to also help with the seniors, with visits, or

[1:12:16] transportation, and a whole list of people with that.

[1:12:19] It does lay out exactly how much money we get for each of the different categories, and

[1:12:25] then the county does, we do, it's not a required match, but we do general funds on our senior

[1:12:31] center program.

[1:12:35] I think this is a really important thing for you all.

[1:12:39] We do need to ship orders and usually I think it's great.

[1:12:43] Anybody else have anything?

[1:12:46] No, I mean I think there's no...

[1:12:49] Is this the first year you reviewed a GIF?

[1:12:51] I don't know if there's any changes.

[1:12:53] The dollar amounts have changed a little bit,

[1:12:55] but basically you get $198,980.

[1:12:58] Don't worry. I'm unaware of any substance to choose from.

[1:13:04] And it looks like we need to review it every year.

[1:13:09] At least. Yeah.

[1:13:11] Are you asking me to? Yeah.

[1:13:13] Like from the very beginning, it was talking about the time that it was valid for.

[1:13:18] It's only valid three from 27.

[1:13:20] Yeah, it'll be need to be signed every year.

[1:13:23] Whether or not you can, whether it has to be reviewed every year,

[1:13:27] or we could think about it.

[1:13:29] There's a way to just have Eric in the commission

[1:13:31] or whatever.

[1:13:33] OK, I understand what you're saying.

[1:13:35] I was saying, we'll have to make this decision again

[1:13:39] every year, but it looks like our cash

[1:13:42] in the actual is $9,000,000.

[1:13:45] So that's a pretty good deal.

[1:13:47] Yeah, that's how we're going to help you.

[1:13:49] I was worked all the hope you have to jump through,

[1:13:51] all the reports.

[1:13:52] Yeah, thank you.

[1:13:54] OK, is there any more discussion on that?

[1:13:56] Does anybody want to do a motion?

[1:13:58] Chair, I'll move that we approve the Five County Association

[1:14:03] of Governments Area Agency on Aging,

[1:14:08] this year, 27 contract has presented.

[1:14:12] Okay, any discussion?

[1:14:14] You know?

[1:14:14] How's my favorite?

[1:14:15] Hi.

[1:14:16] That was unanimous, favorite, and favorite.

[1:14:19] Okay, we'll move on to the review of legislative issues.

[1:14:23] Do they give you have any of that?

[1:14:25] What was you going to talk about?

[1:14:31] Well, that's what she likes to do.

[1:14:33] So that's what I was going to talk about.

[1:14:34] That would have been just a couple of times.

[1:14:38] There are two that are impacting us currently

[1:14:41] and they are still the Louisville,

[1:14:44] which is Wildland Urban Interface.

[1:14:46] Nothing's too majorly new on that front.

[1:14:50] And then there's also the preliminary municipality legislation

[1:14:55] So I have a question.

[1:15:00] Relationship with Senator Cal Muscleman over the years. And so he has allowed me to be a member of a special committee that he's chairing this year over interim regarding annexation, incorporation and preliminary municipalities. And we had a focused meeting on preliminary municipalities last week.

[1:15:28] In advance of that, we took the information that our county attorney Jeff had compiled

[1:15:35] based on our recommendations and then Taylor Glover, our government affairs director, took

[1:15:41] all of our thoughts over the years since Willow has been applying for preliminary municipality

[1:15:50] status and he took the proposed bill language line by line and inserted our suggestions

[1:15:58] to make a really rock solid proposal that if the legislature decides to implement those

[1:16:06] suggestions, I think will be in a much better place going forward with future preliminaries.

[1:16:13] It doesn't revoke willow or anything like that.

[1:16:17] It just puts stops further bleeding if new preliminary municipalities try to take place.

[1:16:28] after work, because currently there are allowed to in the state per year.

[1:16:38] So

[1:16:40] we presented in that, or I presented in that meeting what David had

[1:16:45] compiled and what all of us have been working on together.

[1:16:49] And we did hear one encouraging piece of news and that was that the legislature

[1:16:56] So you should consider it a non-starter to increase the minimum from two.

[1:17:02] So currently there's a maximum, not minimum, but maximum.

[1:17:07] Currently there's a maximum of two new preliminaries per year.

[1:17:11] And there is a push from certain fronts to remove or increase that maximum.

[1:17:20] And that was said, no, you know, we're not going to consider that.

[1:17:25] so I was very grateful to hear that said out loud.

[1:17:32] We shall see, I hope to have a meeting with the Senator,

[1:17:38] like a one-on-one in the next week or two,

[1:17:43] to really drill down on which of these things are keepers

[1:17:47] that we've suggested.

[1:17:49] Like, for example, skip

[1:17:55] forward to status report.

