[0:01] I think if we say

[0:02] >> Good morning everybody. I want to

[0:03] welcome everybody to our regular board

[0:05] meeting February 12, 2026 at the Magna

[0:09] Water District. I'd love to call this

[0:11] meeting to order. Will everybody stand

[0:13] with me with the pledge of allegiance.

[0:19] » I aliance to the flag of the United

[0:23] States of America and to the republic

[0:26] for which it stands. One nation under

[0:29] God, indivisible, with liberty and

[0:32] justice for all.

[0:34] >> Thank you.

[0:37] >> I'd like to welcome the public and

[0:39] guest. And so today around our diary

[0:42] seat table is we got Trevor Andre Dallas

[0:46] Henline Steve Clark Andrew Sumption uh

[0:50] Jeff White Mick Sudbury Danny Stewart Le

[0:54] Fitzgerald

[0:56] Nathan Bracken and Clint Dilly

[0:58] uh

[1:00] public comment. So if anybody's wanting

[1:03] to speak to the board uh here we're

[1:07] going to give you three minutes. So,

[1:09] does anybody have anything they'd like

[1:11] to address to the board

[1:15] or any questions?

[1:17] Okay, seeing none, does anybody on the

[1:21] agenda have a conflict of interest that

[1:23] they need to disclose to the board?

[1:26] Okay, easy. So, uh let's move on to our

[1:31] recognizing our employees. Dallas, I

[1:34] mean, um

[1:35] >> Andrew.

[1:37] >> Yeah. Um, unfortunately they weren't

[1:39] able to make it in today. The collection

[1:41] crews got a job going on that they

[1:43] couldn't come come from and uh Jean was

[1:47] is got a vacation day today. But we'd

[1:50] like to recognize Clint Giles for

[1:52] completing his traffic control tech. Um,

[1:55] as we continue to do this, we get safer

[1:57] and safer out there on the roads. Uh,

[2:00] Gavin Ferguson, one of our newer

[2:01] employees, just completed his CDL. uh it

[2:06] it's the first step in becoming uh full

[2:09] member of the team to be fully

[2:11] operational. And then Quint Quinton

[2:14] Ginge finished his water distribution

[2:16] one. He's on our collections crew and

[2:18] he's now got a a collections

[2:21] certification as well as a water

[2:24] distribution certification. And then

[2:25] Jean Sto, he just bid and was the

[2:30] successful bid on the facility

[2:31] maintenance position. Um he hit the

[2:33] ground running this week. I think he's

[2:35] knocking off a big list of to-do items

[2:37] that we've been waiting to get done. So,

[2:39] we're excited to have him.

[2:41] >> Awesome.

[2:41] >> That's good.

[2:43] >> Okay, let's approve our uh common

[2:45] consent items.

[2:47] >> Minutes of the regular board meeting

[2:48] held January 8, 2026.

[2:52] Expenses from December 29th, 2025 to

[2:56] February 1st, 2026. General expenses

[3:00] 1,941,319.33.

[3:06] Sign bank bond payment $83,53083.

[3:12] » I'll second it.

[3:12] >> Been motion second. All in favor? I

[3:14] >> I.

[3:16] >> Okay, moving on to our department

[3:20] reports. Clint.

[3:21] >> Yes. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Um, like we

[3:25] talked, Jean just built the uh service

[3:29] maintenance facilities. So, his position

[3:31] on the water construction crew opened

[3:33] up. That was posted in house. Um, and

[3:36] we'll close next Tuesday, it sounds

[3:38] like, right, Andrew?

[3:39] >> Yes. Tuesday evening.

[3:41] >> And then if we don't get any bids on

[3:42] that, we'll open it up outside. So, if

[3:45] anybody has any referrals,

[3:48] uh, any interested people looking for

[3:50] jobs, we'd love to have them submit a

[3:53] resume

[3:54] for us to consider.

[3:57] Um, other things I want to just

[3:58] highlight on the report on the

[4:01] operations side for the water, the crews

[4:05] have been draining and cleaning and

[4:06] inspecting all of our drinking water

[4:08] storage tanks, which uh is nice to go

[4:12] through for housekeeping.

[4:15] um as well as inspection of how the

[4:20] corrosion, especially our steel tanks,

[4:23] that's the biggest concern. And so

[4:25] they're taking pictures and going

[4:27] through that process the past couple

[4:29] weeks. Uh anything to add on that,

[4:32] Steve?

[4:33] >> Um no, we're just going to try and get

[4:35] through all of them this year if

[4:37] possible. We'll probably have to take a

[4:38] break through the summer when demand's

[4:40] high and then pick back up in the fall

[4:42] and get the ones that we weren't able to

[4:43] this But so far they've done the two

[4:46] steel tanks up at 4100 and they're

[4:49] working on 35th right now.

[4:51] >> Awesome.

[4:52] >> So when we're talking about solar power,

[4:55] are we putting better battery backup in

[4:58] places that's not feasible for

[5:00] generators?

[5:01] >> Yeah. So you remember the issue we had

[5:03] up there zone 3. So that has to deal

[5:05] with that solar panel with some battery

[5:07] backup.

[5:08] >> Yeah, we're updating that. Um, and then

[5:11] we also were able to incorporate a

[5:13] couple other alarms at different

[5:15] facilities

[5:16] >> that will help us watch that. Plus,

[5:18] we're putting in a single fire ranger

[5:20] that's kind of like the setup we have

[5:22] here at the pond

[5:23] >> and it'll be just for that tank. So,

[5:25] >> good.

[5:26] >> We shouldn't have that issue again.

[5:27] >> Yeah, that's great.

[5:29] >> Some redundancy that I think will help

[5:31] us

[5:33] make sure we avoid that. Uh

[5:36] we haven't heard back from the Great

[5:38] Salt Lake on the leasing of the water

[5:41] shares on the canal, but we'll follow up

[5:43] with them. Uh we usually have until

[5:47] canal season starts uh to get that in

[5:49] place. So

[5:50] >> I mean I re we I told them that the

[5:53] board approved to move ahead with that

[5:55] and so they've replied from there and

[5:57] said they would get the agreement ready

[6:00] and then I had

[6:01] >> like to bring that back in March. I

[6:03] hadn't heard back from them, so I did

[6:04] double check again to make sure they

[6:06] weren't waiting for us on anything. And

[6:08] she said, "No, it should be coming

[6:09] soon." And that was a week ago.

[6:11] >> How will that water share get down? Will

[6:14] they take it from the Jordan River and

[6:16] put it in the canal that goes

[6:19] >> Yeah, it'll it'll just come through.

[6:20] >> Will they take it here and

[6:22] >> and we just won't take pull any of it?

[6:24] >> Right. Will it it won't change the flow

[6:26] rate or I mean the level.

[6:28] >> Well, it Yeah, but potentially it could

[6:30] go up a little bit, but we don't need

[6:32] it, right?

[6:33] >> We don't. I don't think you'll see a big

[6:35] difference, but either

[6:37] >> it'll just kind of flow down the canal

[6:39] over into the Great Salt.

[6:40] >> Yeah. Going into the Great Salt Lake.

[6:41] So, I think that's pretty neat. You

[6:44] know, that adds up.

[6:46] >> Well, help them out. Anyway,

[6:48] >> how many how many shares was that?

[6:50] >> How many total?

[6:51] >> We have I think Sorry, memory. 343. So

[6:55] 75% of that 240

[6:58] 280

[6:59] >> 280 shares.

[7:00] >> Wow. That's good. That'll help them out

[7:03] >> roughly.

[7:04] >> Yeah. And you times that by

[7:05] >> What are they paying us?

[7:06] >> 4.59.

[7:07] >> Yeah. Times that by 4 acre feet.

[7:09] >> So it's over a,000 acre feet.

[7:12] >> Yeah. Wow.

[7:13] >> Were they paying us a share?

[7:17] >> We It was about

[7:19] >> 48,000 we got paid last year for half of

[7:22] our shares. So, we'll probably get 75.

[7:25] >> And that's a good resource for them

[7:26] because they could use it. We just don't

[7:28] need it,

[7:29] >> right?

[7:29] >> We just don't need it in our pipes.

[7:31] >> Yeah. And

[7:32] >> we don't need the fish in our

[7:34] >> Yeah,

[7:36] that's right.

[7:37] On the wastewater side, just wanted to

[7:39] highlight the collections crew did some

[7:42] half-day blue steak training with the

[7:46] 811, right? Um I think that's important.

[7:50] And I'd like Dallas to kind of share

[7:52] with you what they go through.

[7:53] >> Sure. About 3 years ago, Blue Stakes

[7:56] went to a online digital dashboard. So

[7:59] now each entity receives their blue

[8:01] stake locate requests through an online

[8:03] portal. Within the online portal, you

[8:06] can reach out directly to the contractor

[8:08] that submitted the blue stake. Um you

[8:10] can apply pictures from the field right

[8:12] to the exact ticket. Um and then it's

[8:15] got everybody's contact information on

[8:16] there. So the training was a refresher

[8:19] on the online dashboard. It also ensures

[8:22] that there's continuity between utility

[8:24] markers that we're all marking the lines

[8:26] the same way how they're supposed to be

[8:29] um marked by standard. And then it gives

[8:32] the the entities and the contractors the

[8:35] chance to, you know, say what's working

[8:37] well, what do we need to improve on? And

[8:40] um it's just a half day local training

[8:42] that we try to get the newer operators

[8:44] to and some of our older operators. We

[8:47] get them there every few years as a

[8:48] refresher. So, pretty valuable.

[8:52] >> Yeah, I appreciate you keeping up on

[8:53] that. As blue staking has become such a

[8:56] substantial part of the workload.

[8:58] >> Correct.

[8:59] >> Um I think it's important that we

[9:01] continue to

[9:02] >> Yeah.

[9:03] >> invest in that.

[9:05] >> Um he's also they've completed some

[9:07] warranty work on the vector truck. Um

[9:10] and then have worked on some cross

[9:12] trainining of the water guys on the

[9:14] collection

[9:15] >> on the back truck. Yeah.

[9:16] >> Um, is this uh the the warranty that

[9:20] came with the truck?

[9:21] >> It is.

[9:22] >> So, what we're finding is on maybe not

[9:25] necessarily on our equipment, but

[9:27] sometimes we don't exercise it and find

[9:30] a problem because we don't use that

[9:32] feature.

[9:33] >> Sure.

[9:33] >> But sometimes we need to check that out

[9:35] to make sure before that warranty

[9:37] expires,

[9:38] >> right? because we're finding out some of

[9:40] the some of the manufacturers are not

[9:44] are taking exception to some things and

[9:48] it's quite costly if you if you don't do

[9:51] it. So, we got to make sure we check it

[9:52] out. I don't know when the warranty will

[9:54] run out on it, but we need to make sure

[9:56] we thoroughly check it before that

[9:58] warranty deadline.

[9:59] >> Yeah, great idea. Thank you.

[10:03] >> Okay, on the office side, wanted to

[10:05] highlight a couple things. We had the

[10:07] new office cleaning company take over.

[10:09] Uh I think we've all noticed an

[10:11] improvement in the facilities. Um and so

[10:15] we'll hope that continues and we'll

[10:17] continue to maintain that, monitor them.

[10:21] We had to submit the annual water use

[10:23] data report. Le worked with uh Trevor

[10:26] and Steve to get that into the division

[10:30] of water rights.

[10:32] Um we did close the bond closure

[10:35] meeting. We held that yesterday with

[10:38] Division of Drinking Water and Zans's

[10:41] Bank and that went well.

[10:43] >> I think uh it ended up at 1.6 million in

[10:48] principal forgiveness.

[10:50] >> Oh wow.

[10:51] >> So basically a grant. Um

[10:53] >> that's pretty exciting.

[10:54] >> Yeah, pretty exciting for the community

[10:56] to get the majority of that paid for. Uh

[10:59] so to reduce the burden on

[11:02] >> So Clint, I got a question. Will you

[11:04] post that in a newsletter?

[11:05] >> Yeah.

[11:06] >> And we'll put that out in our I think

[11:08] people in this city need to

[11:10] >> see that.

[11:12] >> Yeah.

[11:13] >> The Zans Bank made a comment that they

[11:15] hadn't seen that

[11:18] >> those terms from any of their clients.

[11:21] >> Well,

[11:22] >> so pretty good terms.

[11:23] >> Maybe what you might want to do too is

[11:26] Meredith Alexander is the MSD people

[11:29] that does our communications. you might

[11:31] want to reach out to her

[11:33] >> and let her give her the information.

[11:35] Let her post it, too.

[11:36] >> Okay.

[11:39] >> Yeah, we can make a note of that and

[11:41] post that

[11:44] information. And then Leile's found this

[11:47] potential solution. I I think is is

[11:51] maybe a good option for us in Cassell.

[11:55] they have typically we use a service

[11:58] order module

[12:00] um that's linked to a customer address.

[12:02] So that's how we've historically handled

[12:05] um

[12:07] generating leak checks, things like that

[12:11] of that nature, right? Shut on, shut off

[12:14] customers. Yeah.

[12:14] >> And it's based on a customer address.

[12:16] But there's another module that she said

[12:19] that could be it's called a work order

[12:22] that we might be able to improve our

[12:24] tracking of the main breaks when they're

[12:26] not in a at a particular address

[12:29] >> like our facility.

[12:31] >> It's more our facility tracking. Um and

[12:34] then also with Gan working on a lot of

[12:36] the facilities maintenance, it could

[12:39] also be used to help track his progress.

[12:42] So there could be work orders generated

[12:44] and then we could see rather than him

[12:47] keeping a separate database, this could

[12:50] all be in Cassil the same.

[12:52] >> And so she's going to look into that a

[12:54] little bit more. I thought that could be

[12:56] something that

[12:58] improves our efficiency and our

[13:00] tracking.

[13:02] Um so we'll once we're ready, we'll

[13:04] bring some information back to the board

[13:06] to consider uh if you want to move

[13:09] forward with that.

[13:10] >> Great.

[13:13] uh on communications and morale uh

[13:16] attended a Jordan Valley conservation

[13:19] oriented rate structure development

[13:22] meeting with other districts and cities.

[13:25] This is is in regards to their retail

[13:28] system. I just thought it was

[13:30] interesting to give the board a heads up

[13:32] of some of these ideas they're

[13:35] considering are pretty extreme in my

[13:39] mind. Um,

[13:43] one of the ideas that was thrown out is

[13:45] that there would be an individualized

[13:47] average rate

[13:50] uh of usage. So you would almost have

[13:54] each customer would also almost have

[13:56] their own individual rate structure.

[14:00] Uh, so I don't think based on the

[14:03] feedback, I don't think they're going to

[14:04] move forward with that option,

[14:07] >> but I want you to know that those ideas

[14:09] are starting to be discussed.

[14:12] >> Is that a way to increase their taxes?

[14:14] >> I think it's a way to try to continue to

[14:17] encourage conservation

[14:19] and also adjust it more to the user and

[14:23] their lot specifics and their family

[14:25] size rather than have

[14:29] categories that aren't as closely

[14:33] matched and aren't as comparable.

[14:35] >> Yeah.

[14:36] >> From place to place. If Trevor has a

[14:38] halfacre lot and he has 10 kids,

[14:43] you know, compared to a small little lot

[14:48] with a single family, if they're on the

[14:51] same

[14:52] uh breaks in their usage,

[14:56] you might Trevor might say, "Hey, that's

[14:58] not fair to me because I'm, you know,

[15:02] >> a bigger 10 kids because kids, you

[15:06] should a lot of rights. um no choice.

[15:09] >> So in that scenario, Trevor's usage

[15:12] would be adjusted to the lot size, his

[15:15] family size, and then his average usage

[15:19] um would be tracked and if he went

[15:23] significantly above that, that could

[15:26] change the rate. So, I don't think

[15:29] they're heading that direction, but

[15:31] there's some pretty extreme ideas being

[15:34] thrown out out there for conservation.

[15:38] Um, and so wanted to give you a heads up

[15:41] as the uh board as we move forward with

[15:46] ours, I think we'll strike a good

[15:48] balance. Yeah.

[15:50] >> Um,

[15:52] the other thing I wanted to let you know

[15:55] of is we've got a meeting with the golf

[15:57] course board scheduled for next

[16:01] Wednesday to discuss secondary water

[16:03] options. I think they're they've been in

[16:06] communication with Kakott

[16:08] >> and I think they're ready to move

[16:10] forward.

[16:10] >> Next Wednesday at what time?

[16:12] >> 4:30.

[16:13] >> Yeah.

[16:14] >> Down at the golf course.

[16:15] >> 4:30 in the afternoon.

[16:16] >> Yeah.

[16:19] Okay.

[16:21] And then last, I'll just highlight been

[16:24] working on the goals to finalize for the

[16:27] employee performance goals for the March

[16:29] meeting.

[16:30] Andrew's been doing some new Arbinger

[16:34] training for the new employees, which I

[16:37] think is really positive. Um,

[16:41] we sent out that 2025 year in review and

[16:44] 2026 look ahead flyer to customers in

[16:48] the February bill. We haven't had much

[16:50] response on that yet. I will note that

[16:53] we did have quite a few comments on the

[16:56] water pressure check flyer.

[16:58] >> Let's get one.

[16:59] >> So, that flyer that you recommended we

[17:03] put something together on, there's a lot

[17:04] of good feedback on that. a lot of calls

[17:06] in um a lot of questions. I think that

[17:10] was a good

[17:11] >> Was it more positive?

[17:12] >> Yeah, positive.

[17:14] >> So, that's my report unless the board

[17:17] has any questions.

[17:22] » Okay, let's move over to our engineering

[17:24] report.

[17:25] >> Okay, thank you board and chair. Um some

[17:29] highlights here. Influent pump station.

[17:32] Um they've got the screw pumps set in

[17:36] their channels. Um we we got to see a

[17:39] little bit of that with their big crane

[17:41] and how that went in.

[17:43] Um they also set a 96 inch manhole

[17:47] recently. Uh biggest one we have in the

[17:50] district. It was it's pretty cool to see

[17:52] that size. Um Hannes number eight well

[17:57] replacement. We we had a meeting with

[17:59] the EPA. uh finally got got them to come

[18:04] together with us and give us direction

[18:06] on how to shore up that that grant for

[18:09] Hannes number eight. Um

[18:12] with that we're we're planning to move

[18:15] forward on the well drilling and then

[18:17] the wellhouse will be specific to the

[18:20] grant. So that'll let us move that

[18:21] forward, you know, kind of ASAP. So

[18:25] intend to bid out the well drilling

[18:27] fairly soon.

[18:30] Um

[18:32] see other things uh change house

[18:35] design's moving along well. Um speeding

[18:38] along quickly approaching 90%.

[18:42] Um zone 3 reservoir that construction is

[18:45] underway. Uh made a lot of good progress

[18:48] there. You you can see the shape of the

[18:50] reservoir. They'll be starting, they're

[18:53] doing some outfall work and structure

[18:55] work and getting some drain pipe in and

[18:57] they'll start on the pipeline

[19:00] um pretty soon. And then like mentioned,

[19:03] we we closed on our grant for the lead

[19:05] and copper and we'll we've been

[19:09] coordinating with the contractor. We'll

[19:10] give them a notice to proceed um soon

[19:13] and then they'll

[19:15] we'll start that whole process working

[19:17] with the customers to get, you know,

[19:19] into their yard, into their house and

[19:20] start getting those replaced. So,

[19:24] um that's all I have. If there's any

[19:26] questions,

[19:27] >> any question for the board?

[19:28] >> No.

[19:29] >> Thanks.

[19:31] >> Any problem on the railroad?

[19:35] >> No,

[19:36] that's just there as a reminder.

[19:40] Thanks, Trevor.

[19:40] >> Yep.

[19:41] >> Okay, Steve. All

[19:43] >> right. Thank you, board chair. So, the

[19:46] culinary water for production for the

[19:48] month of January was 102.89 million

[19:51] gallons or 315.79

[19:54] acre feet. That's a 8% increase from

[19:57] January of 2025.

[20:00] So far, year to date, we've purchased

[20:01] 67.3 acre feet of water from Jordan

[20:04] Valley.

[20:06] Um, as far as call outs go for the

[20:08] month, we had total of 19. 17 of those

[20:12] were water, two were wastewater for a

[20:15] total of 124.25

[20:17] hours, 115.25

[20:20] of those were water, and then nine of

[20:23] them were wastewater. We had four

[20:26] mainline leaks, um, three service line

[20:29] leaks, and then 12 miscellaneous calls.

[20:33] Um, and then unless you guys questions

[20:35] about the stuff we talked about earlier.

[20:37] That's all I have.

[20:38] >> Steve, what's the minimum that we use

[20:40] from Jordan Valley? Do we have a

[20:42] threshold?

[20:43] >> We have a We have a threshold. A minimum

[20:46] >> 800 acre feet.

[20:49] >> And how do we keep that in check so we

[20:51] don't use too much?

[20:53] >> Matt, he constantly monitors it down

[20:56] treatment plant.

[20:58] We uh they have we have our own

[21:02] projections and then every month Jordan

[21:03] Valley has the projection of where we're

[21:05] at and where they think we'll end up

[21:08] based on our usage. So there's several

[21:12] checks into that to make sure we're not

[21:14] going to leave any on the table.

[21:17] >> Yeah, because we'll we'll pay for it,

[21:20] right?

[21:20] >> Yeah, that's right.

[21:21] >> I just was wondering about that.

[21:25] Okay, Dallas.

[21:27] >> Yes, sir, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Just a

[21:29] couple things I wanted to go over. Um,

[21:31] January was really good for the plant.

[21:33] All the regulatory samples are good. The

[21:37] first quarter bio monitoring passed.

[21:39] That's always a relief for us. Um, we

[21:42] had some scheduled preventative

[21:44] maintenance done on our f our west fine

[21:47] screens in the Headworks building. Um,

[21:50] sometimes those roller wheels get a flat

[21:51] spot in them and they're like an inline

[21:53] skate wheel. They just wear down. So, as we see that wear item start to go, we

[21:58] schedule that maintenance and um, some

[22:01] of the roller bearings need to be

[22:03] replaced at the same time. So, we

[22:05] coordinated that with the mechanics and

[22:07] got ahead of that. Um, on the collection

[22:10] side of it, we're gathering pricing for

[22:13] our annual collection system repairs.

[22:15] That usually takes us a few months. Um

[22:18] then I'll bring that pricing back to the

[22:20] board and we'll get that scheduled and

[22:22] start working on those this fall. Um

[22:25] we're due for our annual sewer line

[22:27] rapid assessment testing with SLRAP.

[22:30] That's the acoustic inspections that we

[22:33] do. Um we target 75 to 80% of our

[22:37] collection system piping through those

[22:39] inspections. I'd like to get that price.

[22:42] We've budgeted for a do not exceed of

[22:44] 65,000. Um, if it's okay with the board,

[22:47] I'll bring that back in March and we'll

[22:49] we can discuss that a little further.

[22:51] Um, right now the collections crew,

[22:54] they're flushing the lines between 3100

[22:57] and 35th South and they're working their

[22:59] way east from 84 to 8,000.

[23:04] Um,

[23:06] yeah, just going back to the screw the

[23:08] screw pumps that Trevor mentioned, I've

[23:10] updated the photo behind um this report

[23:14] to kind of show one of those screws in

[23:16] the air um for those that didn't get to

[23:18] see it. And then we've got some

[23:20] additional photos that we can share if anybody's got some interest and wants

[23:24] to take a look. So, that's pretty much

[23:27] all I have, Mr. Chairman, unless the

[23:28] board's got some questions. Uh what is

[23:31] the standard going to change to? Are

[23:32] don't we have a standard coming up that

[23:34] they're going to change?

[23:35] >> We have the if you're referring to the

[23:38] >> on these limits.

[23:40] >> It was effluent total foss and that went

[23:42] into effect with our new permit for 2025

[23:45] >> and how long do you think that'll go

[23:47] before they change that?

[23:48] >> Uh probably indefinitely.

[23:50] >> Really?

[23:51] >> Yeah.

[23:51] >> Okay.

[23:52] >> There's no word on the horizon that um

[23:55] our permit limit would change. It would

[23:56] be dictated by the receiving waters.

[23:58] >> Okay. which our receiving waters aren't

[24:01] going to change. So, it's I'm not going

[24:04] to say it's permanent, but usually they

[24:06] give us several years heads up.

[24:07] >> Well, I know there's a lot of people

[24:09] that are in the same boat, but I noticed

[24:12] when we started doing uh air quality on

[24:15] the back houses like at Staker and

[24:17] Geodine, I noticed when they seen how

[24:20] well you do, then they started to

[24:22] tighten the belt up and make the

[24:23] restrictions more.

[24:25] >> Sure.

[24:25] >> And if you look at that report, that's

[24:27] exceptional. So,

[24:30] I don't know if it's that good in the

[24:31] summertime as it is the winter. But

[24:33] winter is our toughest time, is it? But

[24:35] it hasn't been a very bad winter.

[24:37] >> Nope. That's That's right. We've had

[24:39] some hot and cold flashes and that's that's tough. If it if it was

[24:43] just cold all winter, that'd be one

[24:45] thing. We can manage that. But when it

[24:47] gets up to 45 or 50 and then down to 30,

[24:50] that the plant reacts a little

[24:51] differently in those shoulder months.

[24:53] But we're doing well. What did we end up

[24:56] doing with our uh oil monitoring? Are we

[24:59] still sending in samples or

[25:01] >> We are. Yep.

[25:02] >> What are we going to do for vibration?

[25:04] Did you guys decide?

[25:05] >> We've got some good intel on that and

[25:07] we've got a few different options lined

[25:08] up. Um

[25:10] cost comparison is where we stand right

[25:12] now. And um we've got our table built of

[25:16] every piece of equipment that we think

[25:17] would need it. Um it's just a matter of

[25:21] getting the water and the wastewater on

[25:22] the same page and and figuring out

[25:25] whether we want to commit to it based on

[25:27] the cost and still a little bit of

[25:29] investigation but we are making headway.

[25:31] >> I was I was hearing some negative things

[25:33] about the global vibration detection. It

[25:37] gets it can get quite expensive. So if

[25:40] you have a handle on what equipment

[25:43] you've got and everything then and you can lock that in then you're

[25:48] doing great

[25:49] >> right?

[25:49] >> But a lot of the plants they change

[25:52] management then all of a sudden they

[25:53] start adding to it and when they add it

[25:57] starts to get exponential instead of

[26:00] linear.

[26:00] >> Right.

[26:01] >> And so as long as we're not adding

[26:04] equipment they said and and you can lock

[26:07] that in. You'll be doing great.

[26:09] >> Sure. and they said it's pretty hard to

[26:11] beat that comparing to trying to one

[26:14] train your people and get the machine

[26:18] and keep track of the data and then

[26:20] human error,

[26:21] >> right?

[26:21] >> Those are the things that are too many

[26:24] variables and so they say it's really

[26:27] advantage with the global system, but

[26:30] the catch is if they expand it, it

[26:33] really catches you. So,

[26:35] >> sure, great point. Thank you, sir.

[26:40] Okay, let's move on to Leileis.

[26:43] >> Thank you, Mr. Chair and board. So, this

[26:46] is the compliance of our legal

[26:48] requirements. Um, we are in compliance

[26:51] with the legal requirements that we're

[26:53] required to complete. Um, the blue

[26:57] highlighted is the ones we have

[26:58] completed.

[27:00] We submitted the salaries and benefits

[27:03] information that goes on the public

[27:06] transparency website and we also have

[27:13] done the quarterly to budget actual

[27:14] reports to the transparency website and

[27:17] of course today just a minute I'm going

[27:19] to report to the board for that. Uh the

[27:23] semianual money management report has

[27:26] been submitted. It was due December 30,

[27:28] January 31st. Um,

[27:32] what else? Uh, water use report. Clint

[27:35] reported. We have completed that.

[27:39] >> The only thing I have highlighted coming

[27:41] up is the uh, public hearing for impact

[27:45] fee impact fees next week, Thursday at 6

[27:50] PM.

[27:52] >> 6 PM.

[27:53] >> Other than that, we are in compliance.

[27:55] Mr. chair, if you want me, does anybody

[27:57] have any questions on that?

[27:59] >> I don't have none. The board have any

[28:01] questions? Okay.

[28:04] >> If you would like, I can proceed into

[28:05] the financials.

[28:06] >> I actually went through this and I

[28:08] thought it looked good to me. So,

[28:09] >> I thought it looks really good, too. Um,

[28:11] we ended up with showing an income,

[28:15] >> right?

[28:15] >> A little bit smaller than last year.

[28:17] >> I don't think it was high enough. You

[28:18] need to raise it.

[28:19] >> I I would go probably low on the list

[28:23] compared. I looked at Karns and some of

[28:24] them. It's astronomical compared, but

[28:28] >> like how much they ended up with.

[28:30] >> They they charge a lot more for impact

[28:32] fees than we do.

[28:34] >> We're on the low side.

[28:35] >> Yeah.

[28:36] >> But Nathan said we have to follow in

[28:38] line with this requirement.

[28:40] >> Yes, we do.

[28:41] >> So Nathan, is there a bill up there on

[28:45] the hill about the impact fees being

[28:49] >> No, what you're referring to is a bill.

[28:53] So, the challenge that the state's

[28:55] facing, and I think this is part of

[28:58] probably what's prompting Jordan Valley

[29:00] with some of its rates, is that all the

[29:02] infrastructure that we're currently

[29:04] using was built many decades ago. It's

[29:07] reaching the end of its design life, and

[29:08] it was built with a lot of public money,

[29:10] both from the federal government in the

[29:11] state. All that federal money and all

[29:14] that state is is gone for the most part.

[29:16] And so, the the legislature is looking

[29:19] at a $34 billion price tag to keep just

[29:22] to maintain our infrastructure. So, the

[29:24] bill I think that you're referring to at

[29:26] the league meeting is there's a bill

[29:28] that would

[29:30] essentially what they should do in my

[29:31] opinion is appropriate money, but I

[29:33] think they they've moved to a different

[29:35] model in which they're essentially doing

[29:38] pass through fees. And so this model

[29:40] would require every public water

[29:42] supplier, which you guys would qualify

[29:45] as, to impose a fee that would be based

[29:49] upon the median income level in your

[29:51] service area, multiplied that by a

[29:53] percentage. I think it's 3% if it's if

[29:55] you do water and sewer, which you do,

[29:57] and then divide that by your

[29:59] connections. And I think when Trevor did

[30:01] the math, what was that was like $14

[30:04] million and $1,400?

[30:06] >> Oh, it was 20 million. 20 million.

[30:09] >> Yeah.

[30:09] >> And so I' I've been checking with my

[30:10] other water suppliers and I've seen you

[30:13] guys are actually the lowest. Everybody

[30:15] else is going to be like $2,500 per

[30:17] connection. Um

[30:19] >> and I think that's maybe just due to the

[30:21] difference in the median income levels.

[30:23] >> Um I don't know where that bill is going

[30:25] to go. It's it's but but the point is is

[30:28] the state's trying to come up with

[30:29] creative ways to fund stuff. Water

[30:31] suppliers are trying to come up with

[30:32] creative ways to fund stuff. So, I'm not

[30:35] really aware of anything with impact

[30:36] fees, but with these type of pass

[30:38] through fees that are being kind of and this is conceptually in line with

[30:43] the bill that we talked about last year,

[30:45] which was that you'd have to oppose a

[30:47] similar fee that would based on usage

[30:50] for

[30:50] >> to fund drinking water infrastructure.

[30:52] This would go into a similar fund, but

[30:53] it would be more for water supply.

[30:55] >> And I think if it passes, you would have

[30:59] the option of participating in it this

[31:01] year. uh well January 1st, 2027 and if

[31:05] you didn't participate in it, you

[31:06] wouldn't be eligible for state funding

[31:08] in that fund. But then I think it

[31:10] becomes mandatory in 2030. So um so I

[31:15] don't know if that'll pass,

[31:16] >> but talking major money. I mean that's

[31:19] >> but but that's that's the reality is

[31:22] that the

[31:24] whatever you're paying for water either

[31:27] here or anywhere else in the state, it's

[31:29] going to be more. And the question is is

[31:32] how much more. And so the idea is to try

[31:34] to get ahead of it. And that to be fair

[31:36] to the legislature, they are trying to

[31:39] tackle this issue and get ahead of it

[31:40] before so it's instead of it being a

[31:42] $1,400

[31:44] annual increase instead of it being a

[31:46] $5,000 annual increase because the

[31:48] longer it takes to fix this stuff. But

[31:50] as part of that, um the

[31:55] most districts aren't charging enough

[31:58] water or money for the water. And so

[32:00] when you go to get bonds and things, the

[32:03] they're going to take a harder look is are your rates high enough? So why

[32:07] should the other taxpayers in the state

[32:08] pay for your infrastructure because you

[32:10] haven't been charging enough? Not saying

[32:12] that's the case here, but that is a

[32:13] pretty common thing. But impact fees are that's a totally separate process

[32:18] that's governed by some constitutional

[32:20] principles and that's based upon what

[32:22] the actual impact is. So, we've gone

[32:24] through an analysis and I I think the

[32:26] difference, Jeff, between what we may be

[32:28] charging, what another district is, is

[32:30] it probably costs more there and that's

[32:32] why the impact fees are higher.

[32:34] >> Well, I I've been impressed that we've

[32:36] been able to get grants and stuff to

[32:38] help with some of our stuff, but we we

[32:40] do have older pipes and stuff that have

[32:42] to be done, but I think Trevor and you

[32:45] guys have really done a good job trying

[32:46] to keep ahead of that. So,

[32:49] >> yeah. And that's that's a little bit of

[32:51] kind of the challenge with some of these

[32:53] things because because if and I'm I'm

[32:56] not a legislator. I know what it's like

[32:57] to be in their shoes, but to me the

[32:59] simplest thing would just be for the

[33:00] state to raise taxes or raise funding

[33:02] and just appropriate that rather than

[33:04] having these disperate fees that are

[33:07] going to impact every district and every

[33:08] water user differently. But um there is

[33:12] this I think approach to kind of move to

[33:14] a more feebased approach to thing. But

[33:16] that particular fear is really just an

[33:18] income tax. just apply locally rather

[33:20] than at a a state level.

[33:24] >> Thanks, Nathan. Yeah, Elis, I think it

[33:28] looks good.

[33:28] >> Okay, cool.

[33:29] >> You guys are

[33:29] >> And just to report, um,

[33:32] >> we are within budget and our expenses,

[33:34] so when we submit our audit at the end of this year or next year,

[33:41] the state will be happy.

[33:42] >> Okay.

[33:43] with with the hearing we've got next uh Thursday, then we make a ruling on it

[33:51] the following meeting.

[33:53] >> No, the um agenda is set up to

[33:57] uh have the hearing. So, any public that

[33:59] attends, they'll have a a time to make

[34:02] comment

[34:03] >> on the proposed changes and then

[34:06] >> uh we if the board sees fit, we can

[34:09] approve that right there. We can

[34:11] >> in that meeting. We approve it in the

[34:13] meeting. Okay.

[34:14] >> I uh I'll also just point out a couple

[34:18] things I that stood out to me. I think

[34:21] it's a testament to the operations

[34:24] managers especially um and their teams

[34:28] on the engineering side as well. We

[34:31] reduced our expenses from we're we we

[34:34] were less in 2025 than we were in 2024.

[34:38] Um, which tells me that we were we used

[34:43] our resources better, we used less, we

[34:47] used our people more efficiently. Um, I

[34:49] think that's great to see when you see

[34:51] our contractual services. Uh, we reduced

[34:55] those substantially,

[34:57] $168,000

[34:59] from year to year. our materials and

[35:02] supplies went down minimally, but uh

[35:05] considering cost increases in those to

[35:09] see that drop down, I was pleased to see

[35:12] that. Um

[35:14] >> yeah, I was noticing how that all

[35:15] dropped down. So,

[35:16] >> yeah. So, I mean, these guys are they're

[35:19] really doing a good job on that.

[35:20] >> That's right. So, when's the steak fry?

[35:23] >> So, just I wanted to highlight that for

[35:26] the

[35:26] >> Thanks you guys. Appreciate you guys

[35:28] looking out.

[35:29] >> Good job.

[35:31] Okay, let's move on to Andrew.

[35:34] >> All right, thanks board and chair. Uh,

[35:38] first thing is I've been in

[35:40] communication with the uh, Fourth of

[35:42] July committee from the city.

[35:44] >> Okay. Who are you talking to with that?

[35:47] >> Is it Janda Hans?

[35:49] >> I can't remember.

[35:50] >> She's the new She's the new

[35:51] >> I think it must be.

[35:52] >> Okay. Okay.

[35:53] >> She reached out. Um, they have a 30-foot

[35:56] trailer that they're going to be able to

[35:57] float out of and they're looking for

[36:01] somewhere to store it. We don't really

[36:02] have anywhere to store it. Um, I let her

[36:06] know that none of our facilities met

[36:08] that

[36:10] uh

[36:13] what they'd be looking for. It's too

[36:15] harsh of an environment to be storing

[36:17] them and too much liability on our end.

[36:19] >> Well, as the mayor, and I'm speaking for

[36:21] the city, no, we don't. They're gonna

[36:23] have to figure something else out

[36:24] because we can't do that. U we as a city

[36:27] is building a float and through modern

[36:29] display and they are going to they're

[36:32] going to um house it for us and so we

[36:37] plan on taking it out to other city

[36:39] parades and then they'll we'll bring it

[36:42] back and they'll put it back away. But

[36:45] um

[36:46] this situation that's happened kind of

[36:48] came from the other previous chair that

[36:51] actually told him to go ahead and build

[36:53] this without approval.

[36:55] >> And so I'm trying to find a way how we

[36:57] can fund that float too. Um but right

[37:01] now they need a place to build it and

[37:06] then they need a place to be able to

[37:07] house it. And I spoke with Granite

[37:09] School District about maybe

[37:12] um the mechanic shop down there, but

[37:15] they don't want to engage in that unless

[37:18] the city we end up buying that building.

[37:22] But so yeah, I just my recommendation

[37:27] and I'm going to go back to the water

[37:29] side is we if we do it for one then and

[37:32] I'm going to ask Nathan for legal help.

[37:34] we do it for one then we pretty well

[37:36] open the floodgate for everybody

[37:38] >> that that's always a concern. I mean I

[37:40] think that this is unique enough to the

[37:42] community that you could probably make

[37:43] an exception there but I mean it sounds

[37:46] the issue Andrew is one we don't really

[37:48] have a a facility that's suitable to

[37:50] store.

[37:50] >> We don't anywhere that's large enough to

[37:52] fit it is either full or too harsh of an

[37:55] environment to store it. We actually

[37:58] back in the day when I first got on the

[37:59] board,

[38:01] Ed Hansen was the manager and he stored

[38:03] a float down at the sewer plant where

[38:06] and I guess when they pulled it out, it

[38:09] was just nasty and stinky.

[38:11] >> Just

[38:14] >> Yeah. The only real option that we could

[38:16] even offer if the board was in support

[38:17] of it is to put it here in our out in

[38:19] our lot, which wouldn't be protected.

[38:21] >> Now, you know what? I just think it's my

[38:23] recommendation is from the water side

[38:26] and the board can decide. I just think

[38:29] if we I don't think it's a good practice

[38:32] to do that because I think if you do it

[38:33] then

[38:34] >> you know somebody else from the

[38:36] community might want to bring something

[38:37] up here and but you know I'm open to

[38:40] what you guys want.

[38:41] >> No liility liility is too high. Yeah.

[38:45] >> When they done it before down at the

[38:46] plant they put it in that press building

[38:49] and it was bad. Oh, shoot.

[38:53] >> Yeah, I think I think the manager is all

[38:55] in agreement with that that it doesn't uh do us much. The other

[39:00] thing that they they reached out about

[39:02] was us using our water trailer at the church. I guess they're changing

[39:08] locations where they're going to be

[39:10] centered.

[39:11] >> No, now that's all changed back. So,

[39:12] they're going to do they're going to do

[39:15] the breakfast. The nights of the

[39:17] Columbus is going to do it down at the

[39:18] Copper Park.

[39:19] >> Okay. My recommendation I thought so

[39:22] they didn't have to haul all the stuff

[39:24] down to the pavilion at the park. Just

[39:27] do it at your church. You could do the

[39:29] 5K, start it there and go around. But

[39:32] you got some of the Knight of Columbus

[39:34] meet board members that don't want to do

[39:36] that. They want to keep it down at the

[39:38] park. And my deal is that's fine, but

[39:40] you guys got to go get all your permits,

[39:42] what you need to do to qualify. And then

[39:44] I'll provide them three golf carts to

[39:46] get people down and back for the

[39:48] breakfast. And then we'll have the the

[39:50] flag ceremony down there. And uh other

[39:54] than that, there's nothing going to go

[39:56] on down at the park at the day other

[39:58] than that night for fireworks.

[40:00] >> Okay. So, they may not be in need of

[40:02] that water trailer anymore.

[40:03] >> Well,

[40:06] we're we're able

[40:07] >> I'm actually going to see her tonight.

[40:09] Um

[40:11] >> so, she reached out to me and I haven't

[40:13] heard back from her since

[40:14] >> You have a phone number for Okay. Tell

[40:17] me what that number is and I'll tell if

[40:18] you got the right number.

[40:19] >> I'll grab you tell me later.

[40:21] >> So I can So we can supply that that

[40:25] water trailer for them and then we could

[40:28] use it for the parade. The one the one

[40:31] thing that would change for us if we in

[40:33] doing this would be we wouldn't want to

[40:35] leave that trailer unmanned.

[40:37] >> Oh, absolutely not. And so that would

[40:39] mean that we are going to have to have

[40:42] some spend money on having somebody

[40:43] there from 7:00 a.m. till probably about

[40:45] 1:30 2:00.

[40:47] >> Right. Right. You know, and I don't

[40:49] >> What day of the week is it?

[40:51] >> It's a Saturday.

[40:51] And I don't know if How

[40:54] many cases of water, Dan, is in that

[40:56] back room? There's

[40:58] >> fourth of July.

[41:00] >> 40.

[41:01] >> And they only needed 150

[41:05] >> bottles.

[41:05] is what? by the city council.

[41:09] >> Uh

[41:11] I think there's enough I think the

[41:13] previous council

[41:15] >> you can buy the bottled water for what

[41:17] it cost to man a guy on that water

[41:19] truck.

[41:19] >> That's exact and and and and that's

[41:21] where I'm at there too is I don't I

[41:23] don't know if I want to spend taxpayer

[41:25] money to pay somebody overtime and

[41:27] especially they want to be with their

[41:29] family on a Saturday and good luck

[41:31] trying to find somebody to do it. Right.

[41:33] >> Yeah. So, um, let me let me talk to her

[41:36] tonight because I'll see her at a

[41:38] meeting at six o'clock and we'll we'll

[41:41] go down that route.

[41:42] >> Okay. All right. Appreciate it.

[41:44] >> Okay. Thank you.

[41:45] >> The other thing that we've got going on

[41:47] is we've got some of our newer employees

[41:50] heading out to Flagger Training at the

[41:52] end of the month. Get them certified.

[41:54] Uh, we just started succession planning

[41:56] this week. managers have uh filled out

[42:01] some key uh positions as well as some of

[42:05] their risks and headaches that's going

[42:08] on right now so that we can start

[42:10] planning. Um up next we'll send out a

[42:13] survey to the employees and then we'll

[42:15] follow up from there with with meetings.

[42:18] Uh we are

[42:21] we've got Jean registered to do his uh

[42:26] qualified water efficient landscaper

[42:28] course through Jordan Valley.

[42:30] >> Okay.

[42:30] >> Um we're excited about that. And that's

[42:33] it for me today unless there's any other

[42:35] questions.

[42:36] >> I had a question but I forgot what it

[42:37] was and when I think about it I'll bring

[42:38] it back to you.

[42:40] >> Thank you.

[42:41] >> So okay thank you. So, let's do let's

[42:44] move on to our project award and

[42:46] agreements, I guess. Is it Trevor?

[42:50] >> I'll give you just on this first one.

[42:52] >> Okay.

[42:52] >> Um, so these are a list of our annual

[42:58] um

[43:00] vendor purchase agreements. These are

[43:03] larger purchases that we do and they're

[43:07] primarily soul source, meaning we can't

[43:10] reasonably find an alternative in the

[43:13] valley um that meets our needs. Uh so we

[43:18] wanted to make sure that we brought

[43:20] these to the board because they exceeded

[43:22] the $50,000

[43:24] limit that I have authority to approve.

[43:27] >> Did we not get rid of chlorine or

[43:30] fluoride?

[43:30] >> Fluoride. Yeah, fluoride's not included

[43:32] in this.

[43:33] >> I don't know of anybody else that sells

[43:34] chlorine.

[43:36] >> So, did we only So, you're only approved

[43:38] up to 50.

[43:38] >> Yeah. Yeah.

[43:39] >> Will you do me a favor? Will you bring

[43:40] that back next month? I think we need to

[43:42] lift that approval.

[43:43] >> Okay.

[43:44] >> If you will, please.

[43:45] >> Mhm.

[43:46] >> Um, but if you have any questions on any

[43:49] of these, they're prepared to discuss

[43:51] those. Um, they're all necessary and

[43:55] we've made the determination that

[43:57] they're required. Uh, but we still want

[44:00] to make sure that the board So, do we

[44:02] Nathan, do we have to go through one by

[44:04] one to approve them?

[44:05] >> I would I think you could probably It's

[44:07] not It's not listed as a common consent

[44:11] item, but I think you probably could. I don't see any reason why you wouldn't.

[44:15] I mean what I would suggest as I

[44:17] understand it Clint these are these are

[44:21] >> soul source

[44:21] >> items that that qualify for the soul

[44:23] source procurement policy and you've

[44:25] gone through the soul source process

[44:28] which means you wouldn't necessarily

[44:29] need the board's approval anyway but but

[44:31] because it exceeds the small

[44:33] >> purchase threshold in an interest of

[44:35] being transparent you're bringing it to

[44:36] the board.

[44:37] >> Yes.

[44:37] >> So the reality is the board doesn't even

[44:40] need to approve at all but it couldn't

[44:42] hurt to have the board's blessing. So if

[44:44] that's the case, you could probably just

[44:45] do one motion to approve them all unless

[44:47] you have concerns about individual

[44:50] amounts.

[44:51] >> So there's more companies than Eckles

[44:52] Painting. That's silly one item.

[44:55] >> That's And that one is not soul source,

[44:57] but it is the state contract.

[44:59] >> Oh, it is.

[44:59] >> Yeah.

[45:01] >> And that meets the small purchase.

[45:04] >> Okay. That's why they're on there.

[45:05] >> That's why they're on there. But Steve

[45:06] can tell you that's for specific

[45:09] circumstances when we can't do it

[45:10] ourselves.

[45:11] >> Yeah. That's for the bigger jobs like on

[45:13] the moratorum stuff that the county the

[45:16] new pavement that they require us to to

[45:19] some of the stuff that they require us

[45:20] to do. They require us to go 15 ft each

[45:23] side of the cut on

[45:25] >> ridiculous.

[45:26] >> Yeah, exactly. And so some of them cuts

[45:28] end up depending on where the hole is,

[45:30] it can end up 40t wide and the entire

[45:33] width of the road.

[45:34] >> I'd like you guys to get a bid from

[45:36] Granite Construction now the asphalt

[45:38] plant's going down there to compete with

[45:39] Morgan.

[45:40] >> Good. Yeah, that'll be good to get a bid

[45:42] from them on on asphalt now

[45:44] >> for like the stuff that we do.

[45:46] >> Yeah.

[45:46] Yeah.

[45:46] >> Because they're good quality, too. I I

[45:49] don't know if they're any better than

[45:51] Morgan, but they would be as good,

[45:53] possibly better.

[45:54] >> And they might give us a deal because

[45:55] we're just right here.

[45:56] >> I think so. I think so. They they want

[45:59] to be a friendly neighbor.

[46:01] >> Sounds good.

[46:02] >> Definitely worth checking.

[46:04] >> So, do we want to approve

[46:06] >> the way they're listed or do we need to

[46:08] call each one out?

[46:08] >> So, let me make sure. So Jeff, do you

[46:11] was was your comment there about the

[46:12] Eckles paving? Do you want another bid

[46:14] for that one?

[46:15] >> No, no, no. This is a state bid, so it's

[46:18] okay.

[46:19] >> He's talking about for the jobs

[46:21] >> when we do our own stuff.

[46:22] >> Oh. Oh, so that's not on the agenda.

[46:24] >> Okay. Sorry. Um, yeah, I think you could

[46:27] do a you could do a motion to approve

[46:30] items one A through G.

[46:32] >> Okay. So, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make

[46:35] a motion to approve uh project awards

[46:38] and agreements u of these vendors annual

[46:42] purchase amounts uh A through G.

[46:45] >> Second that motion and second

[46:47] >> I so I was just telling Le so going back

[46:52] to approval, you know, raising your

[46:54] limit. I I would be totally comfortable

[46:56] with $100,000 because that would take a

[46:58] lot of this off here.

[47:00] >> Yeah, it would.

[47:02] >> And that way we don't have to bring that

[47:05] Okay, let's move on to Haneswells number seven.

[47:09] >> Okay. Um, so as you know, we were doing

[47:12] the Haneswell 7 rehabilitation project.

[47:16] Um, that's been completed for a while

[47:19] and during that process, we had to um

[47:25] develop the well a little bit more and

[47:28] there were a few sections within that were stubborn. we were getting the

[47:33] sand down to a acceptable level and it

[47:36] took more than the hours that were in

[47:38] the original contract.

[47:40] And so that's that's basically what this

[47:43] is. We just got the cost from the the

[47:46] contractor and so bringing that back to

[47:48] you. Um we were trying to reach a level

[47:51] of 100 parts per million or less in each

[47:54] zone. They break them up in like 10 foot

[47:56] zones and there were a couple about 20

[47:58] ft that was higher than that. And it was

[48:01] to our benefit to get that sand down

[48:04] lower one for the pump itself. And then

[48:06] once that water reaches the EDR, we're

[48:09] not clogging up those pref filters.

[48:10] >> You get the sand down. You bail it out.

[48:13] >> Well, they essentially Yeah. develop

[48:15] with a dual swab tool that will pull put

[48:18] like push and pull that material until

[48:21] the sand is

[48:22] >> makes it settle or they pull it out.

[48:23] >> They pull it out. They bell it.

[48:25] >> Yeah.

[48:26] >> But they're basically directing the

[48:29] water in a certain zone. Yeah. They'll

[48:30] go down in like 20 foot zones and just

[48:34] work that zone and then once the sand

[48:37] >> pulling it in through the

[48:38] >> Yeah.

[48:38] >> through the

[48:39] >> Yeah. So getting all those You have your

[48:41] gravel pack, but there's fine sands that

[48:44] will make it through that. So they're

[48:45] trying to get rid of all of that back

[48:47] in. So we're not pulling that in when we

[48:49] pump.

[48:50] >> Well, that's pretty cheap if we got it

[48:52] to meet the requirement.

[48:53] >> Yeah. And it's been up and running. Um

[48:56] they've been using that all winter and

[48:59] it's

[48:59] >> allong. So

[49:00] >> that sand will cost us in a pump cost.

[49:03] >> Yes. As well as at the edr. So a

[49:05] >> lot more than that.

[49:06] >> Very beneficial for us to get that to

[49:08] where we are comfortable and it's you

[49:11] know not producing sand. So

[49:14] >> okay. So Mr. Chairman like to make a

[49:16] motion to approve uh Hannes well number

[49:20] seven rehabilitation project change

[49:22] order with turban services for

[49:25] $26,262.50.

[49:30] I'll second that.

[49:31] >> Motion second. All in favor? I

[49:33] >> I

[49:33] >> thank you.

[49:35] >> Okay. Approval of the UASD

[49:39] 2026 annual membership dues.

[49:42] >> Um yeah, I can I can take that and Le

[49:45] can support it. Uh she put this

[49:47] together. Obviously, this is to continue

[49:50] our membership in the Utah Association

[49:53] of Special Districts.

[49:55] um they charge their fees, membership

[50:00] fees based on your annual operating

[50:02] budget. So, you have to go uh into that

[50:05] table that's in your uh packet and find

[50:10] where we are in there and then the

[50:13] equivalent fee. So, we're in that 9

[50:15] million to $15 million range and that's

[50:19] where the $12,68

[50:22] is. I think that's fairly significant

[50:25] cost for a membership. Um, so it's not

[50:29] something that uh we just want to rubber

[50:32] stamp on, but I will say that we have

[50:34] found in our experience that they've

[50:38] actually done quite a bit for the

[50:40] district. Um and anytime we've had an

[50:43] issue where they could provide lobbying

[50:47] efforts on uh they've been active in

[50:50] trying to set up meetings with the

[50:52] legislature

[50:54] and then they also provide the annual

[50:56] training. So I think it's a worthwhile

[50:58] effort from my opinion but I think the

[51:00] >> I don't like to see how they charge it

[51:02] based on your annual your your gross

[51:05] amount. I would rather see them base it

[51:07] on your population of the community,

[51:10] >> but but we don't see the stuff they do

[51:12] at the legislature and stuff. And I'm all for them. I think they do a

[51:17] great job, the training and everything

[51:18] they do, and they they'll back us up

[51:20] 100%.

[51:22] >> Yeah. If that's something that you'd

[51:23] like me to bring up in a

[51:26] >> I just think it it looks bad if it's kind of like insurance. If they

[51:30] base it on your gross volume, that

[51:32] doesn't say the risk you have. I mean,

[51:35] the fact that we do water and sewer um

[51:37] and our population, our community, I

[51:40] think would be a better to me it would

[51:42] seem more realistic than your gross uh

[51:46] revenue.

[51:48] >> I just don't think that reflects on how

[51:50] much water, you know, we do it all. But

[51:52] and and I'm not just I'm just saying the

[51:55] way they report it, but I think what

[51:57] they do I I have no qualms about that at

[51:59] all. Yeah, Nathan might have some longer

[52:02] term insight into why they do it this

[52:04] way.

[52:04] >> I I don't have much background on

[52:08] >> it's it's always been that way. I think

[52:11] at least during my tenure as an adviser

[52:13] to their board. Uh it's not something I

[52:16] because just to explain my rel I'm an

[52:18] adviser to their board. I'm not a board

[52:20] member because I'm not actually part of

[52:22] a district. Um, I used to be an exeicio

[52:25] member, but then that they had to change

[52:26] that due to I think some tax issues, but

[52:29] um, so I'm not exact. I think it's it

[52:31] was probably done because I have a very

[52:33] small staff and it was an easier way to

[52:35] do it. Um, but that's certainly

[52:37] something you could raise with them as a

[52:39] member. Um, I will say in terms of what

[52:42] they provide, um, I'm I'm a lobbyist.

[52:46] I'm registered for you guys, but I'm I'm

[52:48] a subject matter lobbyist. So what that

[52:50] means is I get involved if there's an

[52:53] issue but Heather and Lrand are up there

[52:55] all the time and for you guys to get

[52:58] essentially they are in a way

[52:59] functioning for your lob as as your

[53:02] lobbyists that are up there not not the

[53:04] expert that come so what they'll do is

[53:05] they'll say hey Nathan what does this

[53:06] impact Magnum water or I can let Magna

[53:09] Water know we go up there every Tuesday

[53:11] and and keep track of bills and that's

[53:13] you sending you guys

[53:14] >> yeah he he sends us Lrand sends it daily

[53:17] yeah

[53:18] >> daily emails and I'm impressed with him,

[53:21] by the way.

[53:22] >> Yeah, all of them. I have no qualms

[53:24] about it whatsoever.

[53:25] >> To give you an idea, if you didn't use

[53:27] them, the cost of having another

[53:28] lobbyist do that for you would be like

[53:30] 70 grand.

[53:32] >> You That shouldn't even come out of your

[53:33] mouth.

[53:34] >> Yeah.

[53:34] >> For what the backing, we don't even know

[53:36] all the stuff they do at the

[53:37] legislature. I'm just saying when I see

[53:40] that, it doesn't reflect on how many

[53:42] people we're serving. I think that would

[53:44] be better for the population and the

[53:46] fact we do sewer and water.

[53:48] >> I I just It reminds me of insurance when

[53:51] you see it rated by how many million you

[53:53] do. I just don't think that's reflective

[53:57] on our community.

[53:59] >> That's all.

[53:59] >> It's a good idea.

[54:00] >> Yeah, we can pass that information

[54:02] along.

[54:02] >> I don't like to hear that's an easy way

[54:04] to to do it. I

[54:05] >> And don't quote me on that. I don't

[54:07] know. I I think what I think the my And

[54:10] actually, you know what? I don't want to

[54:11] guess as to why they did it that way

[54:13] because I don't know.

[54:13] >> No, no, that's okay. I I'm just saying I

[54:16] It's just me inside. Yeah, it's always

[54:19] been that way.

[54:20] >> Always it's always good to ask those

[54:22] questions though.

[54:23] >> Yeah, just because that's been the way

[54:24] it's been. And I will say it if if it's

[54:27] something that you raise, they will

[54:28] bring it up at the next board meeting.

[54:30] They will say, "Hey,

[54:31] >> I I I'm not complaining about their

[54:32] services." And I'm not complaining what

[54:34] we pay. I'm just saying the way they

[54:36] rate that uh I think

[54:40] it's not very accurate.

[54:44] But I'm not complaining of what we pay

[54:46] because the services we get, there's a

[54:48] lot of things they do. We don't even see

[54:50] what they do.

[54:50] >> Okay.

[54:51] >> So, I have no qualms over that.

[54:53] >> Sounds good.

[54:54] >> I I I it it just kind of irks me because

[54:57] the insurance company comes in and they

[55:00] charge me by my gross sales. It doesn't

[55:02] charge me by my net profit, which could

[55:06] be zero. They charge you by your gross

[55:08] sales. It doesn't even charge me by my

[55:11] exposure,

[55:12] you know, as far as how many employees I

[55:14] have or anything else. It's done on

[55:16] gross sales. And I that just drives me

[55:19] crazy.

[55:20] >> So, they have a board meeting tomorrow

[55:22] at 8:30

[55:24] that I will be able to attend part of. I

[55:27] can raise it then if you want.

[55:31] >> I don't think it hurts to ask.

[55:32] >> Yeah, I can ask.

[55:33] >> Good to ask. I I think it's just like I

[55:37] said,

[55:37] >> I think what you're getting at to me is

[55:41] would we be paying more providing dual

[55:44] services because

[55:47] the dual service is reflected in our

[55:50] cost, but that it's not dual population.

[55:54] We're providing dual services for

[55:57] 30,000. So whether we were just

[55:59] providing water or just providing sewer,

[56:02] >> right,

[56:02] >> it would be less. It would be less

[56:04] potentially. Now for another agency that

[56:06] just does water,

[56:07] >> right,

[56:07] >> only and they have the same population

[56:09] and then another district provides sewer

[56:11] to that same

[56:12] >> right

[56:13] >> population. They would both be paying,

[56:16] >> you know,

[56:16] >> I'm just saying they're using this for

[56:18] an easy calculation and I'm not sure it

[56:20] represents. And like I said, I'm I'm not

[56:23] complaining about what we pay. U maybe

[56:26] in some cases it should be a little

[56:28] higher, but they do a great job. I just

[56:31] think that's a quick and dirty way to

[56:32] calculate it and I don't know maybe that's the fairest way. I don't

[56:37] know.

[56:37] >> Yeah, it does capture the sewer and

[56:40] water but like I said u I don't know.

[56:49] » Okay, we could just ask him is there any

[56:52] other way to calculate it? Yeah,

[56:54] >> I think that's reasonable.

[56:55] >> If you think about a company that

[56:57] services just water, I would imagine

[57:00] their numbers would be lower for the

[57:02] same population possibly.

[57:03] >> Right. Right.

[57:04] >> Or if you're buying Jordan Valley water,

[57:06] then they would be higher and you'd pay

[57:08] more.

[57:10] >> That's right.

[57:10] >> That's a good point, huh?

[57:12] >> If you're having to buy the water and

[57:14] then do it, then you're paying more,

[57:16] right? And then you've got you're you're

[57:18] double paying because you got them

[57:20] lobbying plus Jordan Valley lobbying. I

[57:23] don't know.

[57:25] >> I guess I better just shut up.

[57:27] >> No. Good questions.

[57:28] >> I got fell asleep. No, I'm just kidding.

[57:32] >> Okay. You want to Someone wants to

[57:34] motion this.

[57:36] >> Yeah. Uh Mr. Chairman, I'll motion to

[57:38] approve the US UASD 2026 annual

[57:42] membership dues for $12,68.

[57:46] I'll second that

[57:47] >> in. Motion second. All in favor?

[57:49] >> I

[57:52] motion carries.

[57:56] » I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. On this agenda,

[57:58] for some reason, I forgot to put names

[58:00] by the items. So, I think the next item

[58:04] >> I was just guessing.

[58:05] >> I know. I apologize.

[58:07] >> No, you're good.

[58:09] We wanted to get clarification on and

[58:12] wishes from the board on when they want

[58:15] us to start putting out the election

[58:18] notice. Clint, you can

[58:20] >> Yeah. So, I think we talked last time

[58:23] about the aisle had put together a plan,

[58:25] >> right?

[58:26] >> But we didn't really ask for the board's

[58:28] guidance on when to publish and put

[58:32] these notices out. Um, in the past, LEIL

[58:37] has typically waited till we're much

[58:40] closer to the time to notify and open a

[58:47] vacancy, you know, of the board. And so

[58:51] I think last time in the conversation

[58:54] there was some discussion about doing

[58:57] that right away, but wanted to make sure

[59:00] that the board wanted to go that

[59:02] direction.

[59:03] Um,

[59:05] >> and Clint, if I may, yeah, I think that

[59:06] was that was my recommendation is that

[59:09] we have had

[59:11] >> the candidacy declaration filing is is a

[59:14] little confusing because our

[59:15] requirements are a little different than

[59:16] the municipalities and we've had some

[59:18] just legitimate misunderstandings with

[59:20] people that have come in to file. And so

[59:22] my concern when we made the change the

[59:24] election date is we wanted to give

[59:26] citizens ample time. And so we have

[59:30] legal notices that we have to do, but we

[59:32] had talked before of just doing

[59:33] voluntary stuff to just say, "Hey

[59:35] everyone, we've had a change in election

[59:37] year. They're now be on even years." And

[59:40] so if you want to file, the new deadline

[59:42] is this. And then maybe send out I was

[59:45] thinking we're kind of a before you do

[59:46] the actual legal notice doing some just

[59:49] PR notice to educate

[59:51] >> maybe a month ahead or what do you

[59:52] think?

[59:53] >> But that's that's where we want to get

[59:56] on. My recommendation

[59:58] >> because this is

[59:59] >> My recommendation would be that you do

[1:00:01] something now. Not the legal notice

[1:00:04] because it's too soon, but that you do

[1:00:06] something

[1:00:06] >> wait till May.

[1:00:07] >> Well, that's May. You can

[1:00:09] >> I think you want that's what that's your

[1:00:11] guys's call. Yeah. When do you want to

[1:00:14] >> wait till a month ahead? Do it in May.

[1:00:18] >> What what's our what is our legal part?

[1:00:20] When do we have

[1:00:21] >> the legal requirements? May 1st, we

[1:00:23] notify the elections office that we do

[1:00:25] have an election coming up.

[1:00:26] >> Okay.

[1:00:27] >> That it's not public and but the actual

[1:00:30] requirement for the notice of candidacy

[1:00:32] is only 10 days before.

[1:00:34] >> Well, I I'd say we do at the same time

[1:00:35] that we tell them that would that be

[1:00:38] okay if we do it this time notifying

[1:00:40] we're having

[1:00:40] >> and to be fair, we had already notified

[1:00:42] them last year that there was a change.

[1:00:45] >> Yeah, that's been on our website.

[1:00:47] >> That's right. Yeah, that's right.

[1:00:49] >> So, is is that okay if we do it? Yeah, I

[1:00:51] and I think that's the board's decision.

[1:00:54] >> What do you think?

[1:00:54] >> Um, and we just want to make sure we're

[1:00:56] in alignment

[1:00:57] >> when the kickoff is kind of right.

[1:01:01] >> What do you say?

[1:01:03] >> Wait, like you said,

[1:01:05] >> have it the same time we

[1:01:06] >> So maybe begin that PR

[1:01:09] >> the 1st of May,

[1:01:10] >> right? When do they have to file?

[1:01:12] >> June 1st through the 8th.

[1:01:14] >> Yeah. Yeah. That that's that's the issue

[1:01:16] is the thing is is the way a lot of

[1:01:19] these legal notices are set up complying

[1:01:21] with the law. A lot of members of the

[1:01:23] public don't think that that's

[1:01:24] sufficient.

[1:01:26] >> Well, I needed more time and you should

[1:01:28] have let me know. And

[1:01:29] >> so so let me ask you a question. How did

[1:01:31] that work last year with the the mayor's

[1:01:34] race? When when did you have I forgot

[1:01:36] when I had to file. I mean, when did it

[1:01:38] come up saying that we were going to

[1:01:39] elect our first mayor and when I forgot

[1:01:42] when that was and when I had a sign up

[1:01:44] and then all I know is it went on for

[1:01:46] six months.

[1:01:47] >> Yeah, it was May, wasn't it?

[1:01:49] >> I think I'm trying to remember with

[1:01:51] probably Yeah, it So, we were able to

[1:01:54] get

[1:01:54] >> We don't want signs out on the lot right

[1:01:56] now.

[1:01:57] >> No, you don't want You're not

[1:01:58] campaigning. I never heard any

[1:01:59] complaints from that,

[1:02:01] >> Nathan, that that we changed and

[1:02:03] everything. Everybody seemed really good

[1:02:05] about

[1:02:06] >> Yeah. Nobody Nobody complained to me

[1:02:07] about it. I didn't hear anything.

[1:02:09] >> The other change though is that we got

[1:02:12] with the USD, me and Heather and Lrand

[1:02:15] were able to get a change last year so

[1:02:16] that your declaration of candidacy

[1:02:18] filing period is actually in June

[1:02:19] because it was going to be

[1:02:21] >> Yeah, I said now.

[1:02:23] >> Oh,

[1:02:23] >> and so that's

[1:02:24] >> it was going to be you had to file in

[1:02:25] January, right?

[1:02:25] >> Yeah. Yeah. And so the point is is when

[1:02:27] we did the notice last year, we were

[1:02:29] thinking we'd have that was before we

[1:02:31] did the legislation. And so what's

[1:02:33] changed isn't just your elections

[1:02:34] changed, the law has changed from it

[1:02:36] being now in into June.

[1:02:39] >> Okay.

[1:02:42] >> Yeah, that's too short.

[1:02:45] >> So I it's really your call. I mean, we

[1:02:46] could just do the the standard notice

[1:02:48] and we don't have to do anything more

[1:02:49] than that

[1:02:50] >> days ahead.

[1:02:51] >> Yeah, that's that's what the law

[1:02:52] requires. We we didn't make this is on

[1:02:56] the website right now. Trevor could

[1:02:57] probably pull it up. Um we don't have

[1:03:00] any dates. We just said it would not we

[1:03:04] would not hold an election

[1:03:05] >> right

[1:03:06] >> in 2025. We didn't say it'd be in

[1:03:08] January or anything. Um so I think

[1:03:12] you're good with

[1:03:13] >> Did you guys get any feedback on that?

[1:03:15] No. Cuz I never got no feedback on it.

[1:03:17] >> You can see this is still on there. Um

[1:03:19] so we've notified them. I think now we

[1:03:23] just

[1:03:23] >> Okay.

[1:03:24] >> When the board wants us to put out

[1:03:27] >> the information if if 10 days that I

[1:03:30] mean

[1:03:31] >> in May.

[1:03:31] >> Yeah.

[1:03:32] >> May 1st. May 1st.

[1:03:33] >> 10 days would

[1:03:34] >> No, I say 10 days before June.

[1:03:37] >> Yeah. 10 days.

[1:03:38] >> June 1st to June 10th.

[1:03:39] >> Middle of May.

[1:03:40] >> Okay.

[1:03:41] >> Yeah. I'd say middle of May then 10 days

[1:03:43] before.

[1:03:44] >> We'll just make sure we meet our

[1:03:46] minimum.

[1:03:48] >> Make sure it meets the criteria of the

[1:03:49] minimum.

[1:03:50] >> Yeah. So about the about the middle of

[1:03:52] May we'll target.

[1:03:53] >> Yeah. Let's

[1:03:54] >> Okay.

[1:03:56] >> All right. Sounds good.

[1:03:58] >> Thank you.

[1:03:59] >> So May then you got

[1:04:00] >> marching.

[1:04:02] >> Well and and to be fair when we first

[1:04:04] started talking about it the real

[1:04:05] concern is most people are used to

[1:04:07] filing their Declaration of Kennedy in

[1:04:08] June and we were going to be switching

[1:04:10] to a year in which it was going to be in

[1:04:11] January.

[1:04:12] >> Yeah.

[1:04:12] >> Now that it's June that's less of an

[1:04:15] impact than what we talked about before.

[1:04:17] >> Lot better. Great.

[1:04:18] >> Better.

[1:04:19] >> Okay. We'll do.

[1:04:21] >> So, do we make a motion? We don't need

[1:04:22] to make a motion on that.

[1:04:23] >> No, I just think so. Just Okay.

[1:04:26] >> Just on number two on the hearing or do

[1:04:28] we

[1:04:29] >> do we have to make a motion on the

[1:04:30] hearing?

[1:04:31] >> I we need to make a I'm sorry. We need

[1:04:33] to make a motion stating that we are

[1:04:35] holding

[1:04:36] >> holding a public hearing. Okay.

[1:04:38] >> So, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a

[1:04:39] motion to uh hold a public hearing to be

[1:04:43] held on February 19th, 2026 to be held

[1:04:46] at 6 p.m. to allow the public comment on

[1:04:49] the district's amended impact fee

[1:04:51] facilities plan and amended impact fee

[1:04:55] enactment.

[1:04:56] >> I'll second that.

[1:04:57] >> A motion second. All in favor?

[1:04:59] >> I I

[1:05:02] >> Okay, Nathan,

[1:05:04] >> I already I already gave you said you

[1:05:06] gave me the update. So there's

[1:05:08] >> there the only other thing I would say

[1:05:09] and and Mick is aware of this being at

[1:05:11] the same meetings I am up there now with

[1:05:14] the city is I I think there's a push

[1:05:16] this session to we we've heard both from

[1:05:20] uh President Adams and Speaker Schultz

[1:05:22] in the league meetings and one of the

[1:05:24] things they mentioned is that

[1:05:27] they're they're they've been receiving a

[1:05:29] push by their constituents on property

[1:05:31] taxes and they were clear not not from

[1:05:33] municipalities or districts. This was

[1:05:35] coming from repres speaker Schultz but from school districts and and some

[1:05:39] other things and so they're getting some

[1:05:42] pressure on property taxes and so there

[1:05:44] there's quite a few property tax reform

[1:05:47] bills that are in the hopper. the

[1:05:49] counties are one of the bigger targets

[1:05:51] and so this is kind of working its way

[1:05:54] through the I think the general

[1:05:56] observation is I think there's a desire

[1:05:58] to lessen the property tax burden and

[1:06:01] move to more of a fee usagebased

[1:06:03] approach to things and obviously the

[1:06:06] devil's in the details but the concern

[1:06:07] for districts is especially if you're

[1:06:09] growing districts you can't grow it's so much easier to be able to bond

[1:06:14] and use property tax revenue so right

[1:06:16] now I'm not exactly sure how that'll

[1:06:18] impact districts Um, I will say in terms

[1:06:20] of timing, we're about halfway through

[1:06:21] the session. They've, last I heard

[1:06:23] earlier this week, they've passed about

[1:06:25] 40 bills. I think that's probably

[1:06:26] increased, but this is a record year in

[1:06:29] terms of numbers of bills. There's

[1:06:30] actually even

[1:06:31] >> how many

[1:06:31] >> there's there's even a bill from a

[1:06:33] freshman representative, Representative

[1:06:35] Okerland to limit how many bills they

[1:06:37] can. But the long and short of we're

[1:06:40] going to be seeing it's going to be

[1:06:41] coming pretty fast and furious. And I

[1:06:43] think I'll be texting

[1:06:45] um uh Clint and Trevor, you know, on a

[1:06:49] more regular basis of, hey, have you

[1:06:50] seen this bill? Um so, but right now in

[1:06:53] terms of water, there's that. There's

[1:06:55] another bill from Representative Ward,

[1:06:56] HB184,

[1:06:58] that would allow um a property owner to

[1:07:02] essentially propose their own lot

[1:07:04] specific land use requirement.

[1:07:06] >> Right. the the concern with that one,

[1:07:09] it's intended to support starter homes,

[1:07:11] which is also a big priority of

[1:07:12] leadership this year. Um, and I'm not

[1:07:15] entirely the bills. I don't fully

[1:07:17] understand the I think the intent is is to kind of essentially get a variance

[1:07:21] for your lot through a more simplistic

[1:07:23] process rather than necessarily get a

[1:07:25] building permit. But that's not entirely

[1:07:27] clear because if they propose it, they

[1:07:28] don't need to get a will serve letter

[1:07:30] from you. They could just go to the city

[1:07:33] and say, "Here's what I'd like to do."

[1:07:35] the city would have some discretion to

[1:07:37] deny it. And so it's not like it the

[1:07:39] city would have to, but there's a

[1:07:41] concern in the land use community that would kind of lead to statewide

[1:07:45] zoning. And the concern that I I would

[1:07:47] have is just the lack of consultation

[1:07:49] with the utility on it. And I my

[1:07:52] personal opinion is we I applaud the

[1:07:54] whole idea of of starter homes. It's a

[1:07:56] worthy goal because affordable housing

[1:07:57] is the number one issue right now. But

[1:08:01] we already have a development agreement

[1:08:02] process where people can essentially do

[1:08:04] that,

[1:08:04] >> right? And one of the deal with the

[1:08:06] leagues with the league is they're

[1:08:08] talking about more affordable housing.

[1:08:10] Well, it's kind of weird when you talk

[1:08:12] about affordable housing and water,

[1:08:14] right? With look at look at our water

[1:08:17] where we're at right now. You know,

[1:08:19] what's going to happen when spring comes

[1:08:20] or whatever, but so how do you how do

[1:08:23] you promote affordable housing? Are we

[1:08:26] going to have enough water to for this

[1:08:28] affordable housing? Right? I mean, it

[1:08:30] was just kind of like it was just

[1:08:31] >> Well, the interesting thing about that

[1:08:33] bill is that it didn't really even

[1:08:36] require that it be affordable. It's just

[1:08:38] you would have to deed restrict the

[1:08:39] property to sell it for at two years at

[1:08:41] market rate,

[1:08:42] >> right?

[1:08:43] >> It was at or below market rate. So, that

[1:08:45] was the comment I made at the league is

[1:08:47] I wasn't quite sure what this would fix

[1:08:48] because

[1:08:50] >> if you're selling at a market rate, it's

[1:08:52] not affordable or a starter home. But

[1:08:54] anyway, I I typically just the way the

[1:08:56] session works and I we probably won't

[1:09:00] this is the last time we'll meet before

[1:09:01] the end of the session. So, it's a

[1:09:02] little bit of a challenge because most

[1:09:04] of the bills that are going to be passed

[1:09:06] are going to happen between now and the

[1:09:07] end of the session before our next board

[1:09:09] meeting. So, I what I would just make

[1:09:12] sure that we're on the same page is that

[1:09:15] we work with if if you guys are okay

[1:09:17] with me working with Clint and then to

[1:09:18] the extent needed, we can bring in Mick.

[1:09:20] that sometimes we just need to may make

[1:09:22] an executive decision on whether we're

[1:09:24] going to oppose something or not in

[1:09:25] accordance with your goals that we

[1:09:27] understand

[1:09:28] >> because we may not have time to convene

[1:09:30] another board.

[1:09:31] >> Okay.

[1:09:31] >> I I do think that there

[1:09:33] >> So that'll be in the next couple days.

[1:09:35] >> Well, the session goes through the first

[1:09:36] week of March.

[1:09:37] >> Oh, first of March.

[1:09:38] >> So, we're about we're half we're roughly

[1:09:40] halfway through the session.

[1:09:42] >> Wow.

[1:09:42] >> But now is when all of the bills will be

[1:09:44] passed. They usually spend the first

[1:09:45] part of the session working out the

[1:09:47] budget stuff and that's why they haven't

[1:09:49] passed as much bills.

[1:09:51] >> Um there is a lot of focus on water this

[1:09:53] year. I I don't so far it hasn't really

[1:09:55] been that impactful to you.

[1:09:57] >> Um there's a lot on infrastructure. I

[1:10:00] don't know how some of those build

[1:10:01] bigger like there was one bill by S

[1:10:03] SB198 which um by Senator Sandal which

[1:10:07] would create a state water manager to to

[1:10:10] potentially build large regional

[1:10:12] infrastructure projects and local

[1:10:14] districts or special districts could

[1:10:15] propose projects. I don't know if that

[1:10:18] bill will move. There's so right now I

[1:10:22] I've mentioned the one that I think is

[1:10:23] the biggest impact which would be that

[1:10:24] potential fee. Uh the other one that you

[1:10:27] guys are already doing is that if for

[1:10:29] any water provider that's requiring a

[1:10:31] water dedication that you would have to

[1:10:34] have your 40-year plan in place, but you

[1:10:35] guys already do. So we're that that

[1:10:38] wouldn't impact you and actually I think

[1:10:40] that's a good idea. Um so that's my

[1:10:43] report.

[1:10:44] >> I think Bowen Collins has done a great

[1:10:46] job. I think that forecast we used and

[1:10:48] everything's been really good.

[1:10:50] >> I agree.

[1:10:50] >> And it's prepared us for what's

[1:10:52] upcoming.

[1:10:53] >> I The only thing I don't like to is that

[1:10:56] uh high density housing that can really

[1:10:58] have a big impact on us and there's no

[1:11:01] way you can plan for that other than uh

[1:11:07] I don't know there's no way you can plan

[1:11:09] for it. Uh maybe minimize it, limit it

[1:11:12] or something. We'll just have to see.

[1:11:14] >> Well, one of the things they said that

[1:11:15] Speaker Schultz said when he spoke with

[1:11:17] us that he's like, "We've put a lot of

[1:11:19] focus on apartments and you guys have

[1:11:21] stepped up to the plate. We've built a

[1:11:22] lot of apartments and now we want to

[1:11:23] shift to starter homes. So that to me

[1:11:27] implies some lesser density. I mean, a

[1:11:30] starter home is going to be less dense

[1:11:31] than an apartment building. Um, those

[1:11:33] starter homes they put down there on

[1:11:35] 8,000 with Thomas Thomas property. Those are bad. I mean, big deep lots

[1:11:43] with water in the in the crawl space and

[1:11:46] everything. It was just not done right.

[1:11:49] And I think if we take if they were to

[1:11:52] put in everything they need to do, the

[1:11:53] problem is even in high impact, it's

[1:11:56] still 500,000. That's not affordable

[1:11:59] housing. So the contractor is still

[1:12:01] making their money, but it's not

[1:12:03] affordable.

[1:12:04] >> Well, that's that's the problem.

[1:12:06] >> The problem I have with that whole

[1:12:08] situation. So you turn around about

[1:12:10] affordable housing. Okay. What is

[1:12:12] affordable? I mean, I feel like Magna's

[1:12:15] got probably the most affordable housing

[1:12:17] out here, you know, out here around. And

[1:12:20] they want us they want us to bring in

[1:12:22] more affordable housing. Well,

[1:12:24] >> I'm not in favor of that. And, you know,

[1:12:27] about the apartment deal is

[1:12:29] >> they said about building bring, you

[1:12:30] know, doing more apartments. Well, what

[1:12:32] do them people that rent them

[1:12:34] apartments, do they invest in the city?

[1:12:36] Absolutely not. They have nothing to

[1:12:38] invest in the city. No,

[1:12:39] >> they they might come to the store, but

[1:12:41] other than doing anything else in the

[1:12:42] city, they go outside of the city.

[1:12:44] >> And that's what I'm trying to figure out

[1:12:45] is our leakage from here to West Valley.

[1:12:48] What we're what our leakage is

[1:12:50] >> and all that stuff. But no, I just I

[1:12:52] struggle with the high density housing.

[1:12:55] That that's one thing I'm not I'm not

[1:12:57] for. I feel like we we're dealing with

[1:12:59] this up here. This has been nothing. Our

[1:13:01] time's been spent up here with this

[1:13:03] problem.

[1:13:04] >> Yeah. We've had to bail them out. If we

[1:13:06] didn't come with suggestions, that would

[1:13:08] be even worse.

[1:13:10] >> Uh anyhow, I mean, we'll we'll work

[1:13:12] through it and see what we're at. But

[1:13:14] our next board meeting is going to be

[1:13:16] March 12th, uh 2026 here at 10:00 a.m.

[1:13:21] >> Yeah. I I wanted to take a minute and

[1:13:24] just thank all you guys, the whole

[1:13:25] board, all you guys. It makes this job,

[1:13:28] our job, look really easy, and we've all

[1:13:31] worked together. And I think that's the

[1:13:33] secret here. I want to just thank you

[1:13:36] guys appreciation for you guys doing

[1:13:38] such a good job

[1:13:40] >> and trying to hold everything and we've

[1:13:42] all learned together and I think it's

[1:13:44] made it look real easy

[1:13:46] >> but it's not. You guys put a lot of time

[1:13:48] and effort into it and I want to thank

[1:13:50] you guys for that.

[1:13:51] >> Thank you.

[1:13:51] >> Well, and I want to say one thing.

[1:13:52] >> I feel the same way. It's it's really

[1:13:54] been nice. All of you

[1:13:56] >> bearing our testimonies.

[1:13:58] So I so what I want to say is I really

[1:14:00] do I really do appreciate you guys and I

[1:14:02] know sometimes the board don't show

[1:14:04] sometimes I don't feel like we show the

[1:14:06] appreciation that you guys deserve

[1:14:07] because you guys are out doing all the

[1:14:09] footwork and and all that and all we do

[1:14:11] is take the complaints right and not

[1:14:13] really know what you guys are doing so

[1:14:15] we kind of you know at times I find

[1:14:17] myself whoa stand back for a minute you

[1:14:19] know what find out the facts but me as

[1:14:21] the chair want to say I want to thank

[1:14:23] each and every one of you and I want to

[1:14:25] thank Nathan for keeping me in line

[1:14:27] keeping me out of jail. And and I also

[1:14:30] want to thank you guys out there for

[1:14:33] your guys' support and coming Doyle and

[1:14:35] you guys for having our backs, too.

[1:14:37] Because at the end of the day, and this

[1:14:39] is what I'm trying to stress to the city

[1:14:41] council is when whoever whatever service

[1:14:44] district we lose, I mean, use if we

[1:14:47] fail, they fail. If they fail, we fail

[1:14:49] because we're a team. And if you plan on

[1:14:51] winning a battle as individuals, then

[1:14:53] you better, as Steve knows, go wrestle.

[1:14:56] But like I said, we when we're all

[1:14:58] together. So if one of us fell, we all

[1:15:01] fell together cuz far as I'm concerned,

[1:15:03] we're a team and and I just wished I

[1:15:06] could take this page that I got here and

[1:15:08] transfer it down onto Main Street with

[1:15:10] the council that I have. But you know

[1:15:11] what? We're all going to be fine. It's

[1:15:13] just trying to get to know each other

[1:15:15] and trying to, you know, find and

[1:15:18] Nathan's our new city attorney, so he's

[1:15:20] thinking to me, Mick, what in the hell

[1:15:22] was I thinking? But it'll it'll it'll

[1:15:25] get better.

[1:15:26] >> That's true. We

[1:15:27] >> I worry when you I worry when you talk

[1:15:29] about starter homes because the quality

[1:15:31] of starter homes back in the 70s were

[1:15:33] crap and they didn't last.

[1:15:36] >> Well, and that's the that's not my

[1:15:38] priority. That's

[1:15:39] >> No, no, no. I'm just saying though, but

[1:15:41] now that we have better uh we have

[1:15:45] better inspections and quality

[1:15:47] requirements and stuff, so it will be

[1:15:49] better, but somehow the contractors are

[1:15:52] going to figure out how to make a buck.

[1:15:53] >> So, well, but that's that's the other

[1:15:55] thrust that we see each year is are

[1:15:57] bills to allow the builders to use their

[1:15:59] own building inspections about their

[1:16:01] own.

[1:16:01] >> Yeah, that's that that's

[1:16:03] >> is that bill going to pass, do you

[1:16:04] think? We have seen a bill of that ilk

[1:16:07] every single session for the last three

[1:16:09] or four years. I I don't know if it's

[1:16:11] going to pass. Typically, in my

[1:16:13] experience, the land use bills that come

[1:16:15] out early in the session

[1:16:17] >> are not the ones that typically pass.

[1:16:20] They usually get folded into something

[1:16:22] there. What typically happens is there's

[1:16:23] a big land use bill every year and it

[1:16:26] comes out the last two weeks and the

[1:16:29] league will be letting us know, but they

[1:16:31] usually kind of hold that back until the

[1:16:33] very end. And that's where some of

[1:16:35] you'll see some concepts from some of

[1:16:36] these bills that you'll see in the

[1:16:37] beginning that'll make it at the end.

[1:16:39] But I don't know if

[1:16:41] >> so how that's going to impact us, I can

[1:16:43] only speak from experience is uh they

[1:16:45] build a house and they run the sewer out

[1:16:47] and they don't compact it good and then

[1:16:50] what happens? Five or 10 years the sewer

[1:16:52] settles and gets a hump in it and then

[1:16:54] they're calling saying my sewer is

[1:16:56] plugged. So, I think we just need a

[1:16:59] better snake that goes all the way up

[1:17:01] and inspects the cl the homeowner.

[1:17:04] That's where that's the biggest problem

[1:17:06] we can have. Either a cross connection

[1:17:08] or a settled sewer line going to the

[1:17:11] street. So,

[1:17:14] >> I know again I want to thank you guys

[1:17:15] for everything and making us who we are.

[1:17:18] >> I do too. I

[1:17:19] >> Yeah, it makes it look easy.

[1:17:20] >> I appreciate all of you.

[1:17:22] >> Yeah. Thanks. Thank you.

[1:17:24] >> So, now ask us what are you guys really

[1:17:25] wanting?

[1:17:30] Okay. So, do someone want we need to we

[1:17:32] need to have a close session. Does

[1:17:33] someone want to

[1:17:35] >> motion?

[1:17:37] >> Yeah, I can motion. Mr. Mr. Chairman,

[1:17:39] I'd like to motion to take a brief

[1:17:40] recess and immediately following meeting

[1:17:43] and close meeting to discuss purchase,

[1:17:45] exchange, lease, sell real property,

[1:17:47] including form of water right, water

[1:17:49] shares pending a reasonable imminent

[1:17:52] litigation and collective bargaining

[1:17:54] issues pursuant to Utah code uh 524204

[1:17:58] through 205.

[1:18:00] >> I'll second that.

[1:18:01] >> It's been motion second. All in favor?

[1:18:02] I.

[1:18:03] >> It's 117

[1:18:05] 18

[1:18:07] >> time is what? Okay.

[1:18:09] >> Okay.

[1:18:09] >> What time is it?

[1:18:10] >> It is uh 12

[1:18:12] >> 125.

[1:18:13] >> 12:55.

[1:18:15] >> I'll make a motion to close the closed

[1:18:17] meeting and reopen the public board

[1:18:20] meeting.

[1:18:21] >> And I second it. All in favor?

[1:18:23] >> I Okay,

[1:18:26] >> this here.

[1:18:27] >> Do we have anything else?

[1:18:30] >> Do we need to consider any action notice

[1:18:33] agenda?

[1:18:33] >> No.

[1:18:34] >> Okay. So, you want to make a motion? And

[1:18:37] I'll make a motion to adjurnn.

[1:18:39] >> I second it. Motion seconded. All in

[1:18:42] favor?

February 12 2026

Transcript