[0:00] turn it over to uh Carlo in our IT
[0:02] department.
[0:03] >> Okay. Thank you.
[0:08] » Thank you, Mayor Council. Um pleas to be
[0:10] here today. I guess I'm first. So, I'll
[0:13] dive right in. Um so, a lot of you, it's
[0:17] not all of you, lot some of you new to
[0:20] ORM. So, I just thought it'd be good to
[0:22] go over the ecosystem of it and and
[0:25] pertains to ORM. Um, people don't
[0:28] understand like why I'm IT and yet McKay
[0:31] and Sarah are also of IT and Steve are
[0:32] IT. It's because aggregate we are it but
[0:36] I'm part of the operations and there
[0:38] Steve's product policy and compliance
[0:40] end of it and then Sarah software
[0:43] development. So
[0:45] a visualization of how all those
[0:48] um this last year was a was a
[0:53] wouldn't say an uneventful year but it
[0:56] was you know more of a uh let us settle
[0:59] after the major stuff we did last year
[1:00] with the new city center um focused
[1:03] mostly on um
[1:06] some tools we had. So uh 701 and action
[1:09] one were pools provided to us by the
[1:11] state part of the um cyber security
[1:13] budget that's started with a federal
[1:15] grant to the state that gets allocated
[1:17] to um from the state out to
[1:20] municipalities as they need it but the
[1:21] bulk of that state is the state and so
[1:23] they chose to buy packages for
[1:26] municipalities and let them uh those
[1:29] programs with them. So send one is our
[1:31] endpoint management
[1:34] um that's provided then which allowed us
[1:35] to retire sofos which is what we were
[1:37] paying for at the time and uh action one
[1:40] is patch management and that allowed us
[1:42] to uh retire our event product.
[1:46] >> So [clears throat] some cost savings to
[1:48] the city there.
[1:50] Um, sorry.
[1:51] >> Another big uh thing we did this last
[1:53] year was we upgraded our our backup
[1:56] systems uh and backup being our disaster
[1:59] recovery data storage systems. We were
[2:02] using some very old software and some
[2:04] very old repurposed hardware for that
[2:06] purpose. Uh we we've moved that now to
[2:08] brand new hardware and and brand new
[2:10] software. And then uh part of that we've
[2:13] upgraded the the hardware that's down in
[2:15] the St. George data center. Uh so we
[2:18] have redundancy of that data both here
[2:20] at city center and down at our disaster
[2:22] recovery site at St. George. Um and then
[2:25] uh part of the St. George upgrades
[2:28] included having to change the rack out
[2:29] to uh a larger rack to accommodate that
[2:32] new hardware and then uh we did some
[2:34] firewall upgrades repurposing the
[2:36] hardware we had at the city center uh
[2:38] previous into that.
[2:40] So not going to go over all these points
[2:42] just kind of what gave the highlights.
[2:44] Um
[2:45] this slide is just kind of to give you
[2:47] guys a little bit of a taste for what the environment looks like here as
[2:52] far as the threats that the city faces.
[2:55] Um if you look at the the top um left
[2:59] hand corner, the ad lumin events over
[3:01] the last year, admin is a product we we
[3:03] pay for that's a managed detection and
[3:05] response system that monitors logs that
[3:08] we get from various systems here, mostly
[3:10] our firewalls and um systems. they feed
[3:13] into this and they get aggregated as
[3:16] events into that system. So almost one
[3:18] and a half billion events um got dumped
[3:20] into that system and out of that um 776
[3:24] were triggered as alerts as something
[3:26] kind of suspicious and leads leads leads
[3:28] to more investigation needing to be done
[3:29] to see if it's
[3:32] a a malicious thing happening at the
[3:33] city or or not. And um part of that
[3:37] service we do with them is they they
[3:40] take care of the busy work. They're 247
[3:43] uh seven days a week um monitoring those
[3:46] so that we can have somebody take take
[3:47] action on the the nastiest of the nasty
[3:50] right as it's happening because if you
[3:51] wait sometimes it's too late. So so they
[3:54] took action on most of those events but
[3:56] still left us with 306 that we had to
[3:58] take action on ourselves. So leaves our
[4:01] teams pretty busy still just um
[4:02] investigating those events to see if
[4:04] they're malicious or just look like they
[4:06] might have been. Um
[4:09] that bottom part of the of the slide
[4:10] talks about vulnerabilities. This is um
[4:13] vulnerabilities as detected by Sentinel
[4:15] one product. So these are the soft
[4:17] running on each each endpoint. Um so
[4:20] your PCs, the servers, that kind of
[4:21] thing. And uh what it what it means by a
[4:25] vulnerability in this case is is a bug
[4:28] that's been released by a manufacturer
[4:30] to a central database that says our
[4:32] product has a problem when this
[4:34] particular thing happens. and and that event is usually tied to a bug in
[4:40] their software and that bug um that
[4:43] software might have several bugs that
[4:46] pertain to the same same problem. So um
[4:49] 120,000 uh vulnerabilities might mean 10
[4:51] or 20 per bug potentially, but it's just
[4:54] things that it's it's keeping an eye on
[4:56] our system that that are uh happening
[4:59] potentially in our environment that that
[5:01] need further investigation and uh
[5:03] scrutiny. And of the the ones that it's
[5:06] seeing, you know, there were still 538
[5:09] that were exploitable. So that means
[5:11] there's a bug that has uh released
[5:15] information on how to exploit that bug
[5:17] and actually turn it malicious. So So
[5:20] even with the tools we have, we're still
[5:21] we still have some of these things in
[5:22] our environment that that need attention
[5:24] that we just don't have the resources to
[5:25] get to right away. So we're focusing on
[5:28] those and trying to get those numbers
[5:29] down. As you can see from the uh
[5:32] percentages there, they are decreasing.
[5:34] So, we're getting to those, just not
[5:35] getting to them as fast as we need, but
[5:37] um not we're not in harm's way or not in
[5:40] a in a bad way yet, but we're those are
[5:43] numbers we want to keep an eye on. Um
[5:45] action one is another package that's uh
[5:47] tracking those and those vulnerabilities
[5:49] that it's talking about are
[5:51] vulnerabilities that have a patch. So,
[5:53] if you have Adobe or something on your
[5:55] system and it's patched that Adobe's
[5:57] released, uh the vulnerability in the
[5:59] old version's there until the new
[6:00] version's installed. And so it's talking
[6:02] about vulnerabilities that we could
[6:04] patch. And then as you can see, we got
[6:07] 5,000 over 5,000 installed pieces of
[6:09] software that we're having to track and
[6:11] manage in the city. So, uh, as if we're
[6:14] doing this manually, that's that's our
[6:15] overwhelming thing to do, you know. So,
[6:18] even with some of the automation, we
[6:20] still have 1,820
[6:22] patches that have to be installed. The
[6:23] patch could be as simple as like a
[6:24] printer driver. So, it's not like whole
[6:27] software packages, but um, but still a
[6:29] lot out there. So we it's this is these
[6:31] are things we're watching closely and we're helpful grateful for the tools
[6:34] we have to kind of put the spotlight on
[6:36] those weaknesses and and let us focus on
[6:38] getting those result.
[6:41] Um this upcoming budget year we have a
[6:44] couple items we we need to have
[6:46] attention. So with the new building uh
[6:48] we have a new UPS system uh and a and
[6:51] the crack units which is a computer room
[6:53] air conditioning unit. um those were
[6:56] bigger units for this building than we
[6:58] had previous and so our budget was needs
[7:00] to be adjusted accordingly to match to
[7:01] manage maintenance on those products so
[7:04] they don't fall into disrepair. So we
[7:06] need an increased budget to keep those
[7:08] in in uh good working order. And then uh
[7:12] the software request there is we have we
[7:14] have software that helps us track all of
[7:16] our our tickets both in the in the
[7:19] software development side for project
[7:21] management as well as in the help desk
[7:22] for uh items that we need to address.
[7:25] And so we've been paying for a product
[7:26] right now that's um gotten more
[7:29] expensive because we're using it more
[7:31] good and bad cost to use more but we're
[7:33] using it more. So we need a little bit of money to maintain that
[7:37] product. Um and then the IBM system we
[7:40] have we typically do on a three to four
[7:43] year lease and it's coming time for the
[7:46] new lease to be set up for the new power
[7:48] series to um replace the core database
[7:50] to run all of our systems on and that
[7:53] lease does include keeping the system
[7:56] redundant in in St. George. Um and then
[8:00] uh the final one is there is our our
[8:02] Google licensing costs. Uh we are Google
[8:05] Workspace Shop. So our license our
[8:08] license agreement for the previous 5
[8:10] years expired. Now it's time for a new
[8:11] agreement and the price went up a little
[8:13] bit. So we needed 23,000 extra for the
[8:16] new price adjustments. And then CIUS
[8:19] requirements have have indicated that we
[8:21] need to move from a commercial product
[8:24] to more of a government product and so
[8:26] we need to add some extra licensing to
[8:29] uh maintain CSUS compliance with with
[8:31] our criminal justice agencies. So uh so
[8:35] that's our budget request for this year.
[8:37] Um some of our focus for the coming year
[8:40] um is mostly looking back to that that
[8:43] slide I referenced a minute ago with the
[8:45] uh the vulnerabilities and this and the
[8:47] uh security events is that's that's our
[8:50] next window of of uh focus. Now that we
[8:53] have the visibility in those tool those
[8:55] with those tools we want to make sure
[8:56] we're focusing on dwindling those lists
[8:58] down to as minimal amount as possible.
[9:02] So big focus will be spent on that. Um
[9:05] you know we're also working on expanding
[9:07] the help desk hours for this coming
[9:08] year. They'll better accommodate police
[9:11] and fire since they work 247 and and
[9:14] then the library and fitness center
[9:15] since they have a lot later hours than
[9:17] the rest of the city does. So want to
[9:20] focus on helping them out a little bit
[9:21] better in those hours. And then uh again
[9:24] just kind of focusing on the the
[9:25] resilience and the readiness that we
[9:27] have for disasters since talk to anybody
[9:30] in the security world it's it's most
[9:32] more so now not if you get attacked by
[9:35] something it's when and so we want to be
[9:38] ready for when it happens so it's as
[9:39] minimal impact impactful as possible and
[9:43] uh that's our focus.
[9:53] Okay. Well, I want you guys to think
[9:56] about most of the things that Carlo
[9:58] presented like your immune system,
[9:59] right? These are things that happen
[10:00] inside of your body. This is what
[10:02] happens if you get sick, right? What
[10:04] systems are mobilized to make sure that
[10:06] you don't die from whatever it was. Um,
[10:08] I want you to think about what I'm about
[10:10] to present as like the social
[10:12] relationships that our organization, the
[10:15] city of War, has with other software or
[10:18] service providers that could make us
[10:21] thick. Um, and this has actually been
[10:23] the focus uh from this last year. It was
[10:26] to take a closer look at the
[10:28] relationships that we have with software
[10:31] and service providers that we leverage
[10:34] as a city to make uh sure that we can
[10:36] offer the service to our customers and
[10:40] we evaluated. So we started making a
[10:42] long list of all of these that that list
[10:44] is not completed at this point but this
[10:46] journey has begun and as we onboard new
[10:50] relationships as we onboard new software
[10:53] or new services that are provided by the
[10:56] outside market we are asking these
[10:58] services uh cyber security questions we
[11:02] are asking them data privacy questions
[11:04] we're asking them about data retention
[11:06] uh and making sure that uh the legal
[11:09] frameworks and the oper operational
[11:11] requirements that we've decided as a
[11:14] team is good hygiene uh that these third
[11:16] parties are engaged in as well. And when
[11:19] they're not right, we go back to the uh
[11:21] business unit within the city, whether
[11:23] that's parks or fire or finance, and we
[11:25] say, "Hey, here are the potential risks
[11:29] associated with doing our business
[11:31] through this service provider." And so
[11:33] we've got full disclosure about how
[11:36] we're doing business, where it's risky,
[11:38] where it's good. And then we're fully we
[11:41] are accepting those risks or we're
[11:42] rejecting those risks if they're too
[11:44] much. And that's just been a blind spot
[11:47] our operation in the past. We we have
[11:49] not terribly focused on. But it's
[11:51] important, right? Just as in the
[11:52] pandemic you did like contract or
[11:54] contact tracing because the people who
[11:57] you are closest with would be ones most
[12:00] likely to get you sick. Right. So this
[12:03] is uh we are doing our third party cyber
[12:06] security and data privacy assessments
[12:07] before we onboard vendors. We're doing
[12:10] annual auditing of the risks that are
[12:13] identified with those third party
[12:14] vendors and doing the best we can to
[12:17] inoculate ourselves from uh risky
[12:20] business behaviors. And then um we
[12:22] formalized a policy uh exception path.
[12:26] This means you know there's there's
[12:28] always the rule right and for every rule
[12:30] there's always an exception. Then just
[12:32] because there's an exception it doesn't
[12:33] mean that we negate the rule right. So,
[12:35] we track the rule or sorry, we track the
[12:38] exception. We audit against that
[12:40] exception annually to see if it's still
[12:42] valid or we close the door. Uh, and then
[12:45] we've created and adopted a citywide
[12:47] cyber security incident response plan
[12:49] this last year. So, the previous year
[12:51] was we adopted a cyber security
[12:53] framework, right? A way in which we
[12:55] build uh this year uh we formalized our
[12:59] response to bad events.
[13:03] questions.
[13:05] Seeing none, I shall move on. Uh this
[13:08] coming year, what we're going to be
[13:10] focusing on is a lot of actually
[13:12] compliance uh uh items here. Uh we've
[13:15] got uh mobile device management that
[13:17] Carlo touched on that that is a
[13:19] requirement for our criminal justice
[13:20] agencies that we're going to be rolling
[13:22] out. Um we are this is a big one. This
[13:26] second item has everything to do with
[13:28] the myorum initiative. uh right where
[13:31] we've got a centralized portal for our
[13:33] citizens uh where as we build new now
[13:36] and as we offer services to cit citizens
[13:39] we're trying to push as many of those
[13:40] services into a central portal for
[13:43] citizens so they don't have to have
[13:44] seven 10 12 different usernames and
[13:48] passwords with the city based upon how
[13:49] many services they consume from us and
[13:51] this line item moving um to a single
[13:54] user sign on for citizens this is the
[13:56] back end that makes that work uh
[13:59] continued good automation of employee
[14:01] account life cycle. So it's great uh
[14:05] people onboard with the city, people
[14:06] offboard with the city and they receive
[14:08] permissions and access based upon their
[14:10] roles as they onboard with us. But what
[14:12] happens to somebody who onboards with
[14:14] the city as a part-time um fitness
[14:18] center employee and is able to move up
[14:20] the ranks, right? Uh there's there are
[14:23] components within the life cycle. We
[14:25] call it backpacking. They usually
[14:27] backpack access and privileges uh and
[14:30] they may bounce around to three or four
[14:31] different departments in the city,
[14:32] right? So by the time they're done, they
[14:34] have so many more privileges than they
[14:36] ever needed. Uh a focal point of this
[14:38] coming year will will be to um tailor uh
[14:42] rights and privileges to users even
[14:44] through the life cycle as they move
[14:46] throughout uh different employment
[14:48] opportunities in the city. Excuse me.
[14:53] Um again, compliance requirements. Uh
[14:55] this is going to be encrypted
[14:56] communication again focusing heavily on
[14:58] our criminal justice agencies. Uh and
[15:01] then the last two is just a continuation
[15:03] of uh maturing the city's privacy
[15:06] program as well as maturing the city's
[15:09] cyber security program. I know that's
[15:10] that seems like a a shotgun blast, but
[15:13] these things are all interconnected and
[15:16] uh uh as we raise the quality of the
[15:19] experience and where all the boats are
[15:21] going to rise
[15:23] and that was everything I had. Any
[15:25] questions?
[15:28] >> How many of those were statemandated?
[15:30] >> H that is a really good question. One,
[15:33] two, three, three and a half.
[15:38] Just over half.
[15:41] Thank you.
[15:42] >> Thank you.
[15:45] >> All right. Software development. So, uh,
[15:47] like Steve and Carlo have presented to
[15:49] this point, looking at the third pillar
[15:51] of the IT group that helps support city
[15:55] services. What we do for the city is
[15:57] support the infrastructure that allows
[15:59] most of the city employees to do their
[16:01] jobs as well as provide convenient ways
[16:03] for citizens and customers of the city
[16:06] to interact with us in day-to-day
[16:08] operations.
[16:09] So to that end, one of the biggest
[16:11] things that we've been working on this
[16:12] past year is the launch of my ORM. I
[16:14] presented this to people at various
[16:17] points throughout the year and I am
[16:18] pleased to announce that as of yesterday
[16:20] that is live to our citizens. So that's
[16:22] been one of the biggest undertakings
[16:23] that we've had to make sure that Steve
[16:26] mentioned earlier with unifying
[16:28] counts across the city and we're
[16:30] providing a service that is adequate uh
[16:33] beyond adequate to our citizens in a way
[16:36] that actually helps them get what they
[16:37] need from the city rather than being
[16:39] lost in the minutia of having various
[16:41] accounts.
[16:43] Along with that comes upgrades of
[16:44] existing software. Uh this has provided
[16:47] us an opportunity to see what we
[16:48] currently have offering and make it
[16:50] better, make it more secure, make it
[16:53] better to fix and change in the future.
[16:56] Uh utility billing website is the first
[16:59] thing that has entered my arm as a
[17:00] available service to the citizens and we
[17:03] have made significant improvements to
[17:05] make sure that it is a secure experience
[17:07] and it is very clear what somebody is
[17:09] getting when they are interacting with
[17:11] that service.
[17:13] We've also been uh looking at updating
[17:15] our accessibility guidelines and this is
[17:18] rooted in things that have come down
[17:20] from the federal level with the
[17:21] Americans with Disability Act,
[17:23] specifically title 2 regulations that
[17:25] were set to go into effect last Friday
[17:27] and have been pushed back one further
[17:29] year. But this is work that we engage in
[17:32] to make sure that all of the services
[17:33] that we offer are legally compliant and
[17:37] are able to serve our citizens.
[17:41] Our software architecture is another
[17:42] thing because there's so much of city
[17:45] infrastructure that relies on the
[17:46] software that we're written. We want to
[17:49] make sure that that software when it
[17:50] comes time for it to be updated or to be
[17:53] life cycled out that it is a smooth
[17:55] transition.
[17:57] to make sure that as developers we can
[17:59] easily access that and change it as the
[18:02] needs of the city of all but also when
[18:04] security events come forward we are able
[18:06] to swiftly and accurately those issues
[18:10] as they go and then finally we've been
[18:13] engaging in steering committee
[18:15] conversations where as a software
[18:17] development team make sure that any
[18:19] decisions that we do to progress the
[18:22] software needs of the city are being
[18:24] directly led by the executive level of
[18:26] the city and not just at the needs of
[18:29] various departments in isolation. So all
[18:32] efforts by our software teams um and
[18:34] this includes our security and IT
[18:36] operations teams are the executive
[18:39] level.
[18:42] » Okay. So looking forward going into our
[18:45] next fiscal year we are two main
[18:49] priorities. First we're building new
[18:51] still right we're extending the myorum
[18:53] portal that just launched. We're looking
[18:55] at business licensing, putting business
[18:58] licensing into our centralized portal.
[19:00] We're also looking at fitness center.
[19:01] is a project that has
[19:04] already started, has been underway for a
[19:05] long time. It's going to take a long
[19:07] time and we're going to keep working on
[19:09] it. Our other big one, McKay talked
[19:12] about the need to life cycle software to
[19:15] keep it up to date, right? Maintenance,
[19:18] keep it all the whole system healthy.
[19:20] Um, we've reached time to life cycle
[19:23] some of our really big systems. So, our
[19:26] legacy programs, we're looking at
[19:27] payroll that pays all of our employees.
[19:30] We're looking at the general ledger
[19:31] system. We're looking at the court
[19:32] system.
[19:34] So, starting this year, we are going to
[19:38] start looking at reevaluating them,
[19:40] redoing them,
[19:42] stabilizing them, all of those kinds of
[19:44] maintenance things that are needed to
[19:46] keep it supporting the city's
[19:48] infrastructure. And as part of that, we
[19:50] are intending to in this next budget
[19:53] year onboard three more people to help
[19:55] us with this multi-year project of um
[20:00] life cycling our most core systems.
[20:02] We're looking at two software engineers
[20:04] and also a database administrator who's
[20:06] going to specialize in the um hygiene I
[20:09] guess of our data and all the
[20:12] information we collect for the citizens
[20:14] so that we can make sure that we are um
[20:17] legal legally compliant as legislation
[20:20] changes and also organized right and
[20:22] clean and we can help our citizens in
[20:24] the most secure way possible.
[20:28] So yeah, I think that's our that's the
[20:31] end of it. Any questions?
[20:33] >> I don't have a question, but I just want
[20:35] to say congratulations on getting the my
[20:37] up and running. That's Yes.
[20:40] >> Good job.
[20:42] >> No, that's
[20:44] a lot of work on that. So, thank you.
[20:46] >> Tuesday,
[20:47] >> any questions at this point, council?
[20:50] >> I do not speak uh developer and all of
[20:53] those languages that you do. So, thank
[20:55] you for what you do because
[20:58] I don't speak that language.
[21:01] Thank you.
[21:02] >> We love doing it. Love doing it for the
[21:04] city to see things progress. We have
[21:06] great like you guys working on man.
[21:10] >> So anyone who has an email now will need
[21:13] to set up access having access things in
[21:16] the past will need to set up a new
[21:19] login.
[21:20] >> That is correct.
[21:21] >> Just to clarify that because that's come
[21:22] up, right? So, this is a whole new
[21:25] system and this is fabulous and you want
[21:26] to access it just a login
[21:30] >> and they'll be able to link their
[21:31] existing accounts to it. Uh, and our 311
[21:34] agents are trained on how to make sure
[21:35] that is a good process.
[21:38] So if people have questions about how to
[21:40] do it, 311
[21:42] be where they need to contact who can
[21:44] help them work through getting set up
[21:46] with the new myorum
[21:48] >> and then as things escalate from there
[21:50] if if it needs to uh as software
[21:52] developers start.
[21:54] >> Thank you. And Pete, we have a whole PR
[21:58] campaign to get the word out about my my
[22:02] sure that awareness is getting out to
[22:05] everyone. We've got a whole big plan
[22:07] that we're going to start rolling out
[22:08] here at the end of the month.
[22:11] >> Is Quinn online or council member?
[22:13] >> Yeah, it looks like he is online. Um,
[22:15] >> council member Mikum, do you have any
[22:16] questions? I just I don't want you to
[22:18] feel ignored.
[22:20] >> Uh, thank you, Mayor. No, I'm um,
[22:24] fantastic update. Sounds like you've got
[22:26] a lot of things going on. It's it's just
[22:29] very informative and I'm particularly
[22:31] excited as well about my ORUM and um
[22:35] thank you for the guidance uh on how to
[22:38] advise our residents as they make that
[22:40] transition.
[22:44] » Right. Thank you.
[23:21] thing. Can anybody guess where this hole
[23:24] is located?
[23:30] » Yes. So, here
[23:34] that's where we should all be today.
[23:37] Even though it's kind of cool. Which one
[23:39] is it? Which hole is that?
[23:42] >> Nine.
[23:42] >> Um, that is number nine.
[23:46] I spent some quality time at that whole
[23:48] during the police
[23:51] [laughter]
[23:52] little longer than you wanted to.
[23:55] >> Uh so first off uh part of uh why we had
[23:59] it we have it come and discuss things
[24:02] every year. Uh councilwoman member
[24:06] Gilstein uh uh many of us are in the
[24:08] same boat as you to be honest with you.
[24:11] Uh even you know we work with our IT
[24:13] folks every day but obviously lots of
[24:15] the things they talk about are just like
[24:18] uh-huh okay
[24:20] you say so um
[24:22] >> works right
[24:24] >> despite our best efforts to try to
[24:26] understand what what they're talking
[24:29] about and how that re impacts us right
[24:33] um but part of the reason why we had
[24:35] them go first this time before is
[24:37] because as you will come to see here
[24:39] when we start talking about the
[24:40] operation ations. A large portion of the
[24:43] operational items that are what we refer
[24:46] to maybe as expansions
[24:48] um are related to our IT area this year.
[24:52] Um just to give you an idea of um the
[24:56] process that we go through. So at the be
[25:00] uh beginning of the year in uh late
[25:02] January, February, we um open our budget
[25:06] uh product to all of the departments and
[25:09] they are able to then start submitting
[25:12] what we refer to these these expansion
[25:14] requests and that's those requests you
[25:16] see on that far left side. they have a
[25:18] time period in which they're able to
[25:20] submit those um and for us to be able to
[25:23] consolidate those and review them and
[25:27] then be able to um eval do some
[25:30] evaluation on that so that by the time
[25:32] we meet with each one of the departments
[25:34] we kind of have an idea of what things
[25:37] that they are looking at doing trying to
[25:40] do in the next year that they feel like
[25:41] [snorts] they need help with.
[25:44] We then meet as it mentions as a budget
[25:46] subcommittee um which is primarily uh
[25:50] Ren and uh Carrie and Ryan and uh Trevor
[25:55] and myself and and Jennica uh and along
[25:59] with each of the departments
[26:01] individually so that we can discuss each
[26:04] of those operational expansions and and
[26:06] what each of those expansions what does
[26:08] it mean? um is there ways that we can um
[26:12] have it some of that covered by a
[26:14] revenue source of some of some specific
[26:17] thing that wasn't there before or is
[26:20] there something else that you know we
[26:22] can look at that as far as a a way to
[26:24] potentially even we can accommodate that
[26:27] in the current fiscal year that we're
[26:28] in. So like this year would have been
[26:30] can we accommodate that here in fiscal
[26:32] 26 potentially. Um so all of that
[26:35] discussion occurs in that um budget
[26:38] subcommittee meeting. As you can see if
[26:42] the little swish going down if we find
[26:44] that there's some things that can we can
[26:46] do immediately um then we do that. We go
[26:49] and we take those out of the mix and and
[26:51] we take care of those and then we go
[26:54] forward all of the other ideas. And I
[26:57] say go forward, we put them on a list to
[27:00] determine,
[27:02] is there going to be enough money to do
[27:04] any of these things? Some of those are
[27:06] maybe, yeah, we're we're going to find a
[27:08] way to do that. That's a given. Some of
[27:10] the others are, well, let's kind of see
[27:12] where we're at and then we'll come
[27:14] revisit that and and then give some
[27:17] approval in that regard. And then all of
[27:20] that is leading towards obviously
[27:22] basically where we're at right now,
[27:24] which is um our tenative budget being
[27:28] completed and which will be presented um
[27:30] to you on May 12th. Um there's still
[27:34] time obviously between now and then that
[27:36] adjustments could be made and can be
[27:38] made and potentially even will be made
[27:40] um by the time we present on May 12th,
[27:42] but for the most part right now uh
[27:45] Trevor and I are begging for everybody's
[27:47] help and not changing anything from this
[27:50] point forward.