[1:17:56] The tradition for it is that Willow has put in their application or whatever they triggered

[1:18:04] the process to start their preliminary, which is big news.

[1:18:10] We were kind of hoping that the 12 months would just go by and they would never go forward

[1:18:15] with it, but they have put in their application September 17th is the final day for the Lieutenant

[1:18:22] governor to our lieutenant governor's office to look at everything so if anyone has input for the

[1:18:32] lieutenant governor we as a county have are definitely compiling our comments and input for the

[1:18:38] lieutenant governor's office but if the public also would like to contact them and provide your input

[1:18:45] this would be an appropriate time sooner rather than later is great before the 17th

[1:18:52] Well, before the 17th to get to the enough time to process and consult their attorneys

[1:18:57] and all of that, we had two main points that we are bringing up regarding willow specifically.

[1:19:05] Sorry, I know this isn't legislative anymore, it's specific to the project that I just thought

[1:19:11] while I close together. One of them is they are only bonded for $2.5 million, which seems

[1:19:19] is laughably low that you could ensure that you could build a town and all of the incumbent

[1:19:26] infrastructure for $2.5 million and currently, and this is one of the things we're working

[1:19:34] on fixing, currently the statute doesn't clarify how much they have to charge or how much

[1:19:40] they have to set aside to ensure that they'll be able to complete their project.

[1:19:46] that's a big issue. Another big issue is that basically the developer gets to determine

[1:19:52] how much money they're going to set aside for that project. And the third component

[1:19:57] of this being a huge issue is that if the project should fail or be done improperly and

[1:20:02] lose their preliminary status, then the general taxpayers have to pay to pick up that tab.

[1:20:08] So, you can understand why we are urgently fighting this matter and continue to urgently fight this matter.

[1:20:18] And then the other issue is that the legal description takes out that lake of land that made the property not fit the legal description of contiguity, which you need to have a blob of land not legs and arms.

[1:20:37] in order to incorporate, and so they took it out of the legal description, but they didn't actually change anything on the actual map or of their actual ownership.

[1:20:52] So that's something we're following up with Lieutenant Governor with.

[1:20:56] Okay, thank you for listening to all of that there.

[1:20:59] Thank you.

[1:21:01] Okay, now we'll move on to their conditionary reports on assignments.

[1:21:05] Do you want to start cutting?

[1:21:07] Sure.

[1:21:09] I guess our last meeting was on the 4th house.

[1:21:12] We had a successful fair.

[1:21:14] I don't know what time we got, but then I had a great, I don't know, the total dollar amount

[1:21:20] that they got at the livestock sale, but the rodeo was fun, good turnout, everything went

[1:21:27] well.

[1:21:27] Well, this isn't really my assignment by default, somehow I ended up with the electric

[1:21:35] charger.

[1:21:36] We are taking ours offline, the ones that Honey are now online, and so we really don't

[1:21:41] want to be on competition, plus we kind of lose money, and we don't want to be losing

[1:21:44] taxpayer dollars.

[1:21:46] So, beginning of September is the goal to have that done, and there'll be signs that they

[1:21:52] They can have center-telling them where to go.

[1:21:55] We get that all online, so people know that.

[1:21:57] The chargers are down on it.

[1:21:59] So there's seven Tesla chargers down there.

[1:22:01] They're about to run it.

[1:22:02] I'll leave, you can say how I leave it.

[1:22:05] Yes, they were worried.

[1:22:07] I was going to a lot of work for our building.

[1:22:08] There's multiple reasons why we're going to mothball them.

[1:22:14] But there's a lot of work for our buildings and grounds,

[1:22:16] just to answer all the service calls that went on them.

[1:22:19] And they're getting old, and then he repaired.

[1:22:21] We haven't put any money into it.

[1:22:24] And also, the road list rule, the comments are open for that.

[1:22:28] That came out at, I think, the ATV club media was that.

[1:22:31] So if anybody wants to comment on the road list rule,

[1:22:33] the force, that was a time to do that.

[1:22:37] OK, thank you.

[1:22:38] Kai Algonets, Larry Crutchfield is resigning

[1:22:42] from our planning and zoning, which I really sat about.

[1:22:45] He did such a great job.

[1:22:46] He was always so prepared.

[1:22:48] But we are looking for a new member.

[1:22:50] If you know anybody who wants to apply, should be online or talk to Shannon, she's handling

[1:22:56] that.

[1:22:57] So, we will.

[1:22:58] I think it's going to be open until September 19th or 25th, I can't remember the day.

[1:23:04] But yeah, we do need a new member on that.

[1:23:07] And then we decided a new contract for the Predator Control Program.

[1:23:13] So we will still be paid boundaries for our clients over the next year, and I think that's all I have.

[1:23:22] Yeah, okay.

[1:23:23] Is there a question about that?

[1:23:24] Yeah.

[1:23:26] For the qualifications to be on the county planning board, do you have to have own property?

[1:23:32] You know, I'm not sure.

[1:23:33] I would think so, but you might want to touch.

[1:23:36] We'll ask Shannon about that.

[1:23:38] All right.

[1:23:38] Thank you.

[1:23:42] Well, all I have left to be hammering on about Willow for so long is that we had a meeting

[1:23:49] in Springdale last week with the park and the BLM and other stakeholders, including

[1:23:56] the state, and I express to them how very down our tourism is here in Cape County, disproportionate

[1:24:05] to the rest of the state as well as to the rest of the nation and it seems to be a correlation

[1:24:12] with the closures on the east side to large vehicles including two of us which is a big deal

[1:24:20] for us. We had record low June and record low July from what I'm hearing and the closures went

[1:24:29] into effect very early in June.

[1:24:31] So it looks obvious if we're talking to business owners

[1:24:35] who say that they have had approximately 80%

[1:24:39] cancellation rate of tour buses.

[1:24:41] On highway trip meeting, I drove by Mount Carmel Junction.

[1:24:44] There were zero tour buses at that subway there.

[1:24:47] And I was visually reminded of how impactful these policies

[1:24:53] are.

[1:24:55] Just to let folks know, the new policy is implemented by the National Park Service and the DOI.

[1:25:06] Before this happened, we fought really hard as a county to propose that the implementation is delayed,

[1:25:17] at least until a shuttle could be put in place to take people from the East side

[1:25:22] to the center of the park if they're not able to enter with their own vehicle and at this

[1:25:31] meeting, well, to give you a little history, basically we got outvoted by Washington County

[1:25:38] the Utah Office of Tourism and the state public lands policy coordinating office on that they

[1:25:47] said, no, we have some other objectives that we kind of know more about, we're not going

[1:25:51] to push or ask for this delay in closing the East side. So it happened and now we're

[1:26:00] trying to deal with the fallout along with other factors. And so I expressed that in

[1:26:07] Springville and then I also had a five county association of government meeting in

[1:26:11] Cedar City where I again expressed the pain that we are feeling here on the East

[1:26:18] side and just how impactful this is and just how urgent it is to find a solution.

[1:26:24] Because tour buses, if there's any ambiguity or uncertainty, they will just not come

[1:26:29] to our area.

[1:26:30] They'll go to the Washington County side or see if it all together and Washington County

[1:26:38] is down a little bit, but nothing compared to what we are.

[1:26:41] And the numbers might not look that way so much because transient room tax was increased

[1:26:49] by 1% last year.

[1:26:51] So our transient room tax collections might not be that impacted, but the businesses,

[1:26:58] especially the businesses that are not all on VIRY, are being highly impacted, which really

[1:27:05] affects everybody, not just businesses.

[1:27:08] So, point being we are working on a shovel work around and hopefully that will help us return in the meantime where we're having a very tough year.

[1:27:22] We have decided and determined and set the date for sure that the Raising King Business Summit will be January 8th which is a Friday and we'll be discussing all of this plus many more topics that are of interest.

[1:27:36] We had a legislative tour along with the 5th County area and the 6th County area.

[1:27:43] So 11 rural counties in southern Utah got together to bring Washington, DC staffers

[1:27:48] to our region and show them the issues that we're facing.

[1:27:51] In fact, they came on toward us and got turned away that they did not realize about the closures,

[1:27:58] even though we've been talking to them about it.

[1:28:01] And so they had to make special arrangements to get

[1:28:04] shoveled into the Zion National Park and missed some

[1:28:07] of the attractions they were going to see.

[1:28:09] So I hope that means I will get some help on those issues.

[1:28:13] And then just to remind you all, construction is still being

[1:28:17] completed on the Spoon-A-Paw Road as well as Mountain View

[1:28:21] Road and Johnson Canyon.

[1:28:24] Thank you all for your patience, especially as we've

[1:28:27] had flooding and other events that create

[1:28:30] hiccups. The good news is that means that we can, now that the School of Paul project

[1:28:38] is being completed, that makes us eligible for potentially applying and getting more

[1:28:44] joint highways committee money. And we do have a joint highways committee meeting coming

[1:28:50] up in the next couple of months, so maybe we'll be asking for some funding for another

[1:28:58] project since our need is so great in our county. That's all? Okay, thank you.

[1:29:06] Anybody have anything else? Okay, I'll make a motion that will be a

[1:29:12] Thank you all for coming.

[1:29:14] Thank you all for coming.

[1:29:18] Thank you.

[1:29:22] Are you done?

[1:29:26] Four of them are here.

[1:29:28] Oh yeah.

[1:29:30] We're going to discuss four of them.

Commission Meeting

Transcript