[27:52] So anyway,
[27:57] the first thing talking about
[27:58] expansions, uh we always want to touch
[28:00] on personnel expansions uh first. They tend to have sometimes the greater
[28:06] impact. Um as you may or may not know
[28:09] our legal department uh is awesome and
[28:14] coming being with awesome they have to
[28:16] look at a lot of things and even as it
[28:20] kind of mentioned we use more and more
[28:23] outside third party things and do more
[28:27] and more things that require uh
[28:30] agreements.
[28:31] Um, so as those things are reviewed, we
[28:35] have this continued greater need to be
[28:37] able to uh have attorneys in place to
[28:41] gain a a better understanding and so
[28:44] Steve can actually take a vacation.
[28:48] So
[28:48] >> who needs
[28:51] you to be here? [laughter]
[28:54] So, um that is one of the first um items
[28:57] um [clears throat] that we needed to
[28:59] address um with personnel. Now, I guess
[29:02] before I go too much further on, you'll
[29:04] notice on many of these um the the last
[29:07] bullet points in many of these talk
[29:09] about where does the funding come from
[29:12] in in those cases. Now, many of these
[29:15] while they exist, this exists these two
[29:17] positions in particular exist within the
[29:19] general fund. That's where they're paid
[29:21] from. Many of those costs of those
[29:25] individuals are paid actually end up
[29:28] being paid for by other funds, whether
[29:32] that be our road funds, whether that be
[29:34] any of our enterprise funds. Um, when we
[29:38] do work, particularly our attorneys,
[29:41] those agreements may come from any one
[29:43] of those particular areas. Um, and so
[29:46] obviously finance is another great
[29:48] example. We do work for all of the funds
[29:51] within the city. So our costs are spread
[29:54] throughout the city. So, so while we're
[29:56] talking about them in a very small box,
[29:59] realize there is potential, we'll refer
[30:01] to it as a revenue component that is
[30:05] spread across several other funds. It's
[30:07] not 100%. So that's why we talk about
[30:10] them here in this setting, but I thought
[30:12] I'd at least make you aware that it is
[30:14] not 100% born by general fund. Uh we
[30:19] also our urban forestry group um as we
[30:23] have more and more trees that continue
[30:25] to age and we have more and more of a
[30:27] need to continue to monitor those trees
[30:30] and you know we've had recent
[30:32] discussions about canopies and different
[30:34] things like that. um that group is
[30:37] really in need of some some help and
[30:39] some assistance especially as we
[30:41] continue to try to plant um new trees or
[30:45] uh take care of those aging trees that we have.
[30:52] Um our next one are beyond those are the
[30:55] two personnel ones that we have within
[30:57] the general fund. Um other expansions
[31:01] that uh we have uh are the for civic
[31:05] engagement. So underneath that uh we use
[31:08] a product software product called podium
[31:11] um that helps our primarily our 311
[31:14] agents but is used by other um groups as
[31:16] well. That was formally [snorts] paid
[31:19] for through um our ARPA grant money that
[31:22] we received from the federal government.
[31:24] um that money has now been exhausted and
[31:27] we still want to keep that product and
[31:30] so we now need to uh if you will figure
[31:33] out a way to help pay for that product.
[31:37] Um Ren wanted me to include the city
[31:40] council element for the youth council of
[31:41] 2000 just to make you aware that we do
[31:44] something for that group um so that uh
[31:48] we can really get that group moving. Um,
[31:52] normally that would not be something we
[31:53] might include it, but um, it's not a
[31:57] terribly large dollar amount, but
[31:59] thought it was important for you to know
[32:01] that we do care about the little the
[32:03] little things that we do as well, and
[32:05] that we try to take care of those things
[32:06] as well. careful. Our police department,
[32:10] um, you know, I can't thank the police
[32:13] department enough because every year
[32:17] they come and tell us, "Yeah, we just
[32:20] made we just found a place to pay for
[32:23] those things."
[32:25] So unfortunately the time I think has
[32:28] come where those things the things you
[32:31] see up here that we expand our budget to
[32:35] make sure that they're not having to
[32:37] take from Peter to pay Paul that they
[32:40] can do those things that they need it.
[32:43] And usually when they're taking from
[32:44] Peter to pay Paul that means they're
[32:45] delaying doing something. So, we don't
[32:49] want that to be an ongoing continuing,
[32:52] if you will, problem or issue. We want
[32:54] them to be able to get those things done
[32:56] that they need to get done. Um, and so
[32:59] that particular top item is related to
[33:02] that. um our animal services agreement
[33:05] with uh new um that takes care of all of
[33:09] our an animal control sing animals that
[33:13] we find within the city and and deal
[33:15] with um that contract and that's not
[33:18] just us obviously it's ORM and everybody
[33:20] northward the um costs for that have
[33:23] increased and and our share of that has also increased now that's not just a
[33:28] one-year this is also another one of
[33:30] those where we've been finding the funds
[33:33] to try to pay for those increases over
[33:35] the past years and it has just now come
[33:37] to time to where realistically we just
[33:40] need to raise that to um the level that
[33:43] it's currently at. And our fire folks um
[33:47] within each of the stations
[33:50] they have various things that wear out
[33:52] andor we need which might include
[33:55] fridges and ovens and beds um various
[33:58] things of that nature.
[34:00] And in the past, we've just kind of
[34:03] found a way to get those. You'll recall
[34:07] the CIP money that we transfer into our
[34:09] capital projects fund. A lot of the
[34:11] times it's, you know, the things have
[34:13] finally come to the point where we need
[34:15] to do something and we use some of that
[34:17] money. Well, these things don't go away,
[34:20] right? They're regularly needing to be
[34:23] addressed. So that those replacement
[34:25] dollars are intended to make sure that money is always available for when
[34:30] those themes are occurring and they
[34:32] occur regularly. They don't occur at the
[34:36] same time all the time. So it's it would
[34:38] be it's good to have some funds
[34:40] available to be able to address those.
[34:42] We also a EMPG grant for you don't know
[34:44] is emergency management. Uh in the past
[34:47] we've received a grant that helped pay
[34:50] for um our salaries of Heath and the
[34:54] things that he does within his division.
[34:57] Um the grant award didn't pay the whole
[34:59] thing u but that grant has gradually
[35:02] been dwindling as to the amount that is
[35:04] involved um with it. So, as part of
[35:08] being able to help support Heath and his
[35:10] continued efforts um in the emergency
[35:12] management realm, um the we would like
[35:15] to put some funds aside to in essence
[35:18] replace some of those those grant funds
[35:20] so that he has those funds available to
[35:22] do the things that he needs to do to
[35:24] make sure that we are prepared.
[35:26] Are there any questions about any of
[35:28] those expansion items at this point?
[35:32] Great.
[35:34] Now, I'm going to be throwing a lot of
[35:37] tables and numbers at you. Um, but I I I
[35:40] just want to try to focus in on a few
[35:43] different things. So, number one, the personnel costs. You might look at
[35:49] that first top line. This is so I guess
[35:52] first I should say as we talked about
[35:55] separating the uh public safety into its
[35:58] own special revenue fund that makes a
[36:01] very unique comparison
[36:04] issue for me. So what I've done is I've
[36:08] done the best that I feel like I can as
[36:11] far as putting those two things back
[36:13] together again in relation to comparing
[36:16] to where we're at this year. In future
[36:19] years, those two things will be
[36:21] separated and you'll have a, if you
[36:22] will, an apples to, totally apples to
[36:24] apples comparison. This would be more
[36:27] like oranges and mandarin pairs,
[36:30] something like that. Little
[36:31] >> cutie.
[36:31] >> Yeah.
[36:32] >> So, um, the first item though, you know,
[36:35] might draw your attention uh to that uh
[36:38] percentage increase, but I need to um
[36:41] address some of the elements that go
[36:43] into that. Number one, obviously all of
[36:46] our step people who are in the STEP
[36:48] program, those are part of that. All of
[36:51] people who are in our merit program,
[36:53] those increases are part of that and
[36:55] those are all at generally speaking at
[36:57] about a 3% increase.
[37:00] Uh there are health insurance increases
[37:03] as you are probably well aware and many
[37:05] things. Um all of those things are in
[37:08] there. the the two ind the individuals
[37:11] that we just referred to that are new,
[37:14] they're part of that increase in
[37:16] percentage as well. We also um moved an
[37:20] individual out of our self- insurance
[37:21] fund and into our uh general fund uh for
[37:27] various reasons, but that does cause
[37:30] when you're looking at our fiscal 26
[37:32] budget, that does cause a variance. Um
[37:36] but that change is also included in
[37:38] there.
[37:39] Um, we have a a whole slew of new
[37:42] firefighters that we've added in the end
[37:45] of fiscal 25. So, they would not have
[37:48] made it into our fiscal 26 budget as
[37:52] well as some uh new firefighters this
[37:54] year that we have added. All of those
[37:56] are related to our contracts with
[37:58] Vineyard and Lynden. Again, those have
[38:01] an associated revenue increase, which we
[38:04] discussed in the last work session
[38:06] associated with them, but from a
[38:09] comparison standpoint, it makes that
[38:12] percentage rise, right? Um, and then,
[38:16] you know, there's along with we've
[38:18] talked about our focus on personnel uh
[38:22] um above expansion or above doing other
[38:24] things and this this budget as we're
[38:27] preparing it has that focus in it. and
[38:30] is trying to make sure that personnel
[38:32] [clears throat] are taken care of first.
[38:35] Um, one and and then if there were been
[38:39] any few promotions that have occurred
[38:41] during the year, those elements have
[38:44] also been incorporated into that
[38:46] comparison as well.
[38:48] As part of all of these uh tables that
[38:51] we're discussing, I want to try to
[38:53] clarify that we're trying to provide you
[38:56] with more transparency than we have in
[38:59] the past. um not by necessarily. It
[39:03] wasn't designed in the past to hide
[39:05] things necessary, but as part of to be
[39:08] honest with you, our new software is
[39:11] providing us with greater and greater
[39:13] opportunities to be able to gather and
[39:16] provide us so we can provide you the
[39:20] better detail in in regards to those
[39:23] without burying you hopefully in too
[39:25] much detail that we just we get lost.
[39:28] Right? So that's what I'm trying to
[39:30] focus on here in these following uh
[39:33] elements.
[39:34] >> And then one more thing that's in that
[39:36] percent change too is when we do a set
[39:39] aside for market increases
[39:42] above and beyond merit and step
[39:45] increases that doesn't start out in the
[39:48] personnel line item. It's it's a set
[39:51] aside and then we wait in the middle of
[39:52] the year to do that analysis to see what
[39:56] the market is. Then once we know what
[40:00] that information is, then it gets put
[40:02] into the personnel.
[40:05] >> Correct. Right. And and so and as we use
[40:08] our new software, we'll continue to
[40:11] fine-tune those capabilities as to well
[40:14] this is the way we used to do it. This
[40:16] is the way we need to do it now. So that
[40:19] more and more of these comparisons
[40:21] um take into account those kind of
[40:24] things where okay that money really that
[40:27] even though we put it in this particular
[40:29] account that's really related to
[40:32] personnel. Um and I've tried to make
[40:34] some adjustments for that but I can't
[40:36] necessarily get them all. So anyway so
[40:40] thank you Fran for bringing that up. Um
[40:42] the other item on there I just wanted to
[40:43] point out, you know, not everything is
[40:46] always an increase there, uh down in
[40:49] capital outlay, sometimes we are um
[40:52] either because the needs just aren't
[40:54] there in that particular year or as we
[40:57] talked about that CIP reserve money that
[41:00] we're able to take care of some of those
[41:01] capital items as part of using those
[41:04] funds to take care of them and and you
[41:07] can see that impact uh in the GI current
[41:09] fiscal year in relation to that as
[41:12] Brandon, I don't mean to be that person,
[41:14] but you got about 15 to 20 minutes left.
[41:16] >> We're we're good. Just want to make
[41:19] sure.
[41:20] >> Yep.
[41:21] >> Um just a couple a few more items uh in
[41:24] relation to our enterprise funds. Um
[41:26] particularly wanted to note, uh if
[41:29] you'll call right in the very center,
[41:31] you'll see a negative 9.9. And anytime
[41:33] you see negative numbers, sometimes you
[41:35] might go, "Yeah, that's good because
[41:37] that means went down when we're talking
[41:38] expenditures, right?" I just want to
[41:40] point out that negative is really all
[41:44] related to two bonds that were paid off
[41:49] a 2005 series.
[41:52] If you go up just two what four lines
[41:55] above and you see the 3.4% 4%. You might
[41:58] wonder, well, how come water didn't go
[42:00] down? And that's because we had a water
[42:04] only bond that had a big payment waiting
[42:10] for those other two bonds to pay off.
[42:13] So, and it's a water only related bond.
[42:17] So, that's why you see a big decrease in
[42:20] relation to storm water, but not much of
[42:22] a decrease. In this case, it would have
[42:25] been a decrease had that water bond not
[42:29] been there, but because it made up for
[42:32] those, it's still an increase.
[42:34] Um, some other items talking about solid
[42:37] waste, you it you might see that that
[42:40] 14.4% that you see down there, however,
[42:43] we're in contract finalizing our
[42:45] contract with them. the fiscal 26 budget
[42:50] did not necessarily contemplate an
[42:53] audit, a can count audit that we
[42:56] recently had kind of right at the end
[42:58] when we were finishing that budget. So
[43:02] you actually will see some uh budget
[43:04] amendment changes to try to accommodate
[43:07] for fiscal 26, but fiscal 20 what was
[43:11] eventually agreed upon in fiscal 26 will
[43:14] actually carry forward into 27. So there
[43:17] won't necessarily be an increase in
[43:20] relation to the cost element uh for
[43:24] that. So so that's somewhat again one of
[43:27] these timing issues in relation to when
[43:29] we're looking at a past budget that was
[43:31] prepared a you know over a year plus ago
[43:34] as opposed to where we're going to be
[43:35] looking forward to moving forward.
[43:39] Um and then are are there any questions
[43:41] on that particular uh page? Obviously,
[43:45] it's a lot to digest and you'll be
[43:47] receiving the presentation and if there
[43:49] are future questions about any of the
[43:50] particular items, you're welcome to
[43:52] contact me about those.
[43:55] our internal service funds of which our
[43:57] IT department uh is part of and you can
[44:00] see the impacts uh there the second to
[44:03] near the bottom um in relation to the
[44:05] things that our IT folks just uh talked
[44:08] to you and and what those mean in
[44:09] relation to their budget um and various
[44:12] and I mentioned the self- insurance fund
[44:13] and the moving of that individual that's
[44:15] why you see a negative over in the
[44:17] personnel column for that um particular
[44:20] place uh outside of those two elements
[44:23] most of the other items are are we'll
[44:25] call just say run-of-the-mill that's
[44:27] their normal expected um increases that
[44:30] we would have
[44:35] um some and then the other funds of the
[44:37] city that that uh we have so road and
[44:40] transportation
[44:41] uh related to those taxes you can see a
[44:44] large focus uh in relation to those uh
[44:47] in the capital area um so we've been
[44:50] focusing on getting more dollars into
[44:53] that capital arena so that we can um
[44:55] obviously have continue to have the best
[44:57] roads in particularly in maybe in the
[45:00] state right Chris.
[45:02] >> Absolutely.
[45:02] >> That's what I thought.
[45:04] >> Uh you know we we've already had a
[45:05] discussion about care taxes. U part of
[45:08] that 6.7% increase is related to use of
[45:12] uh appropriating some reserves that
[45:14] we've had in the past uh to this
[45:17] particular budget. Um and then the
[45:21] redevelopment agency it's a primarily
[45:24] just related to the uh the mall
[45:28] university place uh CDA that we have
[45:30] there. Um that property tax evaluation
[45:34] has been kind of up and down. So this
[45:37] year we always tend to budget a little
[45:39] bit conservatively. So based on our
[45:42] prior year receipt I'm I'm budgeting
[45:44] conservatively again.
[45:46] um our development fees. Uh you can see
[45:49] the personnel change there. Primarily
[45:51] that has relation to uh Mr. Yman and
[45:54] when he retired some reconfiguring in
[45:57] relation to the staff that is still
[45:59] there and the changing of their duties
[46:02] and whatnot. So we don't anticipate that will continue. That was kind of
[46:06] just a one-year blip.
[46:09] Um
[46:12] and the remaining funds that we have uh
[46:15] we just to make you aware we do have a
[46:17] telecommunications fund that is related
[46:19] to Utopia. Um and and you may or may not
[46:22] be aware of we once upon a time had
[46:25] people uh they bought just like you have
[46:28] a sewer lateral. They would buy the
[46:31] fiber line between the main line in the
[46:34] street and their house. It was called a
[46:36] Q. and they would uh finance that queue.
[46:40] is financed through the city.
[46:42] They pay the city and then we forward
[46:44] those funds to Utopia and that's
[46:47] continuing with until those exhaust and
[46:50] those are getting near the end of those
[46:53] as you can tell by the amount of money
[46:54] that is related to them. Uh our impact
[46:58] fee accounts and capital projects you
[47:01] might be going wow that seems really
[47:03] small for capital projects. Keep in mind
[47:05] there's not a lot of revenue in the
[47:06] capital projects fund. So most of when
[47:09] you're thinking the big dollars,
[47:12] those are saved monies from all of those
[47:15] CIP transfers that have been coming from
[47:17] year to year. That's not new money. So
[47:20] that does not get accounted for as part
[47:22] of our budget. So uh the primary thing
[47:26] you see here are related to our cell
[47:29] tower leases. that is almost all of the
[47:32] money that is the new revenue that is in
[47:35] the capital projects fund is related to
[47:37] cell tower leases that we have and then
[47:40] I combined just for uh space sake
[47:43] foundation our uh ORM foundation and uh
[47:46] community and neighborhood services um
[47:49] we had some changes in relation to the
[47:52] uh to Gary and and uh what he his pay
[47:56] and what he does for the city in
[47:58] relation to being and that's covered
[48:00] through our our uh HUD um award grant
[48:04] award.
[48:06] Um but I wanted you to note as you can
[48:09] see on the far right that HUD money,
[48:12] that grant is continuing to decrease
[48:15] year after year after year. Um and so
[48:19] this year is no exception. It is
[48:21] continuing to decline.
[48:23] >> Um and then you say Gary, you mean Gary
[48:26] Leoo?
[48:27] >> Yes. Dr. Gary McInn
[48:29] enforcement neighborhood improvement.
[48:31] >> Correct.
[48:32] >> Little Gary we call it [laughter]
[48:36] 7 foot little Gary.
[48:39] >> That's correct. Uh and then our senior
[48:41] citizens fund which to be honest as you
[48:43] can tell exactly the same as the year
[48:45] before. Um they they don't vary a whole
[48:48] lot so tend their budget tends to not
[48:51] vary very much.
[48:53] kind of the to get through the kind of
[48:55] the end items here uh personal
[48:58] expansions which um Sarah alluded to uh
[49:02] in here and one of the items she she
[49:05] didn't have in there is uh in relation
[49:08] to our privacy area. We're intending to
[49:10] have a hire an intern to help us get
[49:13] through those uh those privacy elements
[49:17] uh for for uh I believe it's with Steve
[49:19] if I remember correctly. Um, and so
[49:22] those pieces uh are very important for
[49:25] our IT. Um, and I can't stress enough
[49:29] from a finance perspective how important
[49:33] um, our IT folks are, particularly our
[49:35] programmers in relation to the how our
[49:37] finance functions throughout the city um
[49:40] because it would be very very difficult
[49:43] without them, almost impossible to to be
[49:47] able to do that. So, and
[49:51] um some of the expansions which Carlo
[49:53] already has kind of outlined. Um so I'm
[49:55] not going to necessarily repeat those,
[49:57] but you can see the dollar impact in
[49:59] relation to the the items that we have
[50:01] there and and what that means as far as
[50:05] those individual elements are concerned.
[50:08] And last but not least, um within our
[50:11] transportation fund, those
[50:13] transportation funds, we have set aside
[50:15] dollars in relation to the trail head
[50:18] that's at the lower cemeter that would
[50:19] be at the lower cemetery. Uh we've also
[50:22] added some funds in relation to our
[50:24] solid waste fund uh in relation to tree
[50:27] pruning replacement and planting um in
[50:31] support the my hometown initiatives. And
[50:33] then the last item in our self-
[50:35] insurance fund, we've set aside dollars
[50:38] um in relation to event fencing. It's we
[50:40] refer to a sinking fund as sinking funds
[50:43] are we save some dollars each year
[50:46] similar to how we built this building
[50:48] and eventually we have enough money to
[50:51] be able to get enough of the thing that
[50:53] we're looking at to be able to get it
[50:55] and that it can be something meaning you
[50:57] know actually meaningful instead of just
[50:59] buying one barricade at a time which may
[51:01] or may not do us any good. So anyway
[51:04] that's what I have. Are there any
[51:07] questions? question. You go back just
[51:09] one slide. Is that the only money that
[51:12] the city's providing partnering with my
[51:14] hometown or are there other
[51:16] >> No, there are other funds. These are in
[51:18] addition to the expansion.
[51:20] >> Yes. Well, we have all what we normally
[51:23] set aside.
[51:26] » I can just also emphasize it fund. Just
[51:30] keep in mind that we say it fund but it
[51:32] benefits every department, every fund
[51:35] throughout the whole city.
[51:37] Yeah. And and I should have I should
[51:39] have mentioned that obviously all of our
[51:40] internal service funds are allocated out
[51:44] to um other funds. Some of the general
[51:47] fund, some enterprise funds, some uh in
[51:50] other areas, but so they're just a way
[51:53] to accumulate those costs. So we know
[51:56] what does it for instance, what does
[51:58] facilities maintenance, what does it
[51:59] cost us in total um before it's actually
[52:02] sent out and charged to all of these
[52:04] other funds.
[52:06] Okay. Right.
[52:07] >> Just to make sure. So, next week we're
[52:10] having another work session, work
[52:11] session only on budget. Then the week
[52:14] after that is a regular council meeting
[52:16] and you'll pres presenting the tenative
[52:19] budget.
[52:20] >> Yeah. Next week will be our fleet.
[52:23] >> Okay.
[52:23] >> And our capital improvement project
[52:26] items.
[52:27] >> So big we're talking big dollars.
[52:29] >> Okay. Is the tenant budget, if you could
[52:30] remind me, is that a public hearing? Um
[52:33] it's it's been a public hearing in the
[52:36] past. Well, I have we have to have a I
[52:39] have to have a discussion um based upon
[52:42] these new law changes whether you still
[52:45] need it to be or not.
[52:47] >> Okay. I just was wondering if it had to
[52:48] be an official public.
[52:51] >> And and right now, to be honest, I'm I'm
[52:53] going to try to convince Steve it does
[52:55] not need to be any longer.
[52:57] >> Okay.
[52:58] >> Anyway.
[52:59] >> All right. Thank you. You ate all the
[53:02] work all everyone all the departments
[53:04] are done and Brandon you're the say the
[53:06] cat wrangler say cats but
[53:11] friend with his cat. All right.
[53:16] Thank you.
[53:18] Where is Jake?
[53:20] >> There you are.
[53:21] >> He's snuck in.
[53:22] >> Walking to the front.
[53:24] >> All right. Our
[53:26] next item is a presentation on
[53:29] short-term rentals. And before we get
[53:32] started, I visit just want to let the
[53:33] rest of council know that I visited with
[53:35] Jake and we discussed
[53:39] kind of the process of this meeting and
[53:40] what what our hopes are
[53:44] for
[53:45] when we conclude this work session that
[53:48] Jake has a timeline. he'd like to get
[53:50] certain pieces of information from us
[53:51] and I would I want to encourage you if
[53:53] you do have questions of course to ask
[53:55] them but u he has certain things that he
[53:58] would like to cover and and Jake I'm
[54:01] going to speak for you too because we
[54:03] talked about what our what our hopes and
[54:05] dreams are for this meeting when this
[54:07] meeting ends our hopes are that we will
[54:11] have an ordinance or Jake will have
[54:13] enough direction to be able to present
[54:15] an ordinance to us for formal
[54:18] consideration ation at our May 12th
[54:20] meeting.
[54:22] So that that's the hope that I that we
[54:25] have
[54:27] >> no like we would have that I think the
[54:30] discussion that we're having today would
[54:33] feed into that and I think maybe we can
[54:35] make some decisions not decisions
[54:37] because we can't make formal decisions
[54:38] here but give direction and have the
[54:40] discussion today. I would like to see uh
[54:43] it on the agenda to be adopted on the
[54:45] 12th. But if the council feels if we
[54:46] don't depending on how far we get or
[54:48] whatever, we can discuss that and if we
[54:50] need to move it to the 26th, we can do
[54:52] that as well. But that's that's what I
[54:54] hope. But let's just see what Jake hopes
[54:58] as we've talked. But let's just
[55:00] >> I kind of like to let things settle for
[55:02] a little bit. So I was hoping that we'd
[55:03] have one more meeting, but let's see how
[55:05] this goes.
[55:05] >> Yeah. Let's see how it goes.
[55:07] >> I'm open to that.
[55:08] >> Okay.
[55:10] >> Yeah. So the mayor turn over to you.
[55:12] >> Thank you. Yeah. Uh you you said it
[55:14] exactly. The purpose here is to
[55:16] basically see where we have directional
[55:18] consensus as a council and and where the council feels comfortable
[55:23] moving forward. Um this isn't about
[55:26] committing anybody to any one particular
[55:28] sentence that will then become code or
[55:30] taking any formal opinions or votes or
[55:33] anything like that, but rather where is
[55:35] there consensus? where can we build upon
[55:37] and then what direction do we have so we
[55:39] can have a working draft to present to
[55:42] the council in coming meetings.
[55:45] Um so kind of the framework for the
[55:47] discussion um is I I view this as three
[55:51] separate mini discussions and discussion
[55:54] one I think there's going to be a lot of
[55:55] consensus already. What are the guiding
[55:57] principles? What are our values? Um I
[56:00] anticipate that that discussion can be
[56:02] accomplished in an area about 5 to 10
[56:04] minutes. Um discussion two is is really
[56:09] based on those values and principles.
[56:10] I've I've prepared three potential
[56:12] different paths forward. Um, and I will
[56:15] go over each of those different paths
[56:17] and I think that that will be a
[56:19] foundational discussion really on how
[56:21] the council moves forward with this. I
[56:24] anticipate that that discussion may take
[56:27] much more time, 30 to 40 minutes. Um,
[56:30] and then discussion three, we get a
[56:32] little bit more into the weeds. What are
[56:34] the actual implementations? What are the
[56:36] things we want to do? If you were to
[56:38] choose option two or option three, what
[56:41] are the concerns that are out there?
[56:42] What are the tools we can use to
[56:43] mitigate some of those concerns and and
[56:46] balance the needs of neighborhoods and
[56:48] STR operators? Before you go on, I just
[56:52] want to just so those who are online
[56:54] listening, just so you as information
[56:57] that Jake and I since we've last
[56:59] discussed this have met with each
[57:01] council member individually and and
[57:04] we've discussed this to get ideas and so
[57:07] this isn't the first time that that
[57:10] we've discussed this or I have or Jake
[57:13] and I have been working on this and we
[57:14] discussed I appreciate council members
[57:16] taking the time to to meet and to
[57:20] discuss in just one-on-one meetings or
[57:22] one and two meet ones to twos to just
[57:25] get some ideas of what direction. So
[57:27] anyway, sorry here I tell everyone to
[57:30] you know I digress us bring me back
[57:33] apologize.
[57:33] >> No, no problem. Um, I added this quote
[57:36] in the bottom of this and I and I like
[57:37] it and I would hope that it helps kind
[57:39] of guide is um, part of the word
[57:41] question is the word quest. And really
[57:44] that's kind of what the last maybe three
[57:46] years of my life has been with this
[57:48] project. Bit of a quest sometimes felt
[57:51] like tilting at windmills but
[57:52] nonetheless we are on a quest. Um, we're
[57:56] all on the same team. I think we're all
[57:57] trying to make ORM a better place, a
[57:59] better place for everybody to live, to
[58:01] work, recreate, etc. Um, so again,
[58:05] please please chime in. The only way I
[58:07] know where there is consensus is if I'm
[58:09] hearing opinions and and seeing where
[58:11] people are aligned.
[58:14] Um,
[58:17] so as we did these many meetings and as
[58:19] we've talked about it, things I've heard
[58:21] I've kind of categorized into four
[58:23] different guiding principles and
[58:25] priorities. Number one is really how do
[58:27] we maintain neighborhood character and
[58:29] how do we make sure our neighborhoods
[58:31] are stable? How do we ensure for
[58:32] neighborhood stability? Second is how do
[58:35] you promote the ordinance that balances
[58:37] fairness between, you know, property
[58:40] rights owners and as well as neighbors?
[58:43] And also, how do you make sure that
[58:45] we're following what the, you know, the
[58:47] consent of the public is? Even though
[58:49] some of that might be a silent majority
[58:51] that really isn't voicing their opinions
[58:52] at at personal appearances, uh they may
[58:56] be doing it through emails, they may not
[58:57] even really be engaged much on this
[59:00] topic. Uh, one of the things I've seen
[59:02] over the last three years is um,
[59:04] regardless of the work sessions,
[59:06] regardless of the the number of people
[59:07] that come out, it seems like every now
[59:09] and then we'll get the person that says,
[59:11] "I didn't even know this was something that's been on the city
[59:13] council's agenda." And so really, how do
[59:16] you know the public consent when
[59:19] you don't really know what, you know,
[59:21] the silent majority really is wanting
[59:23] out there? Uh, next is the legal and
[59:25] operational viability of any ordinance.
[59:28] It has to be defensible. actually has to
[59:29] be enforceable. It can't be overly
[59:32] complex because it needs to be
[59:33] implemented in some way that's
[59:34] meaningful. And then four is just
[59:37] holistically how do we ensure the public
[59:39] health, welfare, and safety of our
[59:41] community.
[59:44] Um, okay, before I move on, because this
[59:47] is kind of that that guiding principle.
[59:49] So, if I were to ask each of the council
[59:51] members, if you were to look back 5
[59:53] years from now after you've adopted an
[59:56] ordinance and that ordinance was a
[59:58] success, what would the neighborhoods of
[1:00:00] ORM look like to you?
[1:00:04] I'm going to pose that question and then
[1:00:05] it'll be awkward silence like I'm
[1:00:06] teaching Sunday school.
[1:00:10] » I think they would look a lot like they
[1:00:12] look now and maybe a little stronger.
[1:00:16] >> Okay. stronger and I picture
[1:00:20] neighborhoods where
[1:00:23] people have the opportunity to to live
[1:00:26] there permanently over long term
[1:00:31] » and just based on emails that we've
[1:00:33] received and things like that place
[1:00:35] neighborhoods where um to the mayor's
[1:00:37] point they're long-term because they're
[1:00:40] able to own a home and they're they also
[1:00:43] feel comfortable enough with the
[1:00:44] neighborhood the their neighbors
[1:00:47] and having those connections that the
[1:00:50] children are playing in the street
[1:00:51] together. There's a that sense of safety
[1:00:55] and um
[1:00:58] definitely that community connection I
[1:01:00] think is important.
[1:01:01] >> Okay. As as you've each vocalized kind
[1:01:05] of your your vision if if there was an
[1:01:06] ordinance in five years from now, do
[1:01:08] these principles and priorities align
[1:01:11] with that vision or is there something
[1:01:13] that's missing from this slide?
[1:01:17] I would push back on the word fairness
[1:01:19] just a little bit because we're in this
[1:01:22] position of having to make an ordinance
[1:01:23] because it's already not fair. We don't
[1:01:26] we're not in the business of making
[1:01:28] ordinances just to
[1:01:30] make ordinances because something's not
[1:01:33] going right already that they're in the
[1:01:35] position of having to address it. So
[1:01:36] there's already this
[1:01:38] level of unfairness around short-term
[1:01:40] rentals that exists.
[1:01:43] And so I guess balanced fairness maybe
[1:01:45] makes sense a little bit, but it's
[1:01:47] already inherently unfair.
[1:01:50] >> And Crystal, I think we could also frame
[1:01:51] that also maybe a little bit differently
[1:01:53] and say, you know, how do you explain
[1:01:57] maybe a prohibition in a way that shows
[1:01:59] the equity between maintaining
[1:02:01] neighborhood character and what our our
[1:02:03] standards have been in the past in our
[1:02:05] land use code. So I mean fairness can be
[1:02:09] framed and defined different ways.
[1:02:12] Also under that one I those things that
[1:02:15] you've listed democratic equitable
[1:02:16] reflect a shared vision. So for me one
[1:02:19] of mine is principled. I try to make a
[1:02:22] principal decision that doesn't um that
[1:02:26] if that takes into account the future of
[1:02:28] one not just the many voices I'm hearing
[1:02:31] now you know something that is possibly
[1:02:35] not popular
[1:02:37] >> right it's for what the vision vision
[1:02:41] >> right of the future so of course that's
[1:02:44] going to maybe be a little different
[1:02:45] based on who you're talking to but
[1:02:48] um I think it if princip is just a word
[1:02:51] I really like.
[1:02:52] >> Would you mind asking the question for
[1:02:53] councelor Kilp? You had to step out for
[1:02:55] a moment.
[1:02:55] >> Sorry. Yeah. So, the question I
[1:02:58] >> question I asked to the group was if you
[1:03:00] were to look back 5 years from now um at
[1:03:03] having passed an ordinance that deals
[1:03:04] with short-term rentals, whether it's a prohibition or regulation of some
[1:03:09] type. Um and that ordinance was a
[1:03:11] success. What do Orum neighborhoods look
[1:03:14] like to you to show that that was a
[1:03:16] success?
[1:03:18] >> You want me to answer?
[1:03:19] >> Yeah.
[1:03:21] um more uh familyfriendly,
[1:03:25] more um
[1:03:29] uh considering the the single family
[1:03:33] home rather than putting basically
[1:03:36] hotels in the middle of city of
[1:03:38] residential areas.
[1:03:40] >> So that's kind of um
[1:03:44] the general thought of looking back. We
[1:03:46] wouldn't want to be thinking that our
[1:03:48] neighborhoods are now geographical hotel
[1:03:51] uh coming to stay locations, but they're
[1:03:54] family lo family neighborhoods that kids
[1:03:56] can grow up and go out on the street and
[1:03:58] play and have fun and and and uh yet be
[1:04:02] aware of those that have successfully
[1:04:06] managed this thing called short-term.
[1:04:09] and their neighbors have been
[1:04:11] supportive because they've always been
[1:04:13] quiet and successful and friendly and
[1:04:16] all those other things. So, they deal
[1:04:18] very fine balance.
[1:04:21] And as you Oh, Jeff, can I I agree with
[1:04:24] everything that's been said. Um, if I
[1:04:26] could just add one thing, it would be
[1:04:29] neighborliness.
[1:04:31] I feel like that's something we lost uh
[1:04:34] during co we all kind of turned inward
[1:04:39] and it feels like neighborhoods aren't
[1:04:41] quite as neighborly as they have been in
[1:04:44] the past and you know so you know as
[1:04:48] we're looking at wishes I I would love
[1:04:50] to go back to a time where we're a
[1:04:53] little more you know we're out in the
[1:04:54] street talking more where they said kids
[1:04:58] are playing in the street riding their
[1:04:59] bikes shadows and so
[1:05:03] I I think that's a valuable part of any
[1:05:06] community is that togetherness.
[1:05:09] >> And I would like to add I think I agree
[1:05:10] with everything that's been said as
[1:05:11] well. And I think I would also like to
[1:05:13] add that I think it would be great if we
[1:05:15] could help families find ways to use
[1:05:17] their properties in ways that suit them
[1:05:19] and their goals. Whatever that may be,
[1:05:21] whether that's staying in their home or
[1:05:22] whether that's, you know, being
[1:05:23] neighborly, whatever it is, let's help
[1:05:25] families use their assets in a way that
[1:05:27] makes sense to them.
[1:05:30] So, now that I again everybody's here,
[1:05:32] let me ask
[1:05:32] >> Quinn does Quinn have anything I can
[1:05:34] say?
[1:05:35] >> Yeah. Thank you, mayor, and thank
[1:05:36] thanks, Jake. Um, I I'll just add that,
[1:05:39] you know, the things you put on the
[1:05:40] slide, I think,
[1:05:42] >> all make good sense to me as well. Um,
[1:05:45] we want to make sure that residents feel
[1:05:47] like um they're comfortable in their
[1:05:50] neighborhoods. Uh, that short-term
[1:05:52] rentals, right, would be low density in
[1:05:55] those neighborhoods if we have them. Um
[1:05:57] I also it's really important to me that
[1:06:01] um those that have a high stake in this
[1:06:03] decision have a seat at the table and
[1:06:05] are able to meaningfully uh resolve any
[1:06:09] concerns that people might have. Um and
[1:06:13] um that you know h housing affordability
[1:06:16] is important to me and and the ability
[1:06:19] uh of those who own homes or are paying
[1:06:21] mortgages to supplement their income in
[1:06:23] ways that that don't detract from the
[1:06:25] quality of the neighborhood is important
[1:06:26] to me.
[1:06:29] And then and then to the group um again
[1:06:32] based off those visions is there
[1:06:34] anything that is missing as a guiding
[1:06:36] principle or a priority as a class that
[1:06:38] should that should be mentioned here?
[1:06:45] Okay, if there's no objections, I'm
[1:06:47] going to move forward to the next slide.
[1:06:52] So, as I indicated, um, based on our our
[1:06:55] many meetings and based on one-on-one
[1:06:58] conversations with council members and based on also meeting with STR
[1:07:03] operators and and neighborhoods, trying
[1:07:06] to see what possible paths there are. Um
[1:07:11] really I'm presenting three different
[1:07:14] potential options forward. Option one um
[1:07:18] and we can talk about these individually
[1:07:20] or we can talk about them collectively
[1:07:22] as a as a group. But option one high
[1:07:25] level is um that we just clarify the
[1:07:28] prohibition that's already in our land
[1:07:30] use code. Um that transate lodging is is
[1:07:34] not allowed in any residential zone. Um,
[1:07:38] and I'll just flip over to that slide
[1:07:40] real quick as well. Um, basically, um,
[1:07:45] what we would be doing is we would be
[1:07:47] adding language that makes it a lot
[1:07:49] clearer to all of those, um, that would
[1:07:52] have a stake as to what Worm stance is
[1:07:55] with short-term rentals. And that would
[1:07:58] be that short-term rentals clearly fall
[1:08:00] under the definition of transient
[1:08:01] lodging and that transient lodging is
[1:08:03] not allowed in any residential zone. Um,
[1:08:07] as I as I looked at comparable cities,
[1:08:10] uh, there had been previously three
[1:08:12] cities that had this type of language.
[1:08:15] Uh, West Jordan, Mapleton, and Alpine.
[1:08:18] However, West Jordan recently passed um,
[1:08:21] an ordinance that does allow short-term
[1:08:23] rental licensing, and they did so within
[1:08:25] the last year. And so, that's a
[1:08:27] relatively new development. Um, and then
[1:08:31] as you can see on the side, the uh the
[1:08:33] other cities that I list there find
[1:08:35] themselves in the same situation that
[1:08:36] ORM is currently. Um, they they for all
[1:08:39] intents and purposes have a ban or a
[1:08:41] prohibition, but it is it's buried in
[1:08:44] their land use code. It's not clear and
[1:08:46] definitive.
[1:08:49] >> I have a question.
[1:08:50] >> Yes.
[1:08:50] >> Those cities I mean I look at Vineyard
[1:08:52] and I think if I wanted to go on, you
[1:08:53] know, or one of those sites today,
[1:08:55] there's no way I would buy
[1:08:56] >> just looking up an STR. I mean, you're
[1:08:58] looking right now. So that so I'm sure
[1:08:59] they exist. So maybe the code is clear
[1:09:02] but the they any sense of like how many
[1:09:04] they're doing or how often they exist or
[1:09:06] >> Well I I haven't looked specifically to
[1:09:08] see how many are listed in vineyard. Um
[1:09:10] one thing I do know is because again in
[1:09:12] their land use code is particular um one
[1:09:15] of the reasons that our numbers seem
[1:09:16] somewhat inflated when we scrape data to
[1:09:18] find out how many is the STR operators
[1:09:21] in vineyard are using ORM addresses to
[1:09:24] list their VRBs.
[1:09:27] I have a question and a comment. Just a
[1:09:28] first a comment. I just want to clarify
[1:09:30] that when I talked to how Jake and I
[1:09:32] met. Um, council member of Kilpac was out of town and I didn't have a
[1:09:36] chance. He's the only one I have we
[1:09:37] didn't have a chance to meet one-on-one
[1:09:39] with. I just want to clarify that.
[1:09:40] Second, I want to have a question on
[1:09:41] this. Is this is 22 is that our zoning
[1:09:44] ordinance or is that is this or would
[1:09:46] this be in the license? Where would this
[1:09:48] reside?
[1:09:49] >> So, if we were to take the the the path
[1:09:51] forward that we clarify the ban, it
[1:09:54] would be in our zoning code.
[1:09:55] >> Okay. Okay. So, it be in the zoning
[1:09:56] ordinance. Okay. Thank you.
[1:09:58] >> Correct.
[1:09:59] >> It's not currently.
[1:10:00] >> Um, it is currently
[1:10:01] >> read in the back.
[1:10:02] >> What it what it says is under 2219. It
[1:10:06] says any and you know, Steve, if you
[1:10:09] want to help me out, but basically says
[1:10:11] uh to have a permitted land use, you
[1:10:13] have to refer to our appendix A, which
[1:10:15] is our land use table, to see if that
[1:10:16] use is permitted. And then it breaks
[1:10:18] down every zone and it says by SLU code
[1:10:21] or or land use code what is permitted in
[1:10:24] that zone. and transient lodging is a
[1:10:27] non-p permitted use in any residential
[1:10:29] zone. So, it's several steps to find
[1:10:33] that answer, but yes, it's currently in
[1:10:35] our code. What I'd be looking to do is
[1:10:36] to move it forward and make it clear.
[1:10:40] >> Can I make a comment?
[1:10:41] >> Yes.
[1:10:42] >> So, a couple of those cities, this last
[1:10:44] week, we were at our League of Cities
[1:10:46] and Towns convention with other city.
[1:10:48] couple of those cities I asked there
[1:10:51] that question, you know, I've got you
[1:10:54] down on the list that you don't allow
[1:10:56] them. What are your thoughts? And um one
[1:11:00] in particular, Saratoga was um you know,
[1:11:03] right now we're interested in housing
[1:11:05] people and not being hotels in our city.
[1:11:09] So, we're comfortable where we are. So,
[1:11:11] I would kind of um I mean, there was
[1:11:15] another one very similar statement. Um,
[1:11:20] so I I just say that to clarify because
[1:11:22] it cuz I understand that Airbnb, VBO,
[1:11:26] there's a lot of pressure right now on
[1:11:28] cities to allow them. There is a
[1:11:30] political movement to do that. So, it
[1:11:34] was interesting to hear that particular
[1:11:37] mayor say, "No, we're not we're not, you
[1:11:40] know, we're not interested in that."
[1:11:44] >> Okay. Going back now to option two just
[1:11:47] to kind of give the high level. Option
[1:11:50] two is kind of the first entry into
[1:11:54] short-term rental regulation and that is
[1:11:56] that you only allow owner occupied
[1:12:00] short-term rentals uh to operate within
[1:12:03] the city.
[1:12:04] Um, basically we would have and we can
[1:12:08] again I I'll move forward to that slide
[1:12:10] so you can kind of see the overview of
[1:12:12] this is um if that was the option we'd
[1:12:15] want to have a more in-depth
[1:12:17] conversation of how do we define owner
[1:12:19] occupied currently as as as I've played
[1:12:23] around with the language and draft and
[1:12:26] um is it would be anybody with a 50%
[1:12:29] ownership interest in the property
[1:12:31] itself. Um, we would have limitations
[1:12:34] about corporate entities being able to
[1:12:37] qualify as owner occupied. Um, to be a
[1:12:40] owner occupied, you'd have to reside at
[1:12:43] that residence. You would have to be
[1:12:44] your primary resident, which means you
[1:12:46] reside there at least 183 days a year.
[1:12:50] Um and this is one of the areas that we
[1:12:53] could have a a further discussion is
[1:12:55] under really basic understanding of
[1:12:59] owner occupied is that the owner resides
[1:13:01] in the primary residence portion of the
[1:13:04] home. So if you wanted to just that
[1:13:08] where they could live in perhaps maybe
[1:13:09] the ADU portion and rent out the
[1:13:11] primary, we would just need to make some
[1:13:13] corrections or changes to our code. Uh
[1:13:16] the second part is that uh owner
[1:13:17] occupied uh STRs would would go through
[1:13:20] a licensing process where they'd have to provide proof of
[1:13:23] ownership. Uh they'd have to pri provide
[1:13:26] proof of occupancy. Um they'd have to
[1:13:29] show that the the property doesn't
[1:13:30] conflict with any sort of deed
[1:13:31] restrictions or any other sort of
[1:13:34] covenant protections. Um would want them
[1:13:37] to go through an STR management course
[1:13:40] trying to identify that currently. Maybe
[1:13:42] it's a hospitality course through UVU.
[1:13:45] Um, they have to submit a parking plan.
[1:13:48] They'd have to show that they're insured
[1:13:50] uh for that type of operation. They
[1:13:53] would be subject to inspections from our
[1:13:55] building department and our fire
[1:13:56] department to ensure that that dwelling
[1:13:58] portion that's going to be rented is
[1:14:00] safe and and habitable and that they pay
[1:14:03] all respective fees to the city.
[1:14:06] So, if it's a separate like a separate
[1:14:09] apartment or whatever unit, would they
[1:14:11] need does this require them to get an
[1:14:14] accessory dwelling unit license and
[1:14:16] bring that bring that accessory dwelling
[1:14:18] up to code?
[1:14:21] >> So, that could be an option and and
[1:14:23] that's really where I have that in in
[1:14:25] discussion three is as [clears throat]
[1:14:26] as we as where I can see where there's
[1:14:28] consensus. If if the desire was to move
[1:14:31] forward with an owner occupied only, uh
[1:14:33] we could get a little bit further into
[1:14:34] the weeds with do we require them to
[1:14:37] have an accessory apartment permit prior
[1:14:39] to obtaining short-term rental license.
[1:14:43] Um these licenses would be annual
[1:14:45] licenses. Uh there would be no vested
[1:14:47] rights. It would not be a land use. This
[1:14:49] would be found under our business
[1:14:51] licensing code.
[1:14:52] >> Can I just back up? So parking plan just
[1:14:56] do we have a standard?
[1:14:57] >> Yes. And again that will be in
[1:14:59] discussion three is what is that
[1:15:01] standard? Where does this council feel
[1:15:03] comfortable with that?
[1:15:06] >> Um
[1:15:07] >> so just so so I understand your
[1:15:09] presentation you're going to go through
[1:15:11] these points.
[1:15:12] >> Yes.
[1:15:14] Um
[1:15:16] there would be no vested rights um in in
[1:15:19] the license because it is a
[1:15:20] discretionary license. uh that license
[1:15:23] would be good for a year uh through the
[1:15:25] through that year or until the home is
[1:15:27] sold. Uh these licenses are not
[1:15:29] transferable.
[1:15:30] Um and if the council at any future date
[1:15:33] decided they wanted to amend or
[1:15:35] discontinue the program because there is
[1:15:37] no vested right, the council would be
[1:15:38] free to act and make those changes. Um
[1:15:42] and then we get into the regulation
[1:15:44] portion of that regulation and
[1:15:46] enforcement is can we be focusing on
[1:15:48] these would be for overnight
[1:15:50] accommodation only. Um there would be
[1:15:52] requirements for uh maintenance
[1:15:54] standards of the property to comply with
[1:15:55] our our already existent existing
[1:15:58] residential maintenance uh requirements.
[1:16:01] A 247 uh 247 hour response even if they
[1:16:05] the owner has gone on vacation, they
[1:16:07] would need to have somebody available to
[1:16:08] respond in case there is a nuisance uh
[1:16:11] at the home. There would be quiet hours.
[1:16:13] Uh lighting requirements as far as
[1:16:15] screening and shielding to make sure
[1:16:17] there is no light transpass onto
[1:16:20] neighboring properties. Noticing
[1:16:22] requirements meaning that they would
[1:16:23] have to provide notice to the neighbors
[1:16:25] by putting a placard as to who that
[1:16:27] 24hour 7 days a week response person is
[1:16:30] as well as if law enforcements get
[1:16:32] called they know who to contact. Um and
[1:16:34] that the tenants know of what the
[1:16:36] expectations are as well. Um, there
[1:16:39] would be some uh limitations on
[1:16:41] advertising. They'd have to list their
[1:16:43] short-term rental license number. They'd
[1:16:46] have to uh only be able to to advertise
[1:16:49] for what they actually can, you know,
[1:16:52] use that property for. So, again,
[1:16:54] accommodations only. You can't advertise
[1:16:56] it as this is a great place to hold a
[1:16:58] corporate event. This is a great uh
[1:17:00] wedding venue. Um, that's not for
[1:17:02] overnight accommodations. So, they
[1:17:04] couldn't advertise for that. And then
[1:17:06] again, um, uh, payment of any, uh,
[1:17:09] transient room tax, all fees, and then
[1:17:13] if there's, um, issues with enforcement,
[1:17:15] the obtain three violations in any
[1:17:18] 12-month period, uh, the city could
[1:17:20] revoke or suspend that short-term rental
[1:17:23] license, and then prohibit them from
[1:17:25] obtaining one in the future if the city
[1:17:27] so chose.
[1:17:29] So, that's again the 5,000 ft view of
[1:17:32] option two.
[1:17:34] Option three
[1:17:36] is basically the next step and that
[1:17:40] would be you keep all the same terms of
[1:17:42] option of option two the owner occupied
[1:17:45] but then you introduce a second tier and
[1:17:48] that second tier would be the nonowner
[1:17:50] occupied STR
[1:17:53] and these uh would have all of the same
[1:17:55] regulations imposed upon them except for
[1:17:58] they would have three potentially
[1:18:00] additional regulations and one would be
[1:18:03] a density requirement and I' I've
[1:18:06] provided here two different density
[1:18:09] um mitigations. One is you do it a
[1:18:12] thousand feet or whatever the distance
[1:18:14] the council feels as the appropriate
[1:18:16] distance and you do it as the crow flies
[1:18:18] between property line to property line.
[1:18:20] That way you don't end up with three or
[1:18:22] four STRs clustered right in the same um
[1:18:25] same street, same culde-sac and so a
[1:18:28] neighbor doesn't have a whole bunch of
[1:18:30] vacant STRs around them. So, are we
[1:18:32] talking radius or just linear?
[1:18:35] >> It would be radius. You would go from
[1:18:37] property line to property line in a
[1:18:38] radial corner of the property line.
[1:18:41] >> From any property line to any property,
[1:18:45] >> the other option is that you look at it
[1:18:47] through our neighborhood. Um, we already
[1:18:50] have divided ORM into several
[1:18:52] neighborhoods. Um, you would start with
[1:18:54] a base of each neighborhood would have
[1:18:58] uh the ability to have two nonowner
[1:19:01] occupied STR uh licenses issued for that
[1:19:05] neighborhood and then you would add one
[1:19:07] non-owner occupied STR per 100 single
[1:19:10] family detached dwellings.
[1:19:13] So that could increase. Um, as you
[1:19:16] notice in there though, there is no
[1:19:17] spacing requirement. So you could end up
[1:19:20] with clustering.
[1:19:23] The uh second would be a safe pedestrian
[1:19:28] restriction and that is as you look at
[1:19:30] um
[1:19:32] uh
[1:19:34] what has ORM school district decided its
[1:19:36] name is I don't know
[1:19:39] >> so as temponogus is required to um do a
[1:19:44] safe walking plan for each elementary
[1:19:46] and junior high u we'd want to ensure
[1:19:48] that if there's a non-owner occupied STR
[1:19:51] um that they're not in that safe
[1:19:53] pedestrian zone and so we would restrict
[1:19:56] them,000 ft or what again whatever the
[1:20:00] council feels comfortable based on that
[1:20:02] pedestrian travel from this the
[1:20:04] elementary or the junior.
[1:20:06] >> So would that be from like crosswalks
[1:20:11] fors?
[1:20:12] >> Yep.
[1:20:13] So you would go from the the nearest
[1:20:15] entrance of the school, you would do it
[1:20:16] as a pedestrian travel and if it's in
[1:20:18] within a thousand feet of that
[1:20:19] pedestrian travel
[1:20:22] prohibiting it.
[1:20:25] The third would be potentially a
[1:20:26] numerical cap and that numerical cap is
[1:20:29] again would be set on based on a number
[1:20:32] that the council feels comfortable with.
[1:20:34] Uh, as a placeholder, I've put up 100
[1:20:38] non occupied STR licenses would be
[1:20:41] eligible throughout the city. Um, these
[1:20:45] would be the over and above requirements
[1:20:48] on
[1:20:51] non-owner occupied STRs.
[1:20:54] with those 5,000 foot view of each of
[1:20:59] these options
[1:21:02] kind of want to open it up to a
[1:21:03] discussion amongst the council and see
[1:21:05] where there's alignment or comfort with
[1:21:09] a different approach.
[1:21:11] Um,
[1:21:12] >> I have a question back on the previous
[1:21:14] slide. Number of non-owner occupied.
[1:21:18] >> I know I've asked this before,
[1:21:22] so please forgive my
[1:21:25] um, do we know how many non-owner
[1:21:29] occupied STRs there are in ORM?
[1:21:32] >> I do not have any reliable number that I
[1:21:35] can give you. Okay,
[1:21:36] >> I can tell you and and the reason I
[1:21:38] don't have a reliable number is ORM has
[1:21:40] never tracked this. We've never had an
[1:21:42] STR license program. So, we've never ask
[1:21:45] for owner occupied versus non-owner
[1:21:47] occupied. Um, if you go out to the
[1:21:50] internet and look at different websites,
[1:21:52] there are different met there are
[1:21:54] different numbers that you can find. Um,
[1:21:57] air what does it say? It's air ROI is a
[1:22:01] website that show gives a whole bunch of
[1:22:03] different market analytics for STRs.
[1:22:07] They anticipate that 80% of ORM's STR
[1:22:11] U market is nonowner occupied.
[1:22:15] >> 80
[1:22:16] >> 80% is what air error ROI says. Is that
[1:22:20] a valid number? I don't know.
[1:22:22] >> And that's based on uh income records.
[1:22:27] That's based I don't know how they've or
[1:22:30] derived at that number. They're they're
[1:22:32] looking at ads and they're saying if
[1:22:34] it's for a whole home or whole town home
[1:22:37] or whole apartment we believe 80% of
[1:22:40] those are are nonowner occupied
[1:22:44] commercial. They're commercial
[1:22:46] >> full commercialities.
[1:22:47] >> Yeah. If you take the number which we
[1:22:49] believe is to be somewhat accurate in
[1:22:51] the area of 230 to 250
[1:22:54] STRs operating in the city, that puts
[1:22:57] the number around 160 to 180. Again, I
[1:23:01] can't say that that's reliable. I'm just
[1:23:02] letting you know what I've seen on the
[1:23:04] internet.
[1:23:05] >> Well, I'd like to put that in context,
[1:23:06] too. I think I mean the numbers we're
[1:23:08] talking about here of STRs generally is
[1:23:10] less than 1% of our entire housing
[1:23:13] market. And then the number of owner
[1:23:15] occupied is less than that or you know,
[1:23:17] non-owner occupied. It's about 6%,
[1:23:20] >> right? But 1%
[1:23:22] of how many houses do we have?
[1:23:25] >> I believe we have 33,000 dwelling units
[1:23:28] in the city.
[1:23:29] >> So, if you do half of those, I was just
[1:23:31] doing some math. You do half of the
[1:23:33] >> Let's say we did half or single family.
[1:23:36] I don't know what that number is. How
[1:23:38] many single family homes we have? Is
[1:23:40] that 33,000? That's including
[1:23:41] apartments.
[1:23:42] >> That's including apartments,
[1:23:43] multifamily. 20 around 24,000.
[1:23:47] >> Yeah, I unfortunately I don't have that
[1:23:49] number off the top of my head.
[1:23:52] >> Don't know everything.
[1:23:53] >> I wish I wish it. It's just not it's
[1:23:57] just not on his right there. I'll
[1:24:00] >> I'll go ahead and if you can go back to
[1:24:01] the three options.
[1:24:03] I'll just throw it out there to start the conversation or people like
[1:24:09] whatever is just to tell you where I
[1:24:11] stand and I'm not expecting all of you
[1:24:13] to take a position this unless you would
[1:24:15] like to and just talk about it because
[1:24:17] we're not doing we're not voting or
[1:24:18] anything but I just want to tell you
[1:24:19] where I'm at right now.
[1:24:22] I I am not
[1:24:25] option one I I don't want to have a
[1:24:27] complete ban on them. Option two, I'm
[1:24:31] comfortable with only owner occupied.
[1:24:35] I'm okay with that. That's kind of where
[1:24:37] I'm sitting. I'm still really struggling
[1:24:39] with option three.
[1:24:41] I think the numbers that would make me
[1:24:44] feel comfortable for with option three,
[1:24:46] the number of total units
[1:24:49] is probably going to be much much lower
[1:24:53] than
[1:24:55] what's been presented because I really I
[1:24:58] do have my some I have concerns, but I'm most interested in option two at
[1:25:03] this point, but I'm still open to ideas.
[1:25:05] I haven't I haven't shut the door
[1:25:07] completely on option three. I just want
[1:25:08] to hear what your what your thoughts
[1:25:10] are. And there I just so that's where I
[1:25:14] stand right now.
[1:25:16] >> May Mayor, I'm happy to to share a
[1:25:19] couple of ideas if that's helpful.
[1:25:21] >> Yeah.
[1:25:24] >> Um I I just am so grateful to our
[1:25:26] residents who have been, you know,
[1:25:30] really active in helping us think
[1:25:32] through this. Um I you know I I think
[1:25:35] I've heard uh more from people on this
[1:25:38] topic than any other topic since I've
[1:25:40] been a a council member and uh so many
[1:25:42] of those those resident comments are are
[1:25:45] just really thoughtful.
[1:25:46] >> We're not laughing at you, Quinn. We're
[1:25:48] just laughing because we we with you.
[1:25:50] >> I feel your pain.
[1:25:52] >> Feel it. Yes. Same.
[1:25:54] Well, you know, I mean, it uh obviously
[1:25:57] people have have strong feelings about
[1:25:58] it, but but I really genuinely
[1:26:01] u feel like I'm better better educated
[1:26:03] on this topic because of of the the
[1:26:06] range of insight that people have
[1:26:08] provided. And so, I just I just want to
[1:26:11] acknowledge um how important this is to
[1:26:13] people uh how thoughtful they are in
[1:26:15] helping us think through it. Um I I feel
[1:26:18] like I've learned a lot from a lot of
[1:26:19] people.
[1:26:21] Um, you know, the way the way I think
[1:26:23] about this is is I'm I'm trying to
[1:26:25] figure out at the at the base, you know,
[1:26:28] in agreement with the principles we've
[1:26:30] discussed previously, what are the
[1:26:31] problems we're trying to solve? And I
[1:26:34] think there are problems that we need to
[1:26:35] solve. So, you know, um, we we want
[1:26:40] any of these properties to not be a
[1:26:41] nuisance with parking or lighting or
[1:26:43] safety. Um, we want that, you know, an
[1:26:46] ordinance to be easily enforceable. We
[1:26:47] don't want to put the enforcement on
[1:26:49] neighbors. That's really important. We I think we all really want to
[1:26:53] preserve the character of our
[1:26:55] neighborhoods and and
[1:26:57] u that's really important to me. Um, as
[1:27:01] I look at the options that Jake presented, um,
[1:27:06] again, u, you know, I, uh, if I had to choose today, I really think that
[1:27:12] some version of the two-tier system
[1:27:14] makes sense, um, for me. And the reason
[1:27:18] for that is that I think all of those
[1:27:21] problems that we've heard about can be
[1:27:24] resolved within the context of that. um
[1:27:26] the numbers that we're looking at there
[1:27:28] that Jake's presented in any of those
[1:27:30] iterations is really just a fraction of
[1:27:34] 1% of our residences. So, so the the
[1:27:38] chance that uh any individual resident
[1:27:42] um will be surrounded by u Airbnbs is
[1:27:45] just, you know, minutely low um with an
[1:27:48] ordinance like this. And so I I feel
[1:27:50] like there are really um good ways of
[1:27:54] resolving all of those those challenges
[1:27:56] that people uh have raised. And I think
[1:27:59] we do need to be conservative about the
[1:28:01] way in which we
[1:28:03] uh you know we uh allow people to
[1:28:06] operate these within our community uh to
[1:28:10] meet you know the the challenges that have been raised over and over
[1:28:13] again. But I I do want uh to keep that
[1:28:17] in perspective in terms of this just the tiny scale uh of of numbers there.
[1:28:24] Um and the I I I just want to thank Jake
[1:28:28] um in particular for thinking through
[1:28:30] all of the ways in which we can enforce
[1:28:33] these in in a meaningful way that make
[1:28:35] it just um easy to control nuisance. Now
[1:28:40] that doesn't mean that we'll never have
[1:28:41] a problem. Um, but I have heard from
[1:28:44] dozens and dozens of residents u that
[1:28:46] they value having the opportunity to
[1:28:50] rent their home uh in this context um or
[1:28:54] that they value the opportunity to bring
[1:28:55] family in to um visit for a family
[1:28:59] reunion and that that having some
[1:29:01] opportunity
[1:29:03] um to bring those benefits to our
[1:29:05] residents is important to me. Thanks.
[1:29:08] >> Thank you um Council Member Makin. I
[1:29:11] appreciate your thoughts and I just want
[1:29:12] to echo what you said. I appreciate
[1:29:14] those who've engaged with us as a
[1:29:16] council and staff to share their
[1:29:18] thoughts and their opinions. I have this
[1:29:20] binder with information and I've read
[1:29:24] every email and I I appreciate the input
[1:29:27] on all sides of the issues of the of the
[1:29:30] issue. So, any other council members
[1:29:32] want to comment?
[1:29:33] >> I'll I'll weigh in. Um, thanks Quinn.
[1:29:37] Um,
[1:29:39] I I feel comfortable with option two.
[1:29:44] Um, I go back and forth with option
[1:29:47] three with extreme
[1:29:50] guardrails.
[1:29:52] Um,
[1:29:54] and well, you you had a number of
[1:29:57] hundred. Um, and I go back to something
[1:30:00] that Councilman Philpac said, we don't
[1:30:03] want hotels in the middle of our
[1:30:05] neighborhoods.
[1:30:06] So I I at this point I would say I'm
[1:30:09] comfortable with option two. Um could be
[1:30:11] persuaded
[1:30:13] uh with very limited
[1:30:18] depending on circumstances and
[1:30:20] situations
[1:30:22] uh option three.
[1:30:24] Um but but I feel very comfortable with
[1:30:26] option two. Um, I would, and I don't
[1:30:29] know, it seems like somewhere along the
[1:30:32] way in some of the correspondence,
[1:30:35] this may have been
[1:30:37] uh years ago or months ago, and maybe
[1:30:40] I'm making it up, but it seemed like
[1:30:42] there was a question. someone that came
[1:30:44] and talked to us talked about
[1:30:46] uh having a property
[1:30:50] next door to so
[1:30:53] and my concern with about the non-owner
[1:30:55] occupied is that every concern that
[1:31:00] we've had has come from a nonowner
[1:31:01] non-owner occupied.
[1:31:04] I don't think it's ever come or that I'm aware of that we've had
[1:31:08] concerns raised from a property where
[1:31:11] the owner is on site. So my other
[1:31:14] question is if there were a situation
[1:31:17] where someone had I guess it wouldn't
[1:31:20] really be owner occupied if they didn't
[1:31:21] live there, but if they had a property
[1:31:22] next door, they could respond
[1:31:26] um to an immediate concern. I would be
[1:31:30] interested in exploring that as well.
[1:31:31] But maybe that just maybe that makes it
[1:31:34] more complicated
[1:31:36] in in weighing those two uh situations
[1:31:40] >> makes it a little bit more complicated
[1:31:42] as far as what we can and can't do. Did
[1:31:46] I make does anyone remember someone
[1:31:48] talking to I think it was in an email
[1:31:49] about that
[1:31:51] >> comment meeting during the meeting
[1:31:53] somebody said that I live next door to
[1:31:54] my for example my father's home some of
[1:31:56] the past and now we're we keep the home
[1:31:58] and we use it for STRs except when our
[1:32:00] family comes and we use it for them to
[1:32:02] be housed in
[1:32:03] >> but it was someone who owns an old house
[1:32:05] STR not their previous they bought the
[1:32:08] house next door to them
[1:32:10] >> and they live in then they live next
[1:32:12] door next door
[1:32:13] >> so it wasn't their family home or
[1:32:14] anything it's an investment
[1:32:16] Oh, got it.
[1:32:16] >> They rented out long term but then found
[1:32:19] it more profitable to rent out TR.
[1:32:23] >> So the way we would approach that is one
[1:32:26] I wouldn't want to expand the definition
[1:32:28] of what owner occupied means um beyond
[1:32:31] what the traditional understanding of
[1:32:32] owner occupied. What that then does is
[1:32:35] it creates where we would say if you are
[1:32:37] a resident of or if you live x far away
[1:32:41] from a home, we will treat you
[1:32:43] differently than we would treat anybody
[1:32:44] else. And what that does is it opens us
[1:32:47] up to litigation for violating the
[1:32:50] commerce clause and where we would be
[1:32:51] treating insters very differently than
[1:32:53] outsters.
[1:32:55] And so that's where it becomes very
[1:32:56] calm.
[1:32:58] >> Thank you for letting me think through
[1:32:59] that
[1:33:01] your visiting.
[1:33:04] Uh, first of all, I also echo what Karen
[1:33:07] and Quinn and I have said as well about
[1:33:09] resident input. We've gotten tons of
[1:33:10] input about this and I feel like the
[1:33:12] residents have really been thoughtful in
[1:33:13] the way we handle it. Um, having lived
[1:33:16] here in Airbnb, you know, I don't want
[1:33:18] to see 25 cars out there and we saw that
[1:33:20] regularly. So, I understand that there
[1:33:22] are valid concerns and that I understand
[1:33:24] that people that have have these
[1:33:26] Airbnbs, you know, where they trying to
[1:33:28] stay in their home and this allows them
[1:33:29] to do that. So, I think there really
[1:33:30] good arguments on both sides of this
[1:33:31] question. My question really is though,
[1:33:33] are we trying to regulate ownership or
[1:33:35] are we trying to regulate impact?
[1:33:38] And I think how you answer that question
[1:33:40] maybe speaks to us a little bit. I don't
[1:33:42] know that it matters. I don't think the
[1:33:43] residents really care who owns the house
[1:33:44] as long as the impact is being managed.
[1:33:47] And I think that option three um with a
[1:33:50] specific set of guard rails allows us to
[1:33:52] manage the impact in a way that is you
[1:33:55] know maybe fair to everyone involved. I
[1:33:57] think the other thing too is when we
[1:33:58] talk about these Airbnbs that have been
[1:34:00] problems and there have been some
[1:34:01] significant problems um our our hands
[1:34:04] were kind of tied in a lot of ways
[1:34:05] because we didn't have regulations on
[1:34:06] the books. So I think that the
[1:34:07] regulations act as guardrails that
[1:34:09] protect the neighbors and protect the
[1:34:10] property owner and with you know a
[1:34:12] reasonable set of regulations we can say
[1:34:14] look you have the opportunity to try it
[1:34:16] strikes you out if it doesn't work then
[1:34:18] you lose the opportunity and we're done.
[1:34:19] We close the books we move on from that.
[1:34:21] So um I think you've done an excellent
[1:34:22] job with option three. I read through
[1:34:25] your proposed legislation and I think
[1:34:26] you did a really good job balancing all
[1:34:28] the different viewpoints in a way that
[1:34:29] feels really fair to everyone and allows
[1:34:32] people latitude to live and protect the
[1:34:35] neighborhoods is like the number one
[1:34:36] priority. So I think you did support
[1:34:38] option three.
[1:34:39] >> Thank you. And Jen, I just want to echo
[1:34:41] I you actually asked the question that I
[1:34:43] I've had here is as a way to help
[1:34:45] facilitate the discussion is are we
[1:34:47] trying to regulate behavior or are we
[1:34:50] trying to regulate identity? And and I
[1:34:53] think people are coming at this with
[1:34:55] different perspectives and some do want
[1:34:56] to regulate identity and some are trying
[1:34:58] to regulate behavior.
[1:35:00] >> Does that Yeah,
[1:35:01] >> go ahead and finish your sentence.
[1:35:03] >> I was going to say does that does that
[1:35:04] help you move the conversation forward?
[1:35:06] >> To answer your question um ownership
[1:35:09] versus behav impact. I think from my
[1:35:12] feeling that I do answer to me is yes
[1:35:15] because I think owners
[1:35:17] if the owner is living in the
[1:35:19] neighborhood
[1:35:21] that there's a more sensitivity to
[1:35:23] what's happening
[1:35:26] as it kind of it affects the impact but
[1:35:29] also the owner is part of the
[1:35:31] neighborhood and is integrated and and
[1:35:34] being part of that connection that's
[1:35:36] there and and can help regulate that
[1:35:40] impact. So, it's kind for me it's kind
[1:35:42] of both.
[1:35:44] >> Yeah. And I can see that side of it. And
[1:35:45] I think also um you know, if you have a
[1:35:48] strict set of guidelines and
[1:35:49] regulations, these owners are going to
[1:35:51] be motivated to be nice neighbors
[1:35:53] because if they don't, they lose their
[1:35:54] license.
[1:35:55] >> So, I think that maybe is a natural
[1:35:56] guardrail that sort of speaks to that um
[1:35:58] and helps you know everybody.
[1:36:01] >> Now, on the guard rail with a is three
[1:36:03] strikes, is that a legally for lack of
[1:36:06] legally magic number?
[1:36:07] >> No, not a magic number.
[1:36:09] >> So, they
[1:36:10] [clears throat] Plus, I think there's
[1:36:11] the requirement that you have to have
[1:36:13] somebody within 10 minutes or 20 minutes
[1:36:15] to, you know, to address whatever issue
[1:36:18] there is.
[1:36:19] >> So, I'm not sure that
[1:36:20] >> three is not any sort of a magic number.
[1:36:22] >> Yeah, it could be two. We could do one,
[1:36:25] >> but again, we threw three to give a
[1:36:28] little bit more due process.
[1:36:30] >> Okay. But yeah, I mean
[1:36:32] >> you only get one red card in soccer
[1:36:36] [laughter]
[1:36:41] » in a swim meet. You only get one you get
[1:36:44] zero false start.
[1:36:46] >> You're out.
[1:36:48] >> There you go.
[1:36:50] >> Anybody going to want to share where
[1:36:51] they're at?
[1:36:52] >> I am in favor of option one and I could
[1:36:55] be persuaded to option two. And the
[1:36:58] thing that I'm caught up on here is one
[1:37:00] of Quinn's things that he said was
[1:37:02] easily enforceable is I don't feel like
[1:37:03] any of this is easily enforcable. The onus is put on the neighbors to
[1:37:10] regulate this. If there's a problem, it
[1:37:12] is on them to complain about the
[1:37:14] problems that they are experiencing. And
[1:37:16] that's the the piece that still has not
[1:37:18] been answered for me. And um in talking
[1:37:21] with
[1:37:23] people all over the city through their
[1:37:24] emails and after, you know, public
[1:37:26] comments and things like that and asking
[1:37:28] them, hey, well, what about an only
[1:37:30] owner occupied thing? They said, okay,
[1:37:32] but if there's a problem, it's still I
[1:37:34] have to complain. I have to be the bad
[1:37:36] guy. I have to
[1:37:39] >> I have to be the one who's on it all the
[1:37:41] time and providing pictures and the onus
[1:37:44] is still on the neighbors when there is
[1:37:46] a problem. And so that's the piece that
[1:37:48] I still I don't like putting that onus
[1:37:51] on residents that when there is a
[1:37:54] problem, they have to complain and complain and complain
[1:37:57] >> to see any change.
[1:38:00] >> I I think you could make that same
[1:38:01] argument though for anything, you know,
[1:38:02] whether that's a long-term rental next
[1:38:04] door or whether that's somebody's shed
[1:38:05] out back. Like I think any situations
[1:38:07] you could rely on the neighbors to
[1:38:09] enforce. So to me, I feel like I'm not
[1:38:11] sure that
[1:38:12] >> the difference between a long-term
[1:38:13] rental and a short-term rental is that
[1:38:15] long-term rental, it's the same people
[1:38:16] who are there time after time after
[1:38:18] time. And the short-term rental, it's I
[1:38:20] don't know what I'm getting every day of
[1:38:22] the week. I don't know if it's going to
[1:38:24] be a quiet night or if it's going to be
[1:38:26] a loud party night. And that's a hard
[1:38:29] uncertainty to live with. I think
[1:38:31] >> in a neighborhood, I think the owner
[1:38:33] occupied reduces that stress level a
[1:38:37] bit. And so I could I could be persuaded
[1:38:40] to the owner occupied,
[1:38:42] but until we can answer that piece of
[1:38:44] the equation, I don't like putting the
[1:38:47] hotel in a neighborhood that means now
[1:38:50] the neighbors have to regulate that over
[1:38:52] and over and over and over again. They
[1:38:54] signed up to live in a single family
[1:38:56] home neighborhood. They didn't sign up
[1:38:58] to live in a commercial area where
[1:39:01] hotels are allowed.
[1:39:05] So, and I'm gonna Oh, well, I want to
[1:39:08] add to that, too,
[1:39:09] >> because I'm here because I'm on the same
[1:39:12] page. I our neighborhood commission
[1:39:15] said they wanted total prohibition. They
[1:39:18] asked the they surveyed their residents
[1:39:22] and
[1:39:23] se it was really interesting to see one
[1:39:27] member of the commission come back and
[1:39:28] say, you know, I didn't realize that I
[1:39:31] had two down the street from me and that
[1:39:34] the neighbors next door were frustrated
[1:39:36] with those that they didn't want to talk
[1:39:39] about their neighbors. They didn't want
[1:39:41] to complain because um a couple of them
[1:39:44] have these three um another in another
[1:39:46] area. They knew the owners because they
[1:39:49] had previously lived in the home and
[1:39:51] they were now renting it out as a
[1:39:54] short-term rental. So, there's that. I
[1:39:57] don't want to be the rat.
[1:39:58] >> Non-owner.
[1:39:59] occupied. Yeah. I don't want
[1:40:01] to be the one ratting people out here.
[1:40:03] friend. So that onus on the neighbor, um
[1:40:08] I think there it's just boiling behind
[1:40:10] the below the surface so many times.
[1:40:13] That's not fair.
[1:40:15] That's not equitable.
[1:40:17] That's not renewing what we've decided
[1:40:20] our values were there in my opinion.
[1:40:23] How is it different than a long ter, you
[1:40:25] know, a renter next door that's longterm
[1:40:27] that's problematic or or any of those
[1:40:29] things? and especially if it's report
[1:40:30] the reporting is anonymous which it is
[1:40:32] in either case.
[1:40:33] >> Um how is it different? Um it's not. We
[1:40:37] are have a serious problem with
[1:40:38] long-term rentals right now and that's
[1:40:41] our next thing to tackle.
[1:40:43] So why would we pass something based on
[1:40:45] a failing model?
[1:40:48] >> Well, I think the model is that
[1:40:49] residents all of us have a civic
[1:40:51] responsibility or I guess opportunity to
[1:40:55] mention things that areating to us. So
[1:40:57] whether that's reporting an STR or
[1:40:58] whether that's reporting that somebody's
[1:40:59] grass isn't the right size or you know
[1:41:00] whatever it is. So I not sure that
[1:41:02] that's maybe our best option. And I
[1:41:04] think the other option I have is we
[1:41:06] start talking about
[1:41:06] >> Oh wait no before you move on. I don't
[1:41:09] agree with that. I don't think our
[1:41:12] residents when they move into a home are
[1:41:15] signing up to being the police of their
[1:41:18] neighborhood and talk complaining about
[1:41:21] I mean we don't want that, right? That
[1:41:23] doesn't create connectivity and
[1:41:25] community. We don't want them to feel
[1:41:27] like we are um we're delegating that to
[1:41:32] them because that's just the way it's
[1:41:35] going to turn out. You know, I I just
[1:41:37] don't
[1:41:37] >> Well, maybe I just throw something in
[1:41:40] really quick. Um along those same lines
[1:41:42] though,
[1:41:44] that's true with any neighborhood. None
[1:41:46] of us want to move into a neighborhood
[1:41:47] where we have problem neighbors, but we
[1:41:49] all
[1:41:52] probably may have a neighbor that's owns
[1:41:55] their property that's living there
[1:41:56] that's not an STR
[1:41:59] with. So that's I mean that's just part
[1:42:02] of living in a community is you don't
[1:42:04] pick your neighbors, but you try to be
[1:42:07] the best neighbors that you can. Um, so
[1:42:12] I mean that's I don't know that we that
[1:42:14] any of us sign up for or get additional
[1:42:17] responsibility to rat on our neighbors.
[1:42:19] That's just part of living in a
[1:42:20] community,
[1:42:21] >> right? But passing this ordinance, we
[1:42:23] are creating that. So right now the
[1:42:26] total prohibition where our law now
[1:42:28] stands
[1:42:30] um we have a tight clamp on that. Well,
[1:42:33] we will this has been we all know the
[1:42:35] history here. we introduce
[1:42:38] more legislation
[1:42:40] that creates this opportunity or a
[1:42:44] change in the neighborhood from what
[1:42:46] Chris said from a purely residential to
[1:42:49] now an investment commercial venture a a
[1:42:52] business if you will.
[1:42:54] We are then putting that on the
[1:42:58] neighbors who have lived there under the
[1:43:00] expectation that they live in a
[1:43:02] residential area.
[1:43:04] So, while that does exist with long-term
[1:43:07] rentals,
[1:43:09] >> it doesn't justify adding another
[1:43:12] ownership.
[1:43:12] >> Yeah, but but that was her example was
[1:43:14] the long-term rentals. Um, it doesn't
[1:43:16] necessarily justify adding another um,
[1:43:22] you know, expectation
[1:43:25] on our residents.
[1:43:27] >> Well, maybe too, I'd see it a little bit
[1:43:28] differently. I see it as an opportunity
[1:43:30] to provide them a toolkit. So, when
[1:43:32] there are issues, oh, here's the rules.
[1:43:33] that we can we all know what the rules
[1:43:35] are and we can go sort of enforce those
[1:43:36] rather than just a vague complaint when
[1:43:38] we don't have answers for now. There's a
[1:43:39] specific action item that happens,
[1:43:41] >> but we're creating that
[1:43:43] >> that could be debated. I think the other
[1:43:44] question I would have is, okay, well,
[1:43:46] we're going to say, you know, short-term
[1:43:48] rentals are a nuisance to the
[1:43:48] neighborhood. Well, what about
[1:43:50] daycarees? What about the guy making
[1:43:52] tamales out of his house? What about all
[1:43:53] these cottage industry sort of gig
[1:43:55] economy things that
[1:43:56] >> one doesn't justify another?
[1:43:58] >> Just because someone else is disobeying
[1:44:00] the law doesn't mean we allow this.
[1:44:03] Well, well, let's just give in and let's
[1:44:04] make it legal.
[1:44:06] >> However, I I will just speak to maybe a
[1:44:09] little bit of that is we do allow for
[1:44:10] some home occupation businesses. So, we
[1:44:13] do allow for some commercial operation
[1:44:15] within residential, right? I think the
[1:44:17] question is what is the tipping point?
[1:44:20] And I think everybody may be coming at
[1:44:22] this with maybe a little bit different.
[1:44:24] You know, where are you okay with having
[1:44:27] commercial venture in a residential
[1:44:29] zone? And so where is that tipping point
[1:44:32] for you that that moves a residential
[1:44:34] neighborhood into more of a commercial
[1:44:36] use? Is that
[1:44:39] you can you can run a daycare as long as
[1:44:41] it doesn't create any impact under the
[1:44:43] home occupation or you can make food out
[1:44:45] of your home and sell it at a at a
[1:44:47] farmers market. Um but is it now that we
[1:44:51] go to an STR operation is that too far?
[1:44:55] That's I think that's the conversation.
[1:44:57] Right.
[1:44:57] >> Right. And I apologize. I want Crystal
[1:44:59] to be able to finish her.
[1:45:04] I did have one other reason
[1:45:07] for
[1:45:09] referring option one. I am worried about
[1:45:12] society that we are turning our housing
[1:45:15] stock into investments for people and
[1:45:18] that that will a continue to inflate the
[1:45:22] price of housing and then make it less
[1:45:25] affordable for people. Again, it's why I
[1:45:28] could kind of see option two where it
[1:45:30] allows people to more afford their home
[1:45:33] and have that opportunity for home
[1:45:35] ownership. You have an ADU, you can rent
[1:45:37] that out either as a long-term or
[1:45:39] short-term rental that covers part of
[1:45:40] your mortgage payment. So, I'm still
[1:45:43] wrapping my brain around that part.
[1:45:46] But especially as a mom of young kids
[1:45:48] that are going to be going out into the
[1:45:50] world and trying to afford homes soon,
[1:45:53] the more we we move towards
[1:45:56] incentivizing people to turn housing
[1:45:59] stock into
[1:46:01] an investment
[1:46:03] uh product. Um especially as we allow
[1:46:06] the the property tax exemption for
[1:46:09] primary residences and things like that
[1:46:10] statewide. Um I really worry about the
[1:46:14] ownership or the the affordability ORM
[1:46:16] is already having that affordability
[1:46:18] problem and by allowing whole home
[1:46:23] short-term rentals are we contributing
[1:46:25] to that affordability problem that we
[1:46:27] haven't
[1:46:28] and then if I can speak now um I am the
[1:46:32] same way I option one you know I want to
[1:46:35] support our neighborhood commission what
[1:46:36] they what they uh the survey informal
[1:46:39] survey that they did I don't see a need
[1:46:42] I am very every you know I've I'm into
[1:46:44] my fifth year on the council
[1:46:46] from day one, um, housing supply,
[1:46:48] affordability has been just every single
[1:46:52] time at the tip of the governor's tongue
[1:46:54] at all of our, you know, every time a
[1:46:56] development is brought, that issue comes
[1:46:58] up. So, why would we take out 240 homes,
[1:47:02] you know, 1%, why would we take those
[1:47:05] off the market? That's a lot of homes.
[1:47:08] when you start looking at families that
[1:47:10] have children that can come to our
[1:47:12] schools that we're now closing because
[1:47:15] we don't have enough families in our in
[1:47:17] our you know communities that's another
[1:47:21] topic that we need to consider. So
[1:47:24] that's why I I think option one why why
[1:47:30] do we have to prevent present why do we
[1:47:32] have to provide a um income related
[1:47:38] uh um opportunity
[1:47:41] for people who want to buy homes and
[1:47:43] sell and rent them as short-term
[1:47:45] rentals. Now, um to that point, to what
[1:47:49] Crystal said, and we've obviously been
[1:47:50] talking because I'm like, "Yeah, those
[1:47:52] are conversations we've both had these
[1:47:53] ideas." Um I I'm possibly able to be
[1:47:57] persuaded for option two.
[1:48:00] Um,
[1:48:02] but I will say when I hear them say, you
[1:48:06] know, it's helping me afford my house, I get that it's also a long-term rental
[1:48:12] of your ADU also helps you afford your
[1:48:14] house and you those I've seen those
[1:48:16] financial models. Housing is not that um
[1:48:19] you can afford the house with the with
[1:48:22] the ADU payments in there. Um, I mean,
[1:48:25] that's a that's an that's a a a good
[1:48:29] enough or not good enough, but that's an
[1:48:32] additional income as a homeowner, an
[1:48:34] owner occupied home through the
[1:48:36] long-term rental market. And just as a
[1:48:39] personal note, you know, my child's in
[1:48:40] Springville because they couldn't even
[1:48:42] find an ADU to rent in ORM going to BYU,
[1:48:46] right? So, once again, our supply issue.
[1:48:50] Are we clamping down on supply? And just
[1:48:52] as an example
[1:48:54] to the inflationary
[1:48:57] um if impact
[1:49:00] and I've seen Airbnb they've mar they're
[1:49:03] marketing this they are marketing whole
[1:49:05] homes uh if you buy this house this
[1:49:09] $600,000 house is a steal because it
[1:49:12] really at a short-term rental income
[1:49:14] rate you are creating a home that's
[1:49:17] really worth 750,000
[1:49:20] 800,000
[1:49:22] What in the heck is that doing? That is inflating the cost of our
[1:49:25] housing. It's making money to buy
[1:49:27] comparables
[1:49:29] um
[1:49:30] >> be seen as comparables
[1:49:33] to the price of housing the real estate
[1:49:35] appraisals. So those are my issues. It's
[1:49:39] a it's from a affordability issue, from
[1:49:41] a housing supply issue, from an
[1:49:44] inflationary issue. Um I don't see it as
[1:49:48] necessarily something that we have to
[1:49:50] provide. Besides the additional
[1:49:52] >> in addition to
[1:49:54] >> um you say it's only one house 1%
[1:49:58] but if we look at these ones that have
[1:50:00] been affected the man who woke up and
[1:50:02] had someone swimming in his pool no in
[1:50:05] his backyard pool um it does it's not
[1:50:08] just that house it affects all the
[1:50:10] neighbors on street. So that's my
[1:50:13] thoughts that I share
[1:50:16] >> before I steer the conversation into our
[1:50:18] third discussion. And I haven't spoken
[1:50:19] yet. Am I the only one left?
[1:50:21] >> Yes.
[1:50:22] >> So I'll be very brief. You ready?
[1:50:25] >> Same as mayor and Jeff.
[1:50:28] >> I I'm persuaded that two is probably
[1:50:30] where I'd go because I think that's the
[1:50:33] option of either ADU or short-term could
[1:50:35] work. I'm persuaded at a limited tiered
[1:50:39] with heavy guard rails and a much lower
[1:50:42] number than what you projected
[1:50:45] too
[1:50:47] >> to be mist that's that's again the
[1:50:50] >> close to I think we're close it's just I
[1:50:52] the thought process I know of a couple
[1:50:55] that aren't owner occupied that could
[1:50:57] qualify and there's reasons for it so
[1:50:58] that's why I'm not saying no
[1:51:01] >> again don't mean to be that person we
[1:51:04] need to break for dinner at briefly
[1:51:06] break for dinner at some point. I don't
[1:51:09] know when the best point in your
[1:51:10] presentation. I want to keep the
[1:51:11] conversation and the momentum going, but
[1:51:13] just as you're doing your thing, say
[1:51:15] this might be a good point.
[1:51:16] >> This is a natural flow in a natural
[1:51:18] break at this point. So,
[1:51:20] >> okay.
[1:51:20] >> And then we can move on to where I think
[1:51:22] we'll actually have a lot more consensus
[1:51:24] on on
[1:51:25] >> I totally forgot to invite a council
[1:51:27] member to discuss the food. Would you
[1:51:30] Oh, you already stood up. [laughter]
[1:51:32] Thank you. I volunteered.
[1:51:35] Father in heaven, we're grateful for
[1:51:37] this day, for the opportunities we've
[1:51:38] had to
[1:51:40] conduct city business and
[1:51:43] deliberate on important issues that will
[1:51:44] affect the citizens of our community.
[1:51:48] We're mindful of thy influence and pray
[1:51:49] that it will continue before the food
[1:51:52] has been prepared and ask that it might
[1:51:53] nourish and bless our bodies to be
[1:51:55] nourished and strengthened in our daily
[1:51:58] lives. watch over the remainder of the
[1:52:00] events and activities we participate in
[1:52:03] this evening conducting civil civic
[1:52:06] duties that were
[1:52:08] responsible to make sure occur in our
[1:52:10] fiduciary responsibilities as well.
[1:52:12] Grateful for all the input and all those
[1:52:14] who provided it. We continue to feel
[1:52:17] that uh collaborative unity that will
[1:52:20] strengthen the decisions going forward.
[1:52:22] We ask in the name of Jesus Christ.
[1:52:23] Amen.
[1:52:25] >> Council members, thank you. Thank you
[1:52:27] for sharing your thoughts. I appreciate
[1:52:28] it. All right, we've got dinner here. I
[1:52:31] don't know.
[2:00:12] continue.
[2:00:14] >> All right, we'll continue now.
[2:00:17] >> Thank you.
[2:00:21] Okay. So if we move on to the next
[2:00:24] section, these would be very specific
[2:00:29] measures in which we could implement to
[2:00:32] help mitigate some of the concerns that
[2:00:34] we've heard over time about STR
[2:00:38] operations and their impact in
[2:00:39] neighborhoods both owner occupied as
[2:00:42] well as the non-owner occupied.
[2:00:45] uh specifically
[2:00:48] um I mentioned one but I think there
[2:00:51] would be a general consensus and if any
[2:00:54] of these seem out of line with more
[2:00:57] policies or principles or how you
[2:00:59] envision a regulation please speak up.
[2:01:02] Um what is first one is you would want
[2:01:06] to limit short-term rentals to ensure
[2:01:09] that they're only for overnight
[2:01:11] accommodations.
[2:01:13] So these do not become open event center
[2:01:17] and wedding receptive vag.
[2:01:22] Um so these are really meant for
[2:01:24] visitors who are looking for
[2:01:27] accommodations overnight and even their
[2:01:30] family. um they want to have access to a
[2:01:33] kitchen. They want to have a place they
[2:01:34] can put kids down for bed. They can then
[2:01:37] play games with their older kids or if
[2:01:40] they want to be managed on the property
[2:01:42] but do so in a way that is in line with
[2:01:45] where residential use would be and not
[2:01:48] just that would be some sort of an
[2:01:50] adult.
[2:01:51] >> Right. So I think we might need to
[2:01:54] clarify too
[2:01:57] hard
[2:01:59] but like the waring events that happened
[2:02:01] at the go house right somehow clarifying
[2:02:06] I'm hearing you say the family thing are
[2:02:08] you going to talk about that
[2:02:09] >> so what I've done is I've taken what in
[2:02:12] each of I have I've got a shared folder
[2:02:15] in there there is perspective
[2:02:16] legislative language um I've taken that
[2:02:19] and I tried to sort it put it as a
[2:02:21] summary
[2:02:22] So in in our overnight accommodation
[2:02:24] language, there's a much lengthier list
[2:02:27] of forden activities as they were. Um
[2:02:33] basically what we're trying to do is
[2:02:34] this is meant for overnight
[2:02:36] accommodation.
[2:02:38] Um the next would be lighting. Um really
[2:02:41] the only the only complaint as as I've
[2:02:44] met with residents
[2:02:46] um the only complaint that we've heard
[2:02:48] really about owner occupy short-term
[2:02:51] rentals is about those that have
[2:02:53] security lighting and somebody who's
[2:02:55] checking in late at night or they're
[2:02:57] coming and going in the early morning
[2:02:59] and you've got security lighting that
[2:03:00] goes off and that light then trespasses
[2:03:04] in the top through their bedroom or
[2:03:07] there's some sort of security camera
[2:03:09] that's positioned and so they feel that
[2:03:11] there's a a privacy thing uh a privacy
[2:03:14] violation or a limitation on their
[2:03:16] privacy.
[2:03:18] So what we want to do is that any
[2:03:19] security measure of any right they're
[2:03:21] shielded in such a way that that doesn't
[2:03:24] nothing create a light trespass
[2:03:26] um or have a negative impact on the
[2:03:29] neighbor.
[2:03:31] Um next would be a noise and nuisance
[2:03:33] control. Really this is going to be
[2:03:35] maintained through quiet hours uh
[2:03:37] requirement is that during the weekends
[2:03:41] uh 1000 pm to 10:00 a.m. be identified
[2:03:45] as the quiet out which means if you have
[2:03:46] a sports court amenity uh pool spa sauna
[2:03:51] um the any of the amenities that would
[2:03:54] likely to attract you know noise and
[2:03:58] into the evening party something like
[2:04:01] that those are to cease operation at 10
[2:04:03] p.m. on the pro and not to begin 10:00
[2:04:06] a.m.
[2:04:08] on weekdays 10:00 p.m. to 7 a.m. Um,
[2:04:12] again, these hours could be adjusted if
[2:04:14] the council so desires, but again, the
[2:04:17] thinking of the weekdays is usually
[2:04:18] people up and going with school and
[2:04:20] work. So, that would be things in a
[2:04:23] week.
[2:04:25] Um, they adopt a noise management plan
[2:04:28] and really that is they could you either
[2:04:30] use, you know, some sort of principal
[2:04:32] monitoring device to help help ensure
[2:04:34] that there any sort of noise disturbance
[2:04:36] on the property. If so, the PR operator
[2:04:39] is alerted to it, mitigate that on their
[2:04:41] own rather than having a complaint drawn
[2:04:44] against them. But the other big force,
[2:04:46] the noise management plan is that
[2:04:48] they're informing their tenants on what
[2:04:51] the expectations.
[2:04:53] Um, so the tenant goes into or the
[2:04:56] renter goes into knowing I can't
[2:05:01] be doing I'm not to be
[2:05:06] >> we require that on their advertising
[2:05:08] materials.
[2:05:09] >> Um,
[2:05:12] we got some lang. We could look at that.
[2:05:14] I'm really hesitant to do too much on
[2:05:16] the requirements on the advertisement
[2:05:18] language because it is a first amendment
[2:05:21] area as well as there's some uh state
[2:05:24] legislation that does put us a little
[2:05:26] bit um with Nathan's vot um what I'm
[2:05:32] looking at what I'm looking at as far as
[2:05:33] our advertisement language is that
[2:05:35] they're notifying the prospective renter
[2:05:38] that they are licensed in the city of
[2:05:40] ORM gives them their STRL license number
[2:05:44] if an advertisement does not have an
[2:05:46] STRL license number because they are not
[2:05:48] licensed with the city. It's a renter
[2:05:51] beware. So they putting a notice of
[2:05:53] rent. Okay, if they're not even notice
[2:05:57] then you wherever you're renting from is
[2:05:59] probably not
[2:06:01] and then they can't they can't advertise
[2:06:03] for a use.
[2:06:05] That's kind of the limitation of what
[2:06:07] I've been looking at as far as
[2:06:08] advertising.
[2:06:10] really just for them so they don't get a
[2:06:13] strike.
[2:06:15] >> We could just definitely back it I guess
[2:06:21] » we encourage them to
[2:06:23] >> we absolutely could encourage the best
[2:06:25] practice or or something like that.
[2:06:27] Okay.
[2:06:29] >> Um the other main qualitative
[2:06:32] regulation is uh noticing and posting
[2:06:37] one is we want a game plan to be
[2:06:39] installed on every STR of who the
[2:06:42] responsible party is. So if a
[2:06:45] neighborhood is like hey there's a party
[2:06:46] going on they go over to knock on the
[2:06:48] door.
[2:06:50] And you can see the name for it and the
[2:06:52] neighborhood the neighbor can choose the
[2:06:54] neighborhood
[2:06:57] or do I feel like this isation where I
[2:07:00] need to get the neighborhood improvement
[2:07:03] involved or if it's after hours do I
[2:07:05] need to get a patrol officer the reason
[2:07:09] with that name plate the patrol officer
[2:07:11] that's responding or the NIT officer
[2:07:13] that responds they have a contact person
[2:07:16] and again if it's after hours name our
[2:07:18] business licensing or may not be
[2:07:20] responsive um because nobody's there. Um
[2:07:24] but with that name plate requirement, we
[2:07:26] always have access to whoever should be
[2:07:29] responding to that property. These all
[2:07:35] » um the second portion of this is
[2:07:41] uh that there's the 247 uh individual.
[2:07:45] So again that they have somebody
[2:07:47] that can respond to the home and again
[2:07:50] right now we set it at 40 minutes. That
[2:07:52] time can be adjusted an hour if you want
[2:07:55] to give them a little bit longer to
[2:07:56] respond. If you want it to be a shorter
[2:07:59] time 20 minutes uh we could adjust that.
[2:08:02] So the requirement is that somebody uh
[2:08:04] responds to the property or the owner
[2:08:07] group or the owner and can help
[2:08:10] resolve mitigate whatever the nuisance
[2:08:13] call is. uh if it's noise influence
[2:08:16] partying, if it's potential drug use,
[2:08:19] something that we could get responsive
[2:08:22] and direct actions rather than always
[2:08:24] just hey giving a citation or waiting to
[2:08:26] give a citation. There can be some sort
[2:08:29] of remedy that evening.
[2:08:32] Um also, uh parking requirements and
[2:08:35] we'll get into detail more on on the
[2:08:37] parking requirements and the maximum
[2:08:40] and then they also have to give a
[2:08:42] package to the tenant. has all of this
[2:08:44] information in it as well as other
[2:08:46] miscellaneous contact information like
[2:08:48] how do you get a hold of the police if
[2:08:50] it's a non-respond uh non-emergency. So
[2:08:53] having the non-emergency line, 911, how
[2:08:55] do you get a hold of the fire department
[2:08:57] or what's the garbage pickup? Where do
[2:08:59] you place the garbage cans etc. All the
[2:09:02] things that we could do to help minimize
[2:09:06] the potential impact.
[2:09:10] Any questions about any of the things
[2:09:12] that I've about minus occupancy
[2:09:15] requirements and parking because those
[2:09:17] are separate slides.
[2:09:18] >> Are family reunions considered events or
[2:09:21] what?
[2:09:23] How about a good solid mate?
[2:09:26] Depends on the family
[2:09:30] together as a family and you're there
[2:09:32] and have a property where you can play
[2:09:34] some games but it's not necessarily that
[2:09:37] you know everybody come
[2:09:42] good solid
[2:09:44] for some families family reunions are
[2:09:46] not cool but there's some people Yeah.
[2:09:51] >> Hold on.
[2:09:53] I don't understand why that's a maybe.
[2:09:55] That's an event. If it's at a house that
[2:09:57] they own, like that one family, she
[2:10:00] said, "We want to keep this house so we
[2:10:01] can have a family reunion there." Then
[2:10:03] they're the residential because they're
[2:10:06] they own it.
[2:10:07] >> If they are if they're coming together
[2:10:08] as a group of a family and they're
[2:10:10] staying there for overnight
[2:10:12] accommodations and going to let's say a
[2:10:14] BYU football game,
[2:10:17] that I don't think is going to draw any
[2:10:19] attention.
[2:10:20] I don't know that that would be
[2:10:21] necessarily anything other than
[2:10:23] overnight accommodation.
[2:10:26] But if you were to say everybody to
[2:10:28] family reunion, bring your bring
[2:10:30] everybody, bring your friends, come on
[2:10:32] over. We're having a barbecue and bring
[2:10:35] 100 people there. And it's it's an event
[2:10:38] style. Like when my family reunion
[2:10:40] happens up in Bountiful, there's
[2:10:43] probably 500
[2:10:46] of my kind. We are loud and proud and
[2:10:52] >> and I don't think it wants to and so we rent out the pavilion there at
[2:10:56] Bountiful Park. It's an event. That's
[2:10:59] why I think it's I think it really
[2:11:01] depends on what that event what that is,
[2:11:04] what that use actually.
[2:11:06] >> Well, and the limiting factor would be
[2:11:07] the number of cars. That's where they
[2:11:09] would be in violation if they've raised
[2:11:11] many
[2:11:11] >> or the occupancy of the home itself,
[2:11:14] right? If if we're limiting occupances,
[2:11:17] get into this in a different slide. If
[2:11:20] the home can accommodate a single
[2:11:22] family, there's 16 people
[2:11:25] and and they have the bedroom have the
[2:11:27] parking available for it and it's a
[2:11:30] single family that's going to be a
[2:11:32] valid. But if it's they're bringing 40
[2:11:35] people a home that can really truly only
[2:11:37] accommodate six people, I would say
[2:11:40] that's a viol. And when you say parking
[2:11:43] are concluding off street parking,
[2:11:45] correct?
[2:11:45] >> Yes.
[2:11:50] » Yeah. Council member Hine brought up
[2:11:54] potential
[2:11:58] future consistency to withdraw
[2:12:02] everything that you're talking about
[2:12:03] here
[2:12:05] has been or could be applied to
[2:12:08] regulating.
[2:12:11] Absolutely.
[2:12:12] And we can look at also adopting a three
[2:12:14] strikes policy on our rental building
[2:12:17] license as well. there are things that
[2:12:19] we can look at strengthening that
[2:12:21] program after we cross the finish line
[2:12:25] here.
[2:12:28] Okay. Um
[2:12:30] as as we talk about enforcement and I uh
[2:12:34] to council member Mule signs point I get
[2:12:37] it. People don't want to come in and
[2:12:40] have to testify. They don't want to have
[2:12:42] to
[2:12:43] hold
[2:12:45] on. However, at the same time, it is a
[2:12:50] multiaceted
[2:12:51] issue, right?
[2:12:53] Even if there was a crime, I mean, we
[2:12:56] don't have minority reports. We don't
[2:12:58] have any precogs that can tell us who's
[2:13:00] going to do what, and we can pre
[2:13:03] pre-prosecute crime. Um, on a retail
[2:13:07] theft, we're going to respond to
[2:13:08] Walmart. The officer is going to meet
[2:13:11] with loss prevention. They're going to
[2:13:13] get the video and we're still, if we end
[2:13:16] up at trial, we're still going to need
[2:13:18] that loss prevention individual who saw
[2:13:20] the event happen and reported it.
[2:13:22] They're still going to need to come in
[2:13:23] and test it. Um, there's always going to
[2:13:26] be some component between us physical
[2:13:30] evidence of what happened, wiz
[2:13:34] then show a violation.
[2:13:36] However, the benefit we have, we are
[2:13:38] going to love this advancement
[2:13:41] grounds and that is not the same
[2:13:44] evidency standard as the criminal. The
[2:13:49] criminal private is so beyond beyond
[2:13:51] reasoning. We use the highest standard
[2:13:53] proof without in our administrative
[2:13:58] process. Um we're using a preponderance
[2:14:01] standard which is more likely than not.
[2:14:04] We also aren't in a formal evidentiary
[2:14:07] setting. So we have access to use
[2:14:10] evidence that wouldn't necessarily be
[2:14:12] admissible at a trial. Um but often
[2:14:14] times we still need to have somebody be
[2:14:17] willing to come in and testify, somebody
[2:14:19] willing to take that phone, somebody
[2:14:21] willing to make that call. So the
[2:14:23] neighbors are a key player in this
[2:14:26] process to help ensure that there is I
[2:14:30] don't know client on but then also at
[2:14:33] the same time team you have officers
[2:14:38] that can respond do an initial
[2:14:40] investigation they can do a knock and
[2:14:42] talk and see who's in the home going on
[2:14:45] they can make the you know yeah I ar
[2:14:47] arrived on scene and there was a loud
[2:14:49] party whatsoever
[2:14:51] um and then they can hand that off to
[2:14:53] the NIT team to do the following and
[2:14:56] then we also use our business licensing
[2:14:57] department and then we end up in the
[2:14:59] ALJ. So it it's a multiaceted team. Then
[2:15:03] also at the center of all of this is
[2:15:04] we're going to also rely on the STR
[2:15:07] operator
[2:15:08] to be in compliance with our our so we
[2:15:13] do they will
[2:15:16] be active. Um, if I've met with many of
[2:15:19] our SD operators, you know, they all
[2:15:22] have been opening. They have been
[2:15:24] reasonable. They've all been really good
[2:15:26] toward
[2:15:28] only a handful have been very
[2:15:29] disgruntled and very angry at me. And in
[2:15:32] some cases, I can understand their
[2:15:34] perspectives and so far, but at the same
[2:15:36] time, I do believe that by and large,
[2:15:39] people in ORM are good people and want
[2:15:41] to do the right thing. And so, I do
[2:15:43] think STR operators fall into that same
[2:15:45] group. I do think by and large they will
[2:15:49] follow the expectations that are set.
[2:15:52] One of the problems is we just haven't
[2:15:54] had any
[2:15:56] clear expectations for how those
[2:15:57] operations should occur.
[2:16:00] Um, however, when when an FTR operator
[2:16:02] does fall short, we would be looking at
[2:16:04] issuing a period type. If they get three
[2:16:08] violations in a rolling 12-month period,
[2:16:10] we would be looking at revoking or
[2:16:12] suspending that that STR license. Um,
[2:16:17] again, the proposed fines right now are
[2:16:19] just proposed. Again, we also understand
[2:16:21] this is a communal venture that we may
[2:16:24] be wanting to see an increase in those
[2:16:26] fines. But again, coming from a more
[2:16:28] conservative approach, 500 on the first,
[2:16:31] 750 on the third, and thousand on the
[2:16:34] third,
[2:16:34] >> that's how much they make in one day. So
[2:16:36] that's like nothing.
[2:16:37] >> That that's not um anything that deters
[2:16:41] have two issues with this. The the
[2:16:43] amount of those fines is too low. This
[2:16:45] is what I'm hearing from residents, too.
[2:16:46] and 12 month period should be a 24 if
[2:16:49] we're truly putting up guard rails and
[2:16:52] rolling this out slowly. Let's
[2:16:54] experiment to see how many complaints
[2:16:57] certain homes get. If they can go for 24 months without three complaints,
[2:17:03] you know, most of it's going to be over
[2:17:04] the summer.
[2:17:06] I think then that then they've proved
[2:17:08] themselves as as a sleepy low impact. 24
[2:17:13] months is I I think that that would
[2:17:18] because they have three or more in 12
[2:17:20] months in order to get their license.
[2:17:25] >> But by going to 24 doubling that that
[2:17:27] probationary period. So if I get one
[2:17:30] next month then I have to be on two
[2:17:34] years. Does that make sense? rather than
[2:17:36] just just one year.
[2:17:39] >> Okay? You see what I mean?
[2:17:41] >> So they can go July more in a 24 month
[2:17:44] period
[2:17:46] >> then they get three they're shut down
[2:17:49] but that resets after 24 months instead
[2:17:51] of after 12 months.
[2:17:52] >> Is it in there that it would reset the
[2:17:54] two?
[2:17:54] >> So it resets because it's so
[2:17:56] >> yes but that after 12 months of not
[2:18:00] having a complaint because they've been
[2:18:02] shut down
[2:18:04] that's a whole different that's If their
[2:18:06] license is suspended, they would not be
[2:18:08] eligible to reapply for an STR for three
[2:18:11] years.
[2:18:14] >> That makes sense. What I'm trying to
[2:18:15] say, what I'm saying is if they have
[2:18:17] July, you know, the 4th of July is on
[2:18:19] Friday and they have the next year the
[2:18:21] 4th of July on a Wednesday, the next
[2:18:23] year if it's like Thursday, Friday. Oh,
[2:18:26] we have three in that year before. Three
[2:18:28] complaints, we just made it because we
[2:18:30] just had another train this summer. So
[2:18:32] now they could get six complaints in two
[2:18:35] years.
[2:18:37] There's three.
[2:18:38] >> So council member Millet, what I'm
[2:18:40] hearing is you would be in favor of
[2:18:42] increasing the fines and increasing the
[2:18:44] probationary
[2:18:46] >> is
[2:18:48] any have any thoughts about that?
[2:18:52] >> I think I would even increase the length
[2:18:55] from three years to five years that they
[2:18:56] couldn't operate.
[2:18:59] I'd like to go through this. What other
[2:19:01] items we have parking yet?
[2:19:04] >> Yeah.
[2:19:05] >> So, let's finish up.
[2:19:07] >> I'll fly through. Okay.
[2:19:09] >> Um, the next one.
[2:19:10] >> Wait a minute. Are we going to be able
[2:19:12] to have the council members voice? I
[2:19:14] don't want silence here as a yes or a
[2:19:16] no. I think we all need to say where we
[2:19:19] are on these topics. We're going to put
[2:19:21] it on the next city council meeting. We
[2:19:23] need to be on the record with what
[2:19:25] ordinance you're writing right now.
[2:19:26] >> Yeah. Again, that's that's again why I
[2:19:28] ask if there's anything that you're in
[2:19:31] disagreement with in these, please voice
[2:19:32] your opinion. I am going to take silence
[2:19:36] as as that you are in accordance with
[2:19:38] this unless you speak up.
[2:19:40] >> Go to 18 months for the [clears throat]
[2:19:42] period and I can see increasing the
[2:19:43] fines but not by much.
[2:19:51] Uh the next one and this is
[2:19:54] this one is is a little bit more nuance.
[2:19:56] >> Can I just clarify that means we're
[2:19:58] three to four. So what you presented
[2:20:01] will stand in your ordinance.
[2:20:05] >> I will prepare an or I'll get there at
[2:20:07] the end.
[2:20:07] >> Okay. I'm just trying to determine what
[2:20:09] the purpose of this meeting is and what
[2:20:11] the outcome is going to be determined
[2:20:12] because sometimes when I haven't said
[2:20:14] anything in a council meeting on
[2:20:17] something that I on a work meeting on
[2:20:18] something that I didn't necessarily
[2:20:20] agree with, it was construed as a as a
[2:20:22] positive. So I think this is such an
[2:20:24] important if if this is it this
[2:20:27] discussion we're having I think we
[2:20:29] should be on the record as council
[2:20:31] members have thoughts.
[2:20:34] >> This is kind of a lot to process for one
[2:20:36] meeting. I kind of wonder if we got to
[2:20:37] do a work session again.
[2:20:40] >> I don't want I don't want to drag it out
[2:20:42] either, but like it's a lot.
[2:20:43] >> Okay,
[2:20:44] >> fair enough to weigh in on that.
[2:20:46] >> The next area that I want to touch on is
[2:20:48] occupancy limits for short-term rentals.
[2:20:52] And by occupancy, [clears throat] I mean
[2:20:53] how many people can stay in an STR on
[2:20:58] any given night? As we first rolled out
[2:21:01] this STR draft, the conversation was the
[2:21:05] easiest way to enforce this would be by
[2:21:06] putting a cap at eight unrelated or
[2:21:09] eight related regardless. Just saying
[2:21:12] we're going to cap it at eight individ
[2:21:14] short-term rental. Now, we heard a lot
[2:21:16] from from the short-term rental
[2:21:19] community um that that would not be a
[2:21:21] practicable
[2:21:23] um regulation, but again, from an
[2:21:25] enforcement perspective, probably the
[2:21:27] very easiest of the enforcement. NIT or
[2:21:30] an officer rolls up to a home, they can
[2:21:32] do a simple math and they can see that
[2:21:34] there's more than so from a from a
[2:21:37] enforcement standpoint, the easiest way
[2:21:40] to enforce occupancy. Um, occ opt option
[2:21:44] two is that we go to a single family or
[2:21:48] a unrelated, which is really what we're
[2:21:50] doing is we're mirroring what we already
[2:21:51] allow for long-term rentals and single
[2:21:55] family dwellings is we allow currently
[2:21:59] single families or three. So by giving
[2:22:02] short-term rental option two, we're
[2:22:05] actually increasing the occupancy over
[2:22:07] that of the long.
[2:22:09] >> Um, clear on one more thing. Yes,
[2:22:12] >> clarification.
[2:22:14] >> This these things that we're talking
[2:22:15] about are things that relate to whole
[2:22:18] house nonowner occupied rentals in
[2:22:21] general
[2:22:22] >> and owner occupied.
[2:22:24] >> So, for example,
[2:22:26] if somebody rents rooms like if I've seen those online where there's
[2:22:32] like the husband, the wife, and the
[2:22:34] sister, they're three bed whatever two
[2:22:35] bedrooms and then they rent they do
[2:22:37] airbnb on two of their other bedrooms.
[2:22:41] How would that fit in there?
[2:22:43] >> So what we are the way we address that
[2:22:46] scenario there is we are indicating that
[2:22:49] you could have one shortterm rental
[2:22:53] area dwelling and you identify that as
[2:22:56] one bedroom or two bedroom or your
[2:22:58] basement or maybe the apartment that's
[2:23:01] above the garage.
[2:23:03] Um whatever you are identifying as your
[2:23:05] short-term rental, you can have one of
[2:23:07] those. Like in this case, it was like
[2:23:10] the house. You just kind of absorbed
[2:23:12] into the into the family. You use the
[2:23:14] kitchen with with the family. You do,
[2:23:16] but they just rent out these bedrooms on
[2:23:18] short-term.
[2:23:19] >> You would we would not allow
[2:23:21] multiplebedroom rentals
[2:23:24] as a short-term rental under this
[2:23:26] ordinance.
[2:23:26] >> Boarding house. Yeah.
[2:23:28] >> Because basically what it does, it does
[2:23:29] turns it into a boarding.
[2:23:31] >> Yeah. What we would be doing though is
[2:23:33] saying you are identifying a basement.
[2:23:36] That basement has two bedrooms,
[2:23:38] bathroom,
[2:23:41] kitchen, its entryway, etc. Right now,
[2:23:43] it doesn't need to have its own separate
[2:23:45] entrance. Um, unless we go the ADU
[2:23:48] route.
[2:23:48] >> Okay. That's what I was going to ask cuz
[2:23:49] I like the mayor's idea of the
[2:23:52] >> um
[2:23:53] >> stipulation.
[2:23:55] But what you would do is then you would
[2:23:56] look and say, "Okay, the general
[2:23:58] standard for that owner occupied
[2:24:01] basement rental or the whole home
[2:24:04] non-owner occupied." The general
[2:24:06] standard is a single family or eight
[2:24:09] unrelated.
[2:24:11] Then you would go to the second level
[2:24:13] which is the occupancy based on bedroom
[2:24:16] standards. So, if you've got two
[2:24:18] bedrooms and they are one is 100 square
[2:24:22] ft or more, the other one is between 70
[2:24:25] and 99, that sets what your occupancy
[2:24:28] is. Does that make sense? What we don't
[2:24:31] want to do is we don't want to
[2:24:32] [clears throat] have end up with eight
[2:24:33] unrelated in a two-bedroom basement
[2:24:36] apartment that doesn't really
[2:24:37] accommodate eight.
[2:24:39] >> So, both of those apply.
[2:24:40] >> Yes, both of those apply.
[2:24:44] So, you're setting a standard, a general
[2:24:46] standard, and then you're doing a more
[2:24:47] specific look at the actual
[2:24:52] uh viability of of that space.
[2:24:57] [clears throat] Okay. The third option
[2:24:58] that we
[2:24:59] >> have a question.
[2:24:59] >> No, I was just you're getting to it. I
[2:25:02] was saying what about the third? The
[2:25:05] third option is we're aware of, you
[2:25:09] know, use that might be very different
[2:25:13] and distinct from all of the other STR
[2:25:16] uses and based by its its very nature,
[2:25:18] size, location, etc. So, how do we how
[2:25:22] do we work some standard
[2:25:25] uh for that type of a of a parcel? And
[2:25:29] so we what we what we did is we provided
[2:25:31] language in that in that packet that
[2:25:34] would again indicate
[2:25:37] one single family or eight unrelated
[2:25:40] unless the property meets specific
[2:25:43] requirements. And that would be like
[2:25:45] it's on one and a half acres. The
[2:25:47] dwelling unit is over 20,000 square ft.
[2:25:50] It's completely enclosed by fencing.
[2:25:52] It's gated. It has parking to
[2:25:55] accommodate
[2:25:57] um I believe it was one parking space
[2:25:59] per
[2:26:00] I want to say thousand square feet of
[2:26:02] the dwelling um but very specific very
[2:26:05] rigorous level to allow for an increased
[2:26:08] capacity for that type of parcel.
[2:26:13] Our recommendation is the council not
[2:26:17] that language according to our office um
[2:26:20] in our opinion is that opens us up to
[2:26:22] litigation and while it was requested
[2:26:25] that we review that and consider it. Our
[2:26:27] recommendation is the council not adopt
[2:26:29] that.
[2:26:32] Are there any questions about occupancy
[2:26:34] at this point?
[2:26:37] >> Jake, why eight unre individuals opposed
[2:26:41] to
[2:26:43] watching along with them.
[2:26:48] Is that aid based off of our new cities
[2:26:52] ordinances?
[2:26:54] >> The the aid comes from requests from STR
[2:26:58] operators that there will be occupants
[2:27:01] that are unrelated. There might be two
[2:27:03] couples, but that's four that are going
[2:27:06] in together because they're coming into
[2:27:07] town or you've got a group of friends.
[2:27:10] So for for co-workers that are coming in
[2:27:13] for a basketball game, football game,
[2:27:16] they're coming for a hunting trip, four
[2:27:19] to five to six people, and they wouldn't
[2:27:22] be permitted to use that parcel or that STR if we left it at three. So we
[2:27:29] wanted to give some sort of increased
[2:27:31] occupancy. And so what we did is we
[2:27:33] looked at our our ordinances across the
[2:27:36] board and say where could we where we
[2:27:38] could be uniform and eight would get us
[2:27:41] where we'd be uniform with other
[2:27:43] unrelated and other areas of our
[2:27:47] so that's how we got to eight
[2:27:48] >> but if we were interested in finding
[2:27:50] places for families because I think
[2:27:52] that's how this started the prostr was
[2:27:55] it's it's family
[2:27:58] you know centered it's cheaper than
[2:28:00] going to get two or three hotel rooms
[2:28:02] This isn't [clears throat] achieving
[2:28:03] that. This is actually opening it up
[2:28:05] even wider to now allow the hunting
[2:28:07] trips, which happened at the Aspen
[2:28:10] House. We're up at 5:00 a.m. because the
[2:28:12] hunters were up at 5:00 a.m. Um, the
[2:28:16] sorority sisters of eight, you know, to
[2:28:18] me, I see this as problematic. I would
[2:28:21] much rather match our long-term rental
[2:28:25] stipulations because maybe pull in some
[2:28:27] unrelated but but still it's family
[2:28:32] centered.
[2:28:34] >> Any other comments on that? I would
[2:28:36] actually I would rather forego some of
[2:28:38] the other sides that have a conversation
[2:28:40] on this.
[2:28:41] >> I would agree with that. Is there any
[2:28:45] does opening it up to eight does that
[2:28:48] open us up to litigation on the
[2:28:49] long-term rental side?
[2:28:51] >> I don't believe so.
[2:28:52] >> Not that we have to provide the same or
[2:28:56] if you're providing it there, why can't
[2:28:57] we do it here?
[2:28:58] >> I I don't see that there's any real
[2:29:02] litigation there.
[2:29:03] >> Okay.
[2:29:04] And I'm again wait to be that person for
[2:29:08] the third time in the
[2:29:11] but we got be in there in five minutes.
[2:29:13] And I see that we I know we probably
[2:29:15] haven't covered everything yet. Council
[2:29:18] question. I we were hoping to get to I
[2:29:21] think you have some direction.
[2:29:22] >> I have some direction.
[2:29:23] >> Give you a couple options and if there's
[2:29:25] other options you want to do council we
[2:29:27] can do something different. But we do
[2:29:29] have a work session next Tuesday that's
[2:29:33] talking about fleet. How long would that
[2:29:36] >> fleet and CIP budget uh which about an
[2:29:40] hour?
[2:29:41] >> So would you how would you feel about
[2:29:42] continuing this work session discussion?
[2:29:44] >> Hour and a half
[2:29:45] >> at our at the work session next week. So
[2:29:49] hour hour and a half or
[2:29:50] >> so we don't what we don't have next week
[2:29:53] is we don't have
[2:29:55] >> a regular meeting nor some sort of city
[2:29:58] event we have to be done by so we could
[2:30:01] have an extended work session next week
[2:30:05] [clears throat]
[2:30:06] >> or we can do it the 12 I I don't know or
[2:30:09] do you feel that we're at a point where
[2:30:11] we don't need to have another work
[2:30:12] session work session
[2:30:14] >> I think so too
[2:30:16] okay just So we are being uh respectful
[2:30:20] of our residents. I feel like we need to
[2:30:22] have our work sessions where we're
[2:30:24] giving the direction and then there
[2:30:27] needs to be some time for the we have a
[2:30:29] city council meeting where the residents
[2:30:31] can come and get it.
[2:30:33] >> Yes. We don't need to have a city
[2:30:35] meeting where if we've made any changes
[2:30:37] because of that resident feedback, we
[2:30:39] have one more meeting that we can take
[2:30:41] it to to make those changes and and pass
[2:30:44] it
[2:30:46] because otherwise I've been in that
[2:30:47] residency where you go and you speak the
[2:30:50] day of the meeting and it the decisions
[2:30:52] made. It feels like a waste of your time
[2:30:54] as a resident to go and speak because
[2:30:57] truly the council's pretty much already
[2:30:59] decided what they're going to do. That's
[2:31:01] what it feels like. So if you I feel
[2:31:03] like that extra time especially in topic
[2:31:06] like this it gives our residents some
[2:31:08] time to reach out for some additional
[2:31:11] feelings based on what we are actually
[2:31:13] presenting. I have heard from so many
[2:31:15] residents well what are you guys going
[2:31:16] to do? Yeah, I've had experiences on the
[2:31:19] council where residents have given input
[2:31:22] as we contemplated the ordinance and we
[2:31:25] discussed those changes and taking in
[2:31:27] that citizen input and making those
[2:31:28] changes then then directing staff to put
[2:31:32] those into the ordinance and put it on
[2:31:35] the consent calendar for the next time.
[2:31:37] So there there are several different
[2:31:38] ways that we can do it where I think we
[2:31:39] can respect the citizens and their and
[2:31:42] their input but also
[2:31:46] move it along as well. So
[2:31:48] >> I'm so interested in moving this along.
[2:31:50] I've been doing this for
[2:31:52] but I really want to I don't want to
[2:32:00] » but there there are variety of ways we
[2:32:01] can do it. So council what do you want
[2:32:04] to do?
[2:32:06] I would say let's add it on to our work
[2:32:08] session next week and have further
[2:32:10] discussion and where we're at.
[2:32:12] >> See where we're at there. I concur.
[2:32:14] >> Okay. Is that okay? Council.
[2:32:17] >> All right. Thank you. I don't know how
[2:32:20] much more you say. [clears throat] That
[2:32:23] sounds rude. I don't mean it. How much
[2:32:25] more is it?
[2:32:26] >> How much more have we got?
[2:32:28] >> A third of the way.
[2:32:31] We
[2:32:31] >> only have five more slides. Five more.
[2:32:34] Okay. We can get that.
[2:32:36] Okay. So, council, we we ended up here
[2:32:39] with occupancy limits, STRs. Um, I
[2:32:43] encourage you in this week to go think
[2:32:45] about this. Do your dishes like I do
[2:32:47] dishes when I as I think.
[2:32:49] But also J20,
[2:32:52] [laughter]
[2:32:56] » but also I know in the packet you've you
[2:32:58] sent it had had some good information
[2:33:01] about why why you as the as the legal
[2:33:06] staff feel it's based as I recall it's
[2:33:09] based on a federal circuit court
[2:33:10] decision out of California.
[2:33:12] >> That is correct.
[2:33:13] >> We have these slides.
[2:33:15] >> Um I can share these. I can put those in
[2:33:17] that same shared folder.
[2:33:19] I also have them. They'll be posted on
[2:33:20] here.
[2:33:22] >> Council member Millet and Council Member
[2:33:24] Mikum. I apologize that we didn't get to
[2:33:26] you in your uh city council reports and
[2:33:30] entire council. I apologize we didn't
[2:33:31] get to the agenda review.
[2:33:34] Here we are.
[2:33:38] We already
[2:33:48] second.
[2:33:53] » Thank you. like very narrow.
[2:34:00] Absolutely.
[2:34:14] Now
[2:34:18] » I will say
[2:34:38] » a long day.
[2:34:39] >> Yes, that was a very long day. I'm glad
[2:34:42] that we didn't have to finish those.
[2:34:45] >> Yeah. Wow. We used
[2:34:49] I think we lost corum.
[2:34:52] >> And why we're allowing those on the
[2:34:53] agenda, you know,
[2:35:00] » that took three
[2:35:03] >> just to go through [clears throat]
[2:35:07] there.
[2:35:09] >> That wound up being Anyway,
[2:35:17] back
[2:35:23] » training.
[2:35:40] And that's
[2:35:42] a reporter just walks in
[2:35:46] China.
[2:35:54] [clears throat]
[2:35:54] And there's Chad. We love.
[2:36:01] » Oh my gosh. It's been forever.
[2:36:04] >> Two nights in a
[2:36:06] It's too bad me better.
[2:36:12] » Yes.
[2:36:14] >> Thank you.
[2:36:22] » Happy to do it.
[2:36:24] >> We got in the correct order, so we'll be
[2:36:26] good.
[2:36:30] » I can start my train.
[2:36:32] >> Oh, hello.
[2:36:34] She's holding up
[2:36:42] this
[2:36:43] ent
[2:36:55] thank you for having me. Thank you.
[2:37:05] Okay,
[2:37:08] I guess
[2:37:11] I don't have to answer that. You have to
[2:37:13] take your question.
[2:37:26] Yes.
[2:37:38] department.
[2:37:59] So is that so
[2:38:04] funny?
[2:38:10] » Oh
[2:38:12] spondies
[2:38:17] and all of the money for like
[2:38:21] the domestic
[2:38:23] watch. They love that
[2:38:26] extra choice for
[2:38:29] them to be able to get my
[2:38:31] wife's we all
[2:38:38] » so
[2:38:42] okay. Um, council member Mikum, can you
[2:38:44] hear us?
[2:38:46] >> Uh, yes. Loud and clear. Thank you.
[2:38:49] >> All right. [gasps]
[2:38:51] We're going to go ahead and get started.
[2:38:53] Welcome to all of you. Apologize we're
[2:38:55] starting a couple minutes late. We've
[2:38:56] just spent the last hour and a half
[2:38:58] talking about short-term rentals. And it
[2:39:00] looks like a lot of you want to talk
[2:39:02] about short-term rentals as well. So, I
[2:39:04] would encourage you um to after the
[2:39:07] meeting, uh
[2:39:09] Pete, when is this going to or Teresa,
[2:39:11] when is this going to be posted on our
[2:39:13] website, the the work session?
[2:39:17] Later tonight. I would start about an
[2:39:19] hourish in
[2:39:22] unless you would like to be part or
[2:39:23] listen to the discussion we had on
[2:39:25] budget as well. But we did we've just
[2:39:28] spent a considerable amount of time
[2:39:30] talking about short-term rentals. And
[2:39:32] just so you know, we are continuing our
[2:39:35] work session to next Tuesday, which is a
[2:39:38] Tuesday that we typically don't meet. We
[2:39:40] have a work session already scheduled to
[2:39:42] talk about the uh budget, but we are
[2:39:46] also going to include and continue our
[2:39:48] discussion on short-term rentals. And so
[2:39:50] that's next Tuesday, May 5th. And that
[2:39:53] meeting, what time does that meeting?
[2:39:55] The 3 at 3:00. So, we're going to spend
[2:39:58] the first little while talking about
[2:40:00] budget and then we're going to continue
[2:40:02] our discussion on short-term rentals at
[2:40:04] that point. So, appreciate the
[2:40:06] discussion we've had as a council. It
[2:40:08] was a robust discussion and I think that
[2:40:10] we're we're getting a better
[2:40:12] understanding of what what direction
[2:40:14] we're we're wanting to go as a council
[2:40:16] and looking at I just appreciate you all
[2:40:19] sharing your your thoughts with that. So
[2:40:21] with that I'll call the meeting to order
[2:40:23] and council member Mikum is
[2:40:26] participating remotely
[2:40:29] and we have an invocation inspirational
[2:40:31] thought by Riley Ramsey.
[2:40:36] » What's that? Oh, current Miss Orm.
[2:40:39] >> Yes,
[2:40:39] >> welcome sash. I'm sorry.
[2:40:42] >> Apologize. [laughter]
[2:40:43] >> Sorry.
[2:40:45] >> Dear heavenly father, we're thankful for
[2:40:47] this day. Please bless us as we meet
[2:40:50] today that we will be able to have
[2:40:51] effective and efficient conversation.
[2:40:53] And please bless those who aren't here
[2:40:56] tonight that they will be able to be
[2:40:59] included in the conversation. And we
[2:41:01] thank thee for all of our many
[2:41:02] blessings. And we thank thee for the
[2:41:04] ability to meet here today. And we say
[2:41:06] these things in name, Jesus Christ.
[2:41:07] Amen.
[2:41:09] >> Thank you. And then we have the Pledge
[2:41:11] of Allegiance by Haley Johnson,
[2:41:14] who's a member of the Miss Orum Royalty.
[2:41:17] [panting]
[2:41:21] » Please repeat the pledge with me. I
[2:41:24] pledge algiance to the flag of the
[2:41:27] United States of America and to the
[2:41:30] republic for which it stands. One nation
[2:41:33] under God, indivisible, with liberty and
[2:41:37] justice for all.
[2:41:43] Thank you. All right, we're on item 7.1.
[2:41:47] Is Oh, there he Okay, welcome. We have
[2:41:53] Senator Kevin Stratton here from our our
[2:41:56] state legislature who's here to do a
[2:41:58] legislative report. Welcome.
[2:42:01] >> Thank you.
[2:42:02] >> Y go ahead and have a seat right there
[2:42:04] and turn the time over to you.
[2:42:09] » Thank you, mayor, and the city council
[2:42:11] and wonderful staff. I'm uh very
[2:42:15] grateful and honored to be here today
[2:42:17] and uh certainly honored to represent
[2:42:19] this wonderful city. It's fun for me uh
[2:42:25] to have good stories to tell and there's
[2:42:28] so much good that's taking place here in
[2:42:30] this city under the direction this
[2:42:31] wonderful council and uh the leadership
[2:42:34] here and the wonderful staff. Great
[2:42:36] story to tell. I I do represent Senate
[2:42:39] District 24, which is takes in we come
[2:42:43] down uh the the north borders of Orm to
[2:42:46] State Street all the way down to Desert
[2:42:48] Industries where the the river comes and
[2:42:53] then we follow the river to I-15 and
[2:42:55] then down to Center Street in Provo and
[2:42:57] then around past the the cemetery and
[2:43:00] then we take Wasatch back as well. Also,
[2:43:03] I represent uh both uh Utah and Wasach
[2:43:08] County as well. But uh this is my home
[2:43:11] here and I am so grateful. I was
[2:43:14] reflecting uh in preparation for this uh
[2:43:18] I was born here in Orm and the
[2:43:20] population back in 1962
[2:43:24] was about 30,000
[2:43:26] and uh there's been remarkable change
[2:43:29] and uh it's been wonderful. Uh I am fond
[2:43:33] of peaches and peach trees, but we we're
[2:43:35] growing other wonderful things uh rather
[2:43:37] than peaches, especially freezes like as
[2:43:40] this year. It's been that's been tough.
[2:43:42] But let me if I may, mayor, uh uh as as
[2:43:46] you wish. I I have a few things I'll
[2:43:48] share and then I'd like to just open up
[2:43:50] to questions if you'd like or would that
[2:43:52] be okay. Let me just share, if I may,
[2:43:55] talk a little bit about Utah. And uh
[2:43:58] it's fun because I think you'll
[2:43:59] understand as as you look uh look at the
[2:44:03] 2 54 cities and towns we have in the
[2:44:07] state of Utah and Orman's really stands
[2:44:08] out in a lot of ways. Well,
[2:44:11] Utah does the same thing as we look at
[2:44:14] other states. And uh you might be
[2:44:16] interested to know that the some there's
[2:44:19] several uh things and key indicators.
[2:44:23] Utah is ranked number one for increase
[2:44:26] in housing household income growth.
[2:44:30] Number one for protecting children's
[2:44:32] mental well-being.
[2:44:34] Number one state overall for the three
[2:44:36] years running. And that's really
[2:44:38] remarkable. US News and World Report
[2:44:40] that takes several key indicators and
[2:44:43] looks across the board uh that that
[2:44:45] indicate the health and vitality and
[2:44:47] strength in many different ways. And the
[2:44:49] US News report has ranked the state of
[2:44:52] Utah number one for three years running.
[2:44:56] Number one economic outlook for 19 years
[2:45:00] running. That that's uh that's
[2:45:01] remarkable. that that deals with tax
[2:45:03] policy and and and budget process and those related to that economic
[2:45:09] strength. Number one in GDP growth,
[2:45:13] number one in upward mobility, number
[2:45:15] two state for teachers. That's
[2:45:17] remarkable. What we've been able to do
[2:45:19] in education over the last several years
[2:45:22] has been, I think, a real complement to
[2:45:24] our citizens and their their focus and
[2:45:27] desire to see good education. remarkable
[2:45:30] number two education across in in in the
[2:45:33] state, highest volunteer rate, most
[2:45:36] independent state, lowest electricity
[2:45:38] rates in the US. Uh so wonderful and and uh opportunity to
[2:45:45] recognize that we stand all we all stand
[2:45:47] on shoulders and principles that help us
[2:45:50] uh guide and direct uh the decisions we
[2:45:53] make. And so there's a lot of good news.
[2:45:56] Now there's of course there's challenges
[2:45:57] and we need to deal with those and and we'll talk about that in in a moment
[2:46:01] but let me start constitutionally the
[2:46:05] state legislature is charged first of
[2:46:07] all one one key point is the fiscal
[2:46:10] health of the state. So let me talk a
[2:46:12] little about the budget. Our budget this
[2:46:15] year was 31.6 billion as a state as a
[2:46:18] whole. We did do something quite unique
[2:46:22] uh that we about every five years, five
[2:46:26] to eight years, we'll go through and
[2:46:28] we'll look for a 5% cut across the board
[2:46:32] and what that would look like. That
[2:46:33] helps identify things that perhaps may
[2:46:37] be uh uh redundant. Uh we we go through
[2:46:41] that exercise. I one of my assignments
[2:46:43] in legislatores chair the social service
[2:46:46] appropriations committee that has the
[2:46:49] largest budget in the state. It's 8 to9
[2:46:51] billion each year. I'm the senate chair
[2:46:54] there and have a good house chair. If we
[2:46:56] have both house and house and senate
[2:47:00] members, in fact the legislature, one
[2:47:02] unique thing about Utah across the
[2:47:04] nation, it's probably why some of the
[2:47:07] things we uh are able to do is that
[2:47:10] every legislator does sit on
[2:47:11] appropriations committee. Senators sit
[2:47:13] on two. So I sit on transportation and
[2:47:16] then I chair the natural the the social
[2:47:19] services in the appropriations area. We
[2:47:23] found $60 million in our social
[2:47:25] services, for example, in that budget
[2:47:27] that we that we could uh redirect and
[2:47:31] make available. Uh we had uh for six
[2:47:36] years enroll the the another tax cut for
[2:47:39] Utah families. There was the from House
[2:47:41] Bill one in July, federal House Bill
[2:47:43] One, there was a [snorts] close to $300
[2:47:46] million tax cut that went into place as
[2:47:48] well, but we were able to do some
[2:47:50] additional tax cutting. and lower those
[2:47:52] taxes focused on policies that help our
[2:47:54] families and citizen citizens.
[2:47:58] Let's see. So, that's a little bit of
[2:48:00] the fiscal health and I and again
[2:48:03] first first priority for the legislature
[2:48:06] always is come up with a good balanced
[2:48:07] budget. We're able to do that and we we
[2:48:10] compliment you. By the way, one of the
[2:48:12] great stories I was able to tell to our our state is look at ORM city and
[2:48:17] what they're doing. They're building,
[2:48:18] you know, they they've had this
[2:48:20] wonderful city center, but it needed
[2:48:24] repair and and were able to build this
[2:48:27] without any debt. What a remarkable
[2:48:28] thing that is a great story to tell and
[2:48:31] I compliment all of you for that. And uh
[2:48:34] one of those things I'm I'm excited to
[2:48:36] share with my colleagues as we we we
[2:48:38] look at different issues.
[2:48:41] Second issue is oversight. Legislature
[2:48:44] is charged with oversight and and
[2:48:46] working to make sure that uh the
[2:48:48] branches are working properly. We have
[2:48:50] several audits ongoing that take place
[2:48:53] and and sever we have an oversight
[2:48:55] committee that that we work with and and that that's a good point. Then the
[2:48:59] third is is the policy and setting the
[2:49:01] policy.
[2:49:03] I will share that I I also chair there's
[2:49:06] other three other areas I chair.
[2:49:10] the uh uh the interim committee
[2:49:14] for natural resources, agriculture,
[2:49:16] environmental quality. I also chair our
[2:49:18] federalism commission that uh that
[2:49:21] that's a remarkable thing that we're
[2:49:23] doing. If you ever think that there's
[2:49:25] contention in politics, you ever think
[2:49:27] that come to our federalism commission.
[2:49:29] We have
[2:49:31] completely opposite points of view
[2:49:34] across the board yet we work together in
[2:49:37] a very synergistic way. There's a great
[2:49:39] comment made uh by one of our my good uh
[2:49:43] I am of I affiliate with the Republican
[2:49:46] party. I have wonderful Democrat
[2:49:48] colleagues and uh we were presenting a
[2:49:52] legislative summary to the Utah bar and
[2:49:55] one of the the
[2:49:57] you can you imagine being legislature on
[2:50:00] an attorney. You have two strikes
[2:50:02] against you before you even get your
[2:50:03] first pitch, right? I'm an attorney. I'm
[2:50:05] a politician. Anyway, we were reporting
[2:50:08] back to our uh uh the Utah State Bar and
[2:50:14] they asked about that and one of our
[2:50:16] good colleagues sent he said, you know,
[2:50:18] the things that the news media plays out
[2:50:20] just aren't accurate. There is because
[2:50:23] he was asked for his first year in the
[2:50:24] legislature how's it been that asked
[2:50:26] specifically. He says there is a Utah
[2:50:28] way that we work together in a
[2:50:31] cooperative way. we listen to each other
[2:50:32] and we seek to come up with the the best
[2:50:35] uh best solution and that's the
[2:50:37] federalism commission is really on that
[2:50:39] and
[2:50:41] generally traditionally
[2:50:43] the those in in the Democratic party
[2:50:47] haven't really liked the notion of
[2:50:49] federalism but they're more receptive
[2:50:50] right now because of the aggressiveness
[2:50:54] from their perspective of our at the
[2:50:55] national level from our our our
[2:50:57] executive branch and so there it it's a ripe opportunity for us to work
[2:51:01] together in some wonderful ways.
[2:51:03] The final one is the legislative water
[2:51:06] development commission is is I chair
[2:51:08] that. So, so those are my assignments.
[2:51:10] So, I can hopefully ask answer any
[2:51:13] questions in that space or any others
[2:51:14] you would have. I would maybe like to
[2:51:17] highlight just a couple of policies
[2:51:20] legislatively. There were
[2:51:23] 1,56
[2:51:25] bills initiated.
[2:51:29] we actually end up passing 541. I often
[2:51:32] say it's really important that uh to
[2:51:35] recognize I'm asked, well, what did you
[2:51:38] do? And I some of the most important
[2:51:39] things is what we don't do as we look at
[2:51:42] sound principles, limited government,
[2:51:45] sound policy, uh federalism,
[2:51:48] uh
[2:51:50] those you free trying to protect the
[2:51:52] free market, the things that that we
[2:51:53] value are very important. But maybe a
[2:51:56] couple of pieces of legislation that may be of interest. I did work uh
[2:52:01] we've been working for two years on a a
[2:52:05] uh water-wise landscaping bill. And I
[2:52:08] just have to say I we we set up that
[2:52:11] what what does water-wise landscaping
[2:52:13] mean? And given our water and the
[2:52:15] challenges we have and we've been so
[2:52:18] blessed uh with our ecosystem that we
[2:52:21] have here in the state, remarkable
[2:52:23] ecosystem and pioneers that thought and
[2:52:25] we have even with this very challenging
[2:52:28] water cycle we're in. We we do still
[2:52:30] have reservoirs that have water in them
[2:52:32] and there's so there's there's a lot of
[2:52:33] positive but I I was pleased to note as
[2:52:36] I came in I think the city's done a
[2:52:39] great job in this new landscaping being
[2:52:41] very wise with your water and the water
[2:52:42] usage and and uh that we're trying to
[2:52:45] set an example that would then be worth
[2:52:48] emulating across the state. So that
[2:52:50] would be one one piece. Uh uh probably
[2:52:55] some of the most uh
[2:52:59] near to my heart piece of legislation
[2:53:01] through the years is uh couple of years
[2:53:04] ago we worked on creating a a pattern
[2:53:09] cadence in September constitutional
[2:53:11] month where we would teach principles
[2:53:13] constitutional principles
[2:53:16] uh that uh highlight them and I'm
[2:53:18] pleased of what the city's done in that
[2:53:20] regard as well but invite all the study
[2:53:22] that the founders that that that's one
[2:53:25] uh we so we we have those those issues
[2:53:28] certainly that deal with our policy but
[2:53:30] then also what makes us who we are and
[2:53:32] how can we make sure we're not
[2:53:34] forgetting those wonderful shoulders
[2:53:36] that we stand on with that mayor I'll be
[2:53:38] glad to answer try to answer any
[2:53:40] questions
[2:53:40] >> right thank you I I appreciate your
[2:53:44] update and thank you thank you for your
[2:53:47] service and grateful for the
[2:53:49] relationship that the city has with our
[2:53:51] state legis legislators. We've we've
[2:53:53] been in contact this year a lot just and
[2:53:55] we have a good open communication. I do
[2:53:58] have a question. Uh what do you see uh
[2:54:01] as you know the legislative session has
[2:54:03] ended but the work still continues as we
[2:54:05] go as we have interim meetings.
[2:54:07] >> What are the what are the focuses and
[2:54:09] the priorities that you're you're seeing
[2:54:12] as we are going into the interim
[2:54:14] meetings between the sessions?
[2:54:16] >> Thank you for that question. there. We
[2:54:18] do go through a process of establishing
[2:54:20] priorities and study items of what we're
[2:54:22] going to do. Very similar to what you
[2:54:24] spent the last 3 hours looking at to try
[2:54:27] and create the the best policy. There are issues that are hot hot item
[2:54:34] issues. Immigration for example, uh
[2:54:37] voting integrity would be another one.
[2:54:40] Uh but there's several important
[2:54:43] management issues that that we're
[2:54:45] dealing with. Several water issues. For
[2:54:47] example, one of the things we're going
[2:54:49] to talk about in our natural resource
[2:54:51] agro environment committee is what do we
[2:54:53] do currently with our water situation
[2:54:56] that we're in right now? Do we need to
[2:54:57] do an emergency declaration or what what
[2:55:00] are steps are we taking to deal with
[2:55:02] that and and protect our environment?
[2:55:04] What are we doing with the Great Salt
[2:55:06] Lake and how how can we help and and uh
[2:55:08] encourage that? There's a lot of
[2:55:10] reporting that takes place. There's uh
[2:55:14] you know I I tax policy is one I'm I'm
[2:55:17] interested I might I don't mean to
[2:55:19] editorialize but one of the things that
[2:55:22] you know we hear a lot about affordable
[2:55:24] housing and we also hear about property
[2:55:27] tax. You know, one of the things I'll
[2:55:29] just throw this out. I don't want to
[2:55:30] have but if we didn't offer the
[2:55:34] residential exemption to nonoccupied
[2:55:38] residences, that would do that would do
[2:55:41] remarkable. We're going to need some
[2:55:43] help. If that's something that that uh
[2:55:46] you that's that
[2:55:48] >> saying, Council Member Miller, you you
[2:55:50] you're speaking her language.
[2:55:52] >> That that that would that would help. I
[2:55:55] think our affordable housing would help
[2:55:56] a lot in the chances. I know you're
[2:55:58] wrestling with this. I'm I'm really
[2:56:00] excited to see what you come up with.
[2:56:02] I'm glad it's your your decision, not
[2:56:04] mine right now. We've dealt with a lot
[2:56:06] already, but be very supportive and I'm
[2:56:09] but I do appreciate the intentionality
[2:56:12] and the carefulness. I've talked to some
[2:56:14] of the council members. I know you're
[2:56:15] very listening and trying to be very
[2:56:18] intentional on this. So, just don't mess
[2:56:20] up and we'll be good. Well, but we're
[2:56:23] trying our very very best.
[2:56:24] >> Oh, you are. Okay.
[2:56:26] >> Appreciate that.
[2:56:27] >> Thank you. Council members, do you have
[2:56:29] any questions? Do you do you still
[2:56:30] >> Well, I just want to make a comment
[2:56:32] because that was a question I was going
[2:56:33] to ask because there was a bill that was
[2:56:35] run this last legislative session that
[2:56:37] first started to to talk about that 45%
[2:56:41] basically tax discount that is given to
[2:56:45] highdensity apartment owners. Um, so
[2:56:49] truly affects our ability to tax because
[2:56:52] it takes away tax from our school
[2:56:53] district who then our school district
[2:56:55] has to make up that deficit and then we
[2:56:57] have to hold off because we don't want
[2:56:59] to overt tax so we don't put on a tax
[2:57:01] because our residents are feeling the
[2:57:02] burdens from providing for schools. You
[2:57:04] know, you know all about that. We talked
[2:57:05] about that during the legislative
[2:57:07] session. So truly appreciate that you
[2:57:09] made that comment because I have been
[2:57:10] beating that drum for four years and I
[2:57:12] truly appreciate that that is a
[2:57:14] conversation now at the legislature. I
[2:57:16] think we're going to need some help from
[2:57:18] our uh local, you know, the league of
[2:57:20] cities and towns and if that's type I I
[2:57:23] would say mayor and council members that
[2:57:25] I do defend your right to have local
[2:57:28] control [sighs and gasps]
[2:57:30] and good data leads to good information.
[2:57:32] For example, uh Chair Dah of the League
[2:57:36] of Cities and Towns, he and I work very
[2:57:38] closely on two or three issues. Uh one great key indicator is uh if we're
[2:57:45] trying to get 40,000 units, we've
[2:57:47] already approved 109,000 in just a few jurisdictions and that that number
[2:57:53] will increase. But but with that in
[2:57:57] mind, do we really need we really need
[2:57:59] to let that be a local control is my
[2:58:02] perspective.
[2:58:04] the the the it the key though is we need
[2:58:06] some potentially some help with
[2:58:08] infrastructure but that needs to be a
[2:58:10] local issue that should not be spread
[2:58:13] throughout the state for example ORM has
[2:58:15] done what if if you've paid and paid the
[2:58:18] cost put it in you need to be able to do
[2:58:20] that but but we need to be wise and try
[2:58:23] and avoid the growth of government and some of the the
[2:58:29] I guess uh interesting isms I'll say
[2:58:33] ideologies of the day to to to not, you
[2:58:36] know, remove ourselves from the roots
[2:58:37] and the grounding that we have.
[2:58:40] >> And that was my second point. I truly
[2:58:42] appreciate because you do lead out on
[2:58:44] honoring municipal property, municipal
[2:58:46] rights, municipal government rights, I
[2:58:47] guess is the best way to say that.
[2:58:49] >> Um, thank you. Thank you for supporting
[2:58:52] us in that way.
[2:58:53] >> Thank you. Great. Thank you. Um, Council
[2:58:56] Member Mulestein,
[2:58:58] >> so you talked a little bit about water
[2:58:59] rights or water being a big issue that's
[2:59:02] going to come up in the interim session.
[2:59:03] How is the state planning on balancing
[2:59:06] that growth that you just talked about,
[2:59:08] this push for growth and the need for
[2:59:10] water for the Great Salt Lake? I'm very
[2:59:12] interested in knowing what that plan
[2:59:14] looks like or the legislaturator's point
[2:59:17] of view on that.
[2:59:17] >> How long can I have? Can I have a few
[2:59:19] minutes maybe answer that? Was that I
[2:59:21] don't want [laughter]
[2:59:24] >> Let let me share something. Let me just
[2:59:26] share. My grandfather ran for he was on
[2:59:28] the city council. He ran in 1950 ran for
[2:59:30] mayor in that time frame and he says we
[2:59:32] need to create a good water system for
[2:59:35] Oram. And he was beaten. His opponent
[2:59:38] says you're going to bankrupt the city.
[2:59:39] Well, ORM has the most one of the most
[2:59:42] remarkable water sources of any
[2:59:45] municipality because what we did for,
[2:59:47] you know, 75 years ago in buying up the
[2:59:51] water rights of the agricultural users
[2:59:55] and then addressing and making that
[2:59:57] available. We It's rem we or Oram will
[2:59:59] never run out of or will be the last
[3:00:01] place in Utah to run out of water. All I I'll just But the same is true. 80 of the 100% of rainfall that comes 90%
[3:00:12] of it goes in the ground and refreshes
[3:00:14] our groundwater and then evaporates.
[3:00:16] That 10% I I'm just using rough numbers.
[3:00:19] 80% of that 10% left is in agriculture
[3:00:22] right now. And so we need to do all we
[3:00:24] can to to utilize best practices in
[3:00:28] there. We will have as as we take care
[3:00:30] of agriculture and the the nice thing is
[3:00:33] as we improve the systems in agriculture
[3:00:36] the water the value of the water that's
[3:00:38] saved can pay for the improvements and
[3:00:40] help that. So that there's there's a
[3:00:42] real good model there. A million acre
[3:00:44] feet I don't a million acre feet would raises Great Salt Lake one foot.
[3:00:50] We feel that we need about 400
[3:00:53] additional 400 additional 400,000
[3:00:57] additional acre feet. We've already
[3:00:59] identified to keep Utah lake stabilized.
[3:01:01] We've already identified 160,000 acre
[3:01:04] feet. One of the things that I have
[3:01:07] asked I'm requiring our our water
[3:01:09] development at the Great Salt Lake and
[3:01:11] several to come. We will have several
[3:01:12] reports. We're going to dial this in.
[3:01:15] That's question exactly. Let's agree
[3:01:17] what we need and how we're going to get
[3:01:19] there. For example, if we change the
[3:01:21] grading on the west side of the Great
[3:01:23] Salt Lake so that water runs into the
[3:01:25] lake instead of out in the desert, that
[3:01:28] is projected to provide another 60,000
[3:01:30] acre feet. If we do away with the
[3:01:33] non-native
[3:01:35] plants around Great Salt Lake in Jordan,
[3:01:38] when we had two years ago when we had
[3:01:40] that great water year, we had to take
[3:01:43] water from to Utah Lake through our
[3:01:45] canal system because the the Jordan
[3:01:48] River was so choked with non-native
[3:01:51] growth. We take care of that non-native
[3:01:53] growth and that adds another 80,000 acre
[3:01:56] feet. So, we're doing some things. We
[3:01:58] purchased the magnesium plant there that
[3:02:00] had tremendous about 100,000 acre feet
[3:02:02] of water. We are really focusing and as
[3:02:06] we just lift together and not use fear,
[3:02:09] I would say not use fear and and some of
[3:02:12] the narratives we see if we're wise
[3:02:15] stewards, uh we're going to we will we
[3:02:18] will weather this and and do it well. So
[3:02:20] those are how's that? That's I could go
[3:02:22] on. That was like a little skip along. I
[3:02:24] could go hit the lots, take up the whole
[3:02:26] meeting if you'd like.
[3:02:27] >> I It's an issue I could talk about for
[3:02:29] hours as well, but thank you for
[3:02:31] representing ORM. Well, we really
[3:02:32] appreciate you.
[3:02:33] >> Well, you have we have a great story. We
[3:02:37] just need to get the rest state do what
[3:02:38] ORM does. We'll be in good shape. So,
[3:02:39] let's not say that.
[3:02:41] >> Right. Thank you. Anybody any other
[3:02:43] council? Okay. Council member Lamson.
[3:02:45] >> Well, we have a kind of a special
[3:02:48] opportunity here, Kevin. You have your
[3:02:49] sweetheart. we're here with you this
[3:02:51] evening and we just want to say thank
[3:02:53] you to both of you uh for your service
[3:02:56] and for your example and the way that
[3:02:59] you've led uh not only you I know that
[3:03:01] your sweetheart is right there with you
[3:03:03] all the way and and she sacrifices a lot
[3:03:06] of things so that you can do what you do
[3:03:07] so thank you to both of you that is very
[3:03:10] kind and I and I you know maybe I could
[3:03:13] ask Ruby Ruby would you stand up she
[3:03:15] bless her heart we have been blessed at
[3:03:18] this point in life with 23
[3:03:20] grandchildren. Imagine that. And Ruby's
[3:03:22] one of them. And it's grandpa and
[3:03:23] grandpa's birthday date with Ruby. So,
[3:03:26] thank you for that. But we need She's
[3:03:29] here. She'll say,
[3:03:30] >> "So, Ruby, you need to talk to your
[3:03:32] grandparents about what constitutes a
[3:03:35] fun birthday." Okay.
[3:03:37] >> I know we're fun, but but there's
[3:03:39] something more fun for you. Trust me,
[3:03:41] >> we we want to be balanced, old mayor.
[3:03:43] remember this is a good civic and I'll
[3:03:46] be in her. Yes. So, we're going to if
[3:03:48] you'll excuse us, we're going to go
[3:03:50] continue our date, but I am I'm so
[3:03:52] grateful. I do want to thank your
[3:03:55] families
[3:03:57] and your support group. And uh I I
[3:04:01] remember I remember Jerry Washburn,
[3:04:03] Mayor Washburn. I happened to be at his
[3:04:05] house. I was visiting and uh he came
[3:04:07] home and he said, "A terrible thing has
[3:04:09] happened.
[3:04:11] Jim Reams had left council meeting and
[3:04:14] had a heart attack just over here and he
[3:04:16] passed away and uh Jerry's uh he's I
[3:04:21] call him my brother cuz we have a sweet
[3:04:23] family relationship but but I recognized
[3:04:27] the work and effort of the wonderful
[3:04:29] staff and uh went played basketball with
[3:04:33] some of them and other things and no
[3:04:35] others but we've got a wonderful city
[3:04:36] manager but very compliment to who you
[3:04:39] are and what you're doing but we do We
[3:04:41] need to take time to thank those that
[3:04:43] support us and I know Jeff for you and
[3:04:45] your sweet wife have been through during
[3:04:47] your time of service and that that's
[3:04:49] true with so many others. So, thank you.
[3:04:52] very much.
[3:04:52] >> Right. Thank you. And happy birthday,
[3:04:54] Ruby. Go have some fun. Thank you,
[3:04:57] Senator. Appreciate you taking the time
[3:04:59] to come this evening.
[3:05:00] >> Honored to be with you. Thank you. Thank
[3:05:02] you, Senator. Mayor and Council, if I
[3:05:04] can also just add from staff's
[3:05:06] perspective in non-public meetings,
[3:05:09] Senator Stratton is super great to work
[3:05:11] with, always responsive, always listens,
[3:05:13] is always helpful, and is great at
[3:05:15] promoting the ORM way uh with the along
[3:05:18] with the Utah way. So,
[3:05:22] making the ORM way. All right. Thank
[3:05:25] you. Okay. The next item on our agenda
[3:05:28] is item 7.2 is a presentation, the Green
[3:05:31] Grant Award.
[3:05:32] Blake is Blake Oh, there's Blake. Blake
[3:05:35] Lenelli from He's the public sector
[3:05:37] solutions manager for waste management
[3:05:39] of Utah.
[3:05:41] Welcome.
[3:05:46] Uh, council mayor, first and foremost,
[3:05:48] thank you for having me out. I always
[3:05:50] say I've got the best job. I get to give
[3:05:52] out checks and do all that fun stuff. So
[3:05:55] over the years um ORUM has done a great
[3:05:59] job around recycle education and we're
[3:06:03] happy to announce that you're the
[3:06:04] recipient of the green grant award this
[3:06:07] year and kudos to you as you know over
[3:06:10] the years you've been able to maximize
[3:06:12] the funds given by waste management to
[3:06:15] continue the recycle education and items
[3:06:18] like the top 10 in the bin or film
[3:06:20] plastic pilots. All of those have been
[3:06:23] pioneered by ORUM. So, greatly
[3:06:25] appreciative of appreciative of that and
[3:06:28] would like to give you a check for
[3:06:30] $5,000.
[3:06:31] >> Oh, I don't think we'll turn that down.
[3:06:34] Okay. So, how do we do we do I do I go
[3:06:38] down? Okay. I Okay, council, just know
[3:06:40] that we have a lot of of these require
[3:06:43] pictures. So, make sure there's no
[3:06:44] cilantro in your teeth because we got to
[3:06:47] take some pictures.
[3:06:49] Move
[3:06:56] together.
[3:07:03] » I'm gonna have you go this way just a
[3:07:05] little bit for a sec.
[3:07:08] >> And then L and Jeff, can you actually
[3:07:09] switch spots? Is that okay?
[3:07:19] Hey, we got it.
[3:07:22] >> Thanks, Blake. Thank you,
[3:07:38] All right. Our next item is 7.3. It's a
[3:07:42] presentation, Arbor Day proclamation and
[3:07:45] video. So, we'll invite Bradley Day, our
[3:07:48] community and sustainability officer,
[3:07:52] to
[3:07:53] make do the presentation. Thank you.
[3:07:56] Thanks much,
[3:07:58] mayor and council. It has to be said ORM
[3:08:00] really loves its trees. Just this past
[3:08:02] weekend, the my hometown days of service
[3:08:04] happened. And during that, the my
[3:08:07] hometown communities, both Sharon Park
[3:08:09] and Geneva Park, we were able in Geneva
[3:08:11] Heights, we were able to plant some
[3:08:13] trees in their respective parks. It was
[3:08:14] a lovely experience. You all just
[3:08:16] participated at the start of work
[3:08:18] session with helping plant the new
[3:08:20] freedom tree. And we have so many other
[3:08:22] trees just going up on this campus
[3:08:23] alone. It's fantastic.
[3:08:25] for Arbor Day and as part of a tree city
[3:08:28] USA. The city has this presentation and
[3:08:30] we will share it for you now
[3:08:35] is famous for being family city USA. But
[3:08:38] did you know that ORM is also Tree City
[3:08:41] USA? In fact, I have here in my hand a
[3:08:46] letter from the National Arbor Day
[3:08:47] Foundation designating ORM a Tree City
[3:08:50] USA for the 33rd year in a row. The role
[3:08:54] of the urban forester is to maintain
[3:08:55] [music] all of the trees on city
[3:08:56] property. There's roughly 7,000 that we
[3:08:59] maintain in parks, parkways, buildings,
[3:09:01] medians.
[3:09:02] >> But Orin's commitment to planting,
[3:09:03] caring for, and celebrating trees goes
[3:09:06] back way farther than that. In fact, in
[3:09:08] the very first city council meeting of
[3:09:10] May of 1919, one of the first official
[3:09:13] acts of the new city was to hire someone
[3:09:16] to care for the trees. And here we are
[3:09:18] 107 years later, more committed to trees
[3:09:22] than ever. Uh our long-term goal is we
[3:09:24] need to do a thousand trees in 5 years.
[3:09:26] Trees are important for the urban
[3:09:28] environment. [music] They lower air
[3:09:29] temperatures. They sequester carbon.
[3:09:31] They filter storm water to help reduce
[3:09:33] how much runoff we get. They also
[3:09:35] beautify the city and give people a
[3:09:37] place to interact out in the public
[3:09:39] setting.
[3:09:39] >> The four standards set forth by the
[3:09:41] Arbor Day Foundation to qualify as a
[3:09:44] Tree City USA are maintain a tree board
[3:09:47] or department. Check.
[3:09:49] >> Ours is the natural resources advisory
[3:09:51] commission. Have a community tree
[3:09:52] ordinance. Check.
[3:09:54] >> You have to spend at least $2 per capita
[3:09:56] on urban forestry.
[3:09:58] >> Check. Celebrate Arbor Day. I'm signing
[3:10:01] the official city Arbor Day proclamation
[3:10:03] right now. So, check and check. We're
[3:10:06] excited to celebrate Arbor Day this year
[3:10:08] with a few extra special events. We're
[3:10:11] planting trees in city parks as part of
[3:10:13] my hometown days of service. We're
[3:10:15] planting a new freedom tree right here
[3:10:18] in the new Freedom Plaza to honor our
[3:10:20] veterans. We're planting hundreds of
[3:10:22] trees on the city center campus to make
[3:10:24] sure the heart of our city is green and
[3:10:26] clean. Stay tuned for more ways that you
[3:10:29] can help bring more trees to ORM. Happy
[3:10:31] Arbor Day, ORM.
[3:10:38] » Thank you very much. Happy Arbor Day.
[3:10:40] >> All right. So, we've got a I don't have
[3:10:42] the proclamation here, but you saw me
[3:10:44] holding a letter in that video. Yeah.
[3:10:47] So, Arbor Day, we do have the tree
[3:10:49] initiative coming up from the Natural
[3:10:50] Resources Advisory Commission that we
[3:10:52] have and and and like Bradley said, we
[3:10:55] did plant a new freedom tree out in the Freedom Plaza. And so, you
[3:11:00] can see that out there if you go out
[3:11:03] there this this evening. It's brand new,
[3:11:06] just hanging out. And so, council, any
[3:11:10] anything you want to say about Arbor
[3:11:11] Day?
[3:11:13] Go trees. Okay. [laughter]
[3:11:16] All right, thank you. [gasps] Our next
[3:11:19] presentation
[3:11:20] is fire appreciation day. And so I just
[3:11:24] this title made me think about when I we
[3:11:26] I grew up camping and when I would with
[3:11:28] the campfire, I really appreciated fire
[3:11:31] probably enough to really scare my mom
[3:11:33] and dad. But anyway, I don't think
[3:11:36] that's what you mean here by
[3:11:38] appreciating fire.
[3:11:39] >> That's what we mean. But no, I I I did appreciate but turn the time over to
[3:11:44] our fire chief, Mark Sanderson.
[3:11:46] >> Thank you, mayor and council. I just
[3:11:48] want following that presentation, I just
[3:11:49] want to assure you that we have the
[3:11:51] sharpest chainsaws and we have the best
[3:11:54] firefighters in the event that a tree
[3:11:55] catches on fire that they can follow
[3:11:57] that tree wherever it needs to be
[3:12:00] safely. That's how good they are.
[3:12:01] >> That's great. Yeah, this is an
[3:12:03] opportunity for me and I appreciate any
[3:12:06] time that I can get in front of you or
[3:12:08] our citizens to brag about our fire
[3:12:11] department or show the personal
[3:12:13] appreciation that I have as well as the
[3:12:16] support you have for them. It's an
[3:12:18] opportunity that I'll take every day.
[3:12:19] And so I actually first of all want to
[3:12:22] start off with just uh thanking our
[3:12:24] command staff for joining me tonight and
[3:12:26] supporting this presentation along with
[3:12:28] Chief Dave Chase and our C platoon crew.
[3:12:32] And we're very fortunate. I haven't
[3:12:33] heard the pages go off and I haven't
[3:12:35] seen anybody leave in an emergency. So
[3:12:36] I'm going to try to talk fast so that we
[3:12:38] can keep them all here. But I appreciate
[3:12:40] them taking the time out of their busy
[3:12:42] day that allows us to do this. This
[3:12:45] actually is falling on the heels of our
[3:12:47] quarterly awards that we did yesterday,
[3:12:50] today, and then we'll finish up on
[3:12:52] Thursday. And it leads right into Fire
[3:12:55] Appreciation Day, which is May 4th. And
[3:12:57] I'm going to give you some background
[3:12:59] that initially
[3:13:01] we've turned fire appreciation day into
[3:13:04] what was previously called International
[3:13:06] Firefighters Day, which is a day of
[3:13:08] remembrance, recognition, support, and
[3:13:11] celebration where current and past
[3:13:12] firefighters are recognized, especially
[3:13:14] those who have fallen in the line of
[3:13:16] duty.
[3:13:17] This day began in 1999 after five
[3:13:21] Australian firefighters were killed
[3:13:22] during their attempt to battle a
[3:13:24] wildfire on the outskirts of Melbourne,
[3:13:27] Victoria area. After their deaths, JJ
[3:13:30] Edmonson was a volunteer lieutenant
[3:13:33] firefighter in Victoria, Australia,
[3:13:35] rallied to coordinate this day as a
[3:13:38] national and international day of
[3:13:39] recognition and remembrance of those
[3:13:42] firefighters. The day of May 4th was
[3:13:44] also chosen as it's linked to the feast
[3:13:47] day of St. Florian which is the patron
[3:13:49] saint of all firefighters.
[3:13:52] St. Florian was first known was the
[3:13:55] first known commander of one firefighter
[3:13:57] squad in the Roman Empire. He ultimately
[3:14:01] lost his life while in the protection of
[3:14:03] others.
[3:14:05] St. Florian is widely recognized as a
[3:14:08] symbol of the fire service.
[3:14:10] International firefighter day is
[3:14:12] observed in many ways. It is represented
[3:14:14] by a red and blue ribbon like I'm
[3:14:17] wearing now which symbolically links the
[3:14:20] main elements of firefighters work with
[3:14:22] red to fire and blue to water. And these
[3:14:25] colors are also known internationally
[3:14:27] and recognized as representing emergency
[3:14:29] services.
[3:14:32] >> [clears throat]
[3:14:33] >> So with that, mayor, the ORM fire
[3:14:35] department would like to publicly thank
[3:14:36] you and the members of the council and
[3:14:39] Bren and his exec staff and our
[3:14:40] leadership team for their continued
[3:14:42] support because without that, the men
[3:14:45] and women of our fire department
[3:14:46] wouldn't be able to deliver the amazing
[3:14:49] firefighter skills, levels of service
[3:14:52] along along with our critical care
[3:14:54] paramedic program. Um what I have staff
[3:14:58] has prepared a ribbon with our logo that
[3:15:02] I would like to present to each one of
[3:15:04] you that I hope that you can place on
[3:15:06] yourselves tonight and then wear over
[3:15:09] the next week when appropriate just in
[3:15:11] appreciation for the men and women of
[3:15:12] our fire department.
[3:15:14] >> Right. Thank you.
[3:15:17] Well, we appreciate
[3:15:19] the work you and and your teams do. So I
[3:15:23] do want we I uh we three attended the uh
[3:15:27] platoon platoon a was it award yesterday
[3:15:30] recognition and we
[3:15:33] >> b shift and we missed the one today
[3:15:36] because we were in city council meeting
[3:15:37] but I do want to congratulate those of
[3:15:39] you who received service awards and and
[3:15:43] other uh were there any new fire brand
[3:15:46] new new firefighters that have met the
[3:15:48] probation that
[3:15:48] >> actually Talon Peterson Amy's son was uh
[3:15:51] recognized And Amy, even in her
[3:15:53] condition, not feeling well today, came
[3:15:55] in and was able to pin Talon's badge on
[3:15:57] his chest.
[3:15:57] >> Is Talon here tonight?
[3:15:59] >> Talon is here.
[3:16:00] >> Talon, I'm going to put you on the spot.
[3:16:02] Can you stand up?
[3:16:04] >> Well, at this point, mayor, what I would
[3:16:05] like to do is I would just ask everybody
[3:16:08] within this going to make him feel
[3:16:10] embarrassed.
[3:16:11] >> I'd like them all to stand up. Well,
[3:16:12] >> I want them all to stand up.
[3:16:13] >> And that gives us the opportunity to
[3:16:15] just show our appreciation to each one
[3:16:16] of them for the service they provide the
[3:16:18] community.
[3:16:19] >> All right. Thank you.
[3:16:20] >> Thank you.
[3:16:30] I don't think
[3:16:34] » and Talon's actually on a call. Mayor,
[3:16:37] >> okay. I was going to say Talon was
[3:16:38] spared embarrassment that you can Yes.
[3:16:42] >> Would it be appropriate, Mayor, if if
[3:16:43] the guys that were here that could we
[3:16:45] have a picture with?
[3:16:46] >> Sure. Yes. Come on up.
[3:16:47] >> Yeah. and members of the command staff,
[3:16:48] if you'll join and we'll just have a
[3:16:50] picture and then we can close.
[3:16:56] Thank you for your time.
[3:17:04] » Oh,
[3:17:11] okay.
[3:17:17] Probably gonna have to do two rows of
[3:17:18] you. Yeah.
[3:17:22] [laughter]
[3:17:26] » Guys, come in the front.
[3:17:30] » Okay, let's see.
[3:17:39] » Yeah.
[3:17:47] Yes.
[3:17:54] » All right. Squeeze in. Sorry. One more.
[3:17:56] It's a big group.
[3:18:03] » We got it.
[3:18:04] >> All right. Thank you.
[3:18:08] » Thank you.
[3:18:13] » All right. would just like to ask that
[3:18:15] the C platoon be excused just so they
[3:18:18] can get back to business.
[3:18:19] >> Okay. Thank you.
[3:18:22] [gasps] All right. The next item on the
[3:18:25] agenda is a presentation on National
[3:18:29] Drinking Water Week, which I think goes
[3:18:32] well with fire appreciation. It we just
[3:18:34] have this kind of element thing and fire
[3:18:36] going on stuff. And so we have Chris
[3:18:39] Shery.
[3:18:41] He is going to be presenting
[3:18:44] um on national drinking water week which
[3:18:47] is May 3rd through 9th
[3:18:52] and also Reed Price will be presenting
[3:18:56] >> and Quinn Fenton
[3:18:59] >> he's our water manager. Oh, again I'm
[3:19:01] sorry those of you who are here, you get
[3:19:03] to see another video with me in it. And
[3:19:08] so [laughter]
[3:19:09] it's it's very short. Well, my part's
[3:19:12] short.
[3:19:12] >> This one's even better, though.
[3:20:40] helping me. Come on
[3:20:44] here.
[3:20:48] to me.
[3:20:51] Today is a fine collection of orange
[3:20:56] spring or spring.
[3:21:05] Thank you. How does forum produce such
[3:21:12] mayor? I'm glad you got
[3:21:17] here. What's the work?
[3:21:20] starts by having good source water.
[3:21:23] We're very fortunate that 40% of our
[3:21:25] water comes from groundwater sources
[3:21:28] that include spring water. About 15% of
[3:21:31] our water annually runs right on the
[3:21:33] side of we're fortunate to have that
[3:21:35] good seed source that close to our hand
[3:21:39] on near side where it's dry. We have a
[3:21:42] good portfolio where we choose more
[3:21:45] wellwater if there's not as much snow
[3:21:48] thanks to decision makers and leadership
[3:21:53] ambulances in the past that have set us
[3:21:55] up in a good spot. And our team consists
[3:21:58] of uh nearly 25 people that are
[3:22:01] committed to providing quality water
[3:22:03] from backflow control to pulling over
[3:22:07] 1,400 bacteriological samples in a year.
[3:22:10] people that just take pride in their job
[3:22:12] and are willing to work around the
[3:22:13] clock. We follow guidelines that from
[3:22:16] federal, state, and local code that help
[3:22:19] us provide safe quality drinking water.
[3:22:22] Three years ago, the state and did a
[3:22:24] survey on our water system and we had a
[3:22:28] perfect score with no deficiencies.
[3:22:30] They'll have another survey this year to
[3:22:33] be in the same position. In order to
[3:22:35] keep that water safe and clean in the
[3:22:38] future, we will need to rely on our team
[3:22:41] and our public works leadership to
[3:22:43] ensure that we follow master plans and
[3:22:47] complete capital improvement projects
[3:22:49] that will put future residents in the
[3:22:52] same position that we are where they
[3:22:56] will save glass of water. Thanks for
[3:22:58] that great information. I hereby
[3:23:01] proclaim maker of your life as national
[3:23:04] drinking water.
[3:23:10] Here's the H2 or
[3:23:12] [laughter]
[3:23:20] thank you for showing you surprised me
[3:23:23] by appearing on suddenly appearing on my
[3:23:25] couch in my office. [laughter]
[3:23:29] >> [snorts]
[3:23:29] >> All right.
[3:23:30] >> So, mayor, we just wanted to say thank
[3:23:32] you for your support for our uh human
[3:23:35] resources and our capital resources that
[3:23:38] are necessary to continue to provide
[3:23:40] water uh safe water, drinking water
[3:23:43] sources for us today and well into the
[3:23:45] future. We have uh great plans and we
[3:23:47] support and we appreciate your support
[3:23:49] of those plans and moving forward into
[3:23:51] the future. Uh there are times in years
[3:23:54] like these when we have drought
[3:23:55] conditions where we are especially
[3:23:58] appreciative of that support and of the
[3:24:00] um the blessed area that we live in with
[3:24:02] these amazing water resources. So So
[3:24:05] thank you.
[3:24:05] >> Thank you. Would you mind taking 30
[3:24:08] seconds and telling the those who are
[3:24:10] here this evening about the new water
[3:24:12] reuse facility that even gives us more
[3:24:15] drinking water? Sure. Because we're not
[3:24:17] using it to water parks and golf
[3:24:19] courses.
[3:24:21] >> Yeah. The city recently uh completed a
[3:24:23] project that's been was envisioned over
[3:24:26] 20 years ago uh when when uh city
[3:24:30] officials approached the state and
[3:24:32] sought uh permission to reuse or the
[3:24:35] wastewater that comes down to the
[3:24:37] wastewater treatment plant. Um over the
[3:24:40] years we've made plans uh to do that and
[3:24:42] about 5 years ago uh started to uh
[3:24:45] pursue that uh that goal in earnest. uh
[3:24:48] we uh completed the facility which will
[3:24:52] which has the capacity of treating uh 15
[3:24:55] million gallons per day. Um we don't
[3:24:58] need that much right now but we built it
[3:25:00] to be able to provide that at some point
[3:25:02] in the future. Um so uh by reusing water
[3:25:08] that leaves water up in our storage
[3:25:11] facilities in the mountains or
[3:25:13] underground in our deep wells. So, we're
[3:25:16] we get to use the water twice. Right
[3:25:18] now, we're using it to irrigate uh at
[3:25:21] Sleepy Ridge Golf Course as well as
[3:25:23] Lakeside Sports Park and and soon uh
[3:25:26] Springwater Park as well. So, that's a
[3:25:30] great investment that we've made, one
[3:25:32] that uh 20, 30, 50 years down the road
[3:25:36] uh we believe that that the that the
[3:25:40] that our residents will like. We are
[3:25:43] grateful for the uh investments that
[3:25:45] have been made in the past. We'll we'll
[3:25:47] be grateful for that facility as well.
[3:25:50] >> Right. Thank you, Quinn. Thank you for
[3:25:53] you and your team for working to have
[3:25:56] such wonderful drinking water for us.
[3:25:58] Appreciate it. Council, do you have any
[3:26:01] Okay, Council Member Gail.
[3:26:03] >> Crystal and I were just talking that we
[3:26:05] didn't even know that National Drinking
[3:26:06] Water Week was a thing, but we're really
[3:26:08] glad it is. And I think since I've been
[3:26:10] on council now going on this is my third
[3:26:12] year I think um I have been just
[3:26:14] constantly marveling at the the work
[3:26:15] that the public works team does that and
[3:26:17] I just I turn on the faucet and there's
[3:26:19] water and I just am so grateful. So
[3:26:20] thank you for what you do.
[3:26:22] >> In the words of Bobby Buchchet, we have
[3:26:24] some high quality H2O.
[3:26:27] [laughter]
[3:26:28] >> Can I ask one question just since we're
[3:26:30] coming into the spring and Chris you
[3:26:32] addressed this last year in my area. we
[3:26:35] had bubbles in our water and people were
[3:26:37] concerned that that was a negative but
[3:26:40] um my understanding was we addressed
[3:26:42] that and said no that's kind of what
[3:26:44] happens when we have water from our
[3:26:46] springs the early mountain the early
[3:26:48] runoff is would you just kind of explain
[3:26:51] that a little bit or um yeah Quinn yeah
[3:26:55] just so our residents understand
[3:26:57] >> so sometimes we get air in the spring
[3:26:59] water there's a couple different uh
[3:27:01] causes uh number one the water is so
[3:27:03] cold where it runs out of the out of the
[3:27:05] mountain that that temperature change
[3:27:07] will will make little oxygen bubbles in
[3:27:10] the water. And then on certain years in
[3:27:12] real high flow conditions, sometimes um
[3:27:15] we've seen as much as 5,000 gallons a
[3:27:17] minute running out of the side of
[3:27:18] Tempenogus and and we're putting that
[3:27:21] right down into the tank and then uh
[3:27:23] with minimal treatment, just a little
[3:27:25] bit of chlorine, it goes right to the
[3:27:26] residents and they're drinking pure
[3:27:27] spring water. But with that, you might
[3:27:29] get microbubbles in the water when the
[3:27:31] flows are so high and the water's so
[3:27:33] cold.
[3:27:35] >> Without your Rocky Mountain High fresh
[3:27:37] water, right? Okay.
[3:27:40] >> Mayor and council, with your permission,
[3:27:42] I think that uh ne this time next year,
[3:27:46] we should have Pierre and Quinn bring
[3:27:49] some H2O Orum water bottles as gifts
[3:27:54] >> for everyone at the council meeting.
[3:27:56] What What do you say? I I agree. We're
[3:27:58] just warm water right out of the
[3:28:01] mountain. Yes. Thank you.
[3:28:04] >> Thank you.
[3:28:08] » The next item on our agenda is item 7.6,
[3:28:12] Utah City Managers Association awards
[3:28:14] for the traffic tiger team and Jennica
[3:28:18] Jones uh strategy and innovation man
[3:28:21] innovations manager. So, we'll turn the
[3:28:24] uh time over to Carrie Rug, our deputy
[3:28:26] city manager.
[3:28:28] >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I'd like to invite
[3:28:31] the Tiger Traffic Team members that are
[3:28:33] here, as well as Jennica to come up. And
[3:28:35] I want to share a little bit about these
[3:28:37] awards. They're pretty cool. So, once a
[3:28:40] year, the Utah City Managers Association
[3:28:42] meets the same week as the ULCT
[3:28:44] conference, so right before you guys
[3:28:46] came down. Um and once a year they
[3:28:48] choose three
[3:28:50] uh awards to be given and two of the
[3:28:53] three awards this year came to the city
[3:28:55] of ORM out of all of the cities and
[3:28:57] towns in Utah. So we're very proud of
[3:28:59] these accomplishments. So the first one
[3:29:02] goes to the Oram Tiger Traffic Team.
[3:29:04] This was the brainchild of city manager
[3:29:06] Bren Bby public works director Chris
[3:29:08] Shery and transportation engineer John
[3:29:11] Dhy. This team was created to alleviate
[3:29:14] traffic issues and patterns in ORM that
[3:29:16] were frustrating residents. This
[3:29:18] crossdep departmental team is made up of
[3:29:20] the following employees. Taylor Forbush,
[3:29:23] traffic operations manager. John
[3:29:25] Dornney, transportation engineer. Bill
[3:29:28] Peterson, streets manager. Tyler Pay,
[3:29:31] former assistance public works director.
[3:29:33] Chris Shery, public works director.
[3:29:36] Tagert Bowen, city engineer, and a
[3:29:38] representative from the police
[3:29:39] department, fire department, and city
[3:29:41] manager department. This team meets
[3:29:43] bi-weekly to review traffic issues and
[3:29:46] comes up with solutions.
[3:29:48] Congratulations to the Tiger Traffic
[3:29:50] Team.
[3:29:56] So, their award was uh program
[3:29:59] excellence in a city. Then Jennica Jones
[3:30:03] received the emerging leader of the year
[3:30:06] award. In 2023, Jennica Jones was named
[3:30:09] as the division manager of the newly
[3:30:11] created strategy and innovation division
[3:30:13] for the city of ORM. Prior to this role
[3:30:15] and espe especially in this role,
[3:30:18] Jennica has proven herself to be an
[3:30:20] emerging leader of the highest caliber
[3:30:22] in local government. Under her
[3:30:24] leadership, the division has become a
[3:30:26] central hub of problem solving and
[3:30:28] solution focused research and innovation
[3:30:30] for every department and division for
[3:30:32] the city. Her division oversees grant
[3:30:35] writing for the city, securing millions
[3:30:37] of dollars in just two years.
[3:30:39] Furthermore, she provides compensation
[3:30:41] studies for all full-time city
[3:30:43] employees, data dashboards, and head
[3:30:46] steering committees. On any given day,
[3:30:48] Jennica's team is directly contacted by
[3:30:50] a division or department within the city
[3:30:52] for assistance of a problem. These
[3:30:54] problems cover anything from
[3:30:56] organizational to financial to HR. The
[3:30:59] greatest testament to Janica's work, ethic, and acumen is the fact that
[3:31:03] every member of the executive staff
[3:31:05] trusts her and comes to her for
[3:31:07] assistance with perplexing problems they
[3:31:09] face. She leads her team with humility,
[3:31:12] kindness, empathy, kindness, kindness,
[3:31:16] empathy, hard work, and especially by
[3:31:18] example. ORM city is incredibly
[3:31:20] fortunate to have Jennica in their
[3:31:22] ranks. Watching her emerge as a local
[3:31:23] government leader is not only
[3:31:25] inevitable, it's a joy. Congratulations
[3:31:27] to you all.
[3:31:31] And we'd like to get a picture of you
[3:31:33] guys with your awards with the council.
[3:31:53] Okay,
[3:31:55] perfect.
[3:31:58] You got it.
[3:32:03] Congratulations.
[3:32:08] I do have to say at the Utah League of
[3:32:12] Cities and Towns Conference, which was
[3:32:13] held right after this, it began this
[3:32:17] pretty much the same day or within a day
[3:32:19] of the of the conference where these
[3:32:21] awards were given. I had the mayor of of
[3:32:24] a community in the Salt Lake Valley text
[3:32:27] me and say,
[3:32:29] "We need to talk about your traffic
[3:32:31] tiger team and we need to so they want
[3:32:34] to come down and watch you deliberate.
[3:32:38] not not to put pressure on you, but
[3:32:40] [laughter]
[3:32:40] the mayor and their staff want to come
[3:32:42] and come and learn because it's
[3:32:45] something that that's been so successful
[3:32:47] for us here in ORM that other other
[3:32:49] communities are interested in it as
[3:32:51] well. As this is item is the mayor's
[3:32:56] report and items referred by council,
[3:32:59] I'm just going to take a moment and just
[3:33:01] share a couple of other pieces of
[3:33:02] information not on the agenda for um you
[3:33:06] here in the public. You know, we one of
[3:33:08] the priorities we have at the city is
[3:33:10] economic development and right we have
[3:33:12] been without an economic development
[3:33:14] director and we've just hired a new e
[3:33:17] economic development director and he
[3:33:19] will be starting on May May the May the
[3:33:23] 4th. That's a May 4th and we look
[3:33:27] forward to him coming and and um sharing
[3:33:32] his expertise.
[3:33:34] has a lot of experience outside of the
[3:33:35] state of Utah and but has has roots here
[3:33:38] in Utah as well. And so we look forward
[3:33:41] to having his name's Garrett. Look
[3:33:42] forward to Garrett joining our team. We
[3:33:45] also as a city a part of Jennica I'm
[3:33:48] going to put Jennica on the spot here.
[3:33:50] Uh, one of the things that we do get
[3:33:52] emails about and we've had people come
[3:33:53] for public comment about the future of
[3:33:55] the North Union Canal and the city did
[3:33:59] receive a grant of over $100,000
[3:34:03] for a study to to look at the North
[3:34:07] Union Canal. And so I want to extend my
[3:34:10] appreciation to Jennica and her team and
[3:34:12] others who participated in in getting
[3:34:15] that grant for us so we can look at what
[3:34:17] some of those options are.
[3:34:19] All right, we'll move on to number
[3:34:20] eight, our consent items. We have two
[3:34:23] items on the consent calendar this
[3:34:24] evening. First one is approval of the
[3:34:26] meeting minutes for March 10th, 2026,
[3:34:29] April 14th, 2026, and April 15th, 2026.
[3:34:33] And that was our very first joint tip
[3:34:36] school district meeting, which was very
[3:34:38] I thought was very good and very
[3:34:39] productive. And item 8.2, an appointment
[3:34:42] to the recreation advisory commission. I
[3:34:45] see Chrissa here. Uh, Chrissa Robertson.
[3:34:48] Is Stephanie here? Oh, there's
[3:34:50] Stephanie. Okay. Um, would you mind,
[3:34:52] guys, would you mind standing up for
[3:34:54] just a moment? We on our consent
[3:34:56] calendar, we are
[3:34:58] uh going to vote on appointing these two
[3:35:03] uh fine community members to our
[3:35:05] recreation advisory commission. So, I
[3:35:08] would entertain a motion for consent
[3:35:10] items.
[3:35:11] >> Mayor, I move that we approve the
[3:35:13] consent items as outlined.
[3:35:14] >> Right. We have a motion. Is there a
[3:35:15] second? Second.
[3:35:17] >> Right. Thank you. A motion in a second.
[3:35:19] Um we'll go ahead and start with council
[3:35:21] member Gail.
[3:35:22] >> I I
[3:35:24] >> I Quinn, it's your turn.
[3:35:27] >> I
[3:35:31] >> Right. Thank you. Passes unanimously.
[3:35:34] Welcome. Appreciate your service for to
[3:35:36] the recreation committee and to the
[3:35:38] city. Thank you.
[3:35:44] All right. Right. The next item on our
[3:35:46] agenda are public appearances.
[3:35:48] So, looking at the list, we've got quite
[3:35:50] an extensive list this evening. And I
[3:35:53] noticed um we have uh we have two people
[3:35:57] who would like to talk about
[3:35:59] uh water drainage. And everybody else
[3:36:02] would like to or we've got somebody who
[3:36:03] wants to talk about street safety
[3:36:06] [snorts] and and then everybody else
[3:36:08] would like to speak about short-term
[3:36:10] rentals and Airbnbs. So, I ask we will
[3:36:13] give you we'll invite you to take up to
[3:36:15] three minutes. One of the things I just
[3:36:17] I I with I politely ask is that um I
[3:36:20] notice that some of you have spoken
[3:36:22] numerous times before the city council.
[3:36:24] Of course, you're always welcome to
[3:36:25] speak again, but just to remind you that
[3:36:28] your your comments are already on the
[3:36:29] public record. And so, if you don't want
[3:36:32] to take all three minutes, that's fine.
[3:36:36] But we'll go ahead and I'm gonna start
[3:36:38] with um Nicole Smith and then Elsie's
[3:36:41] after Nicole.
[3:36:46] Hello. So, as you know, I'm not here to
[3:36:48] talk about Airbnbs. Um my house is one
[3:36:51] of two houses that sits on a culde-sac
[3:36:53] that's currently being developed by
[3:36:54] Patterson Homes into the Belmont West
[3:36:56] property. And I want to preface by
[3:36:58] saying we actually really like the
[3:37:00] development. The houses are beautiful.
[3:37:01] Um and my husband and I are excited to
[3:37:03] have a culde-sac for our kids to play
[3:37:04] in. Um, but we are a bit concerned about
[3:37:06] the water drainage. Um, the houses have
[3:37:09] been built up about 3 or 4 feet above
[3:37:11] the two existing houses on the culde-sac
[3:37:13] and even with the rain yesterday. We saw
[3:37:15] some of it drain into it's currently an
[3:37:17] empty lot, but they're planning on
[3:37:18] building a house next to it. Um, and so
[3:37:20] we're worried that with the drainage
[3:37:22] it'll come onto our property and our
[3:37:23] property could potentially flood given
[3:37:25] that we are so far below and like many
[3:37:27] of you I assume we have a basement that
[3:37:29] we're worried about the flood water
[3:37:31] running into. Um and so we're hoping
[3:37:33] that the developer can be required to
[3:37:35] put in some kind of drainage system um
[3:37:37] so that we do not have the water runoff
[3:37:40] issues that we foresee happening. All
[3:37:41] right. Thank you. Um Mr. McIn is that
[3:37:45] who would you mind following up with them u with with Miss Smith and I
[3:37:52] think um Miss Calls probably you will
[3:37:55] have the same we'll be discussing the
[3:37:57] same thing. I'll give you their contact
[3:37:58] information.
[3:38:00] Good. Welcome.
[3:38:02] >> Thank you, Mayor and Council. Um, my
[3:38:05] home is on the north side of the west
[3:38:09] side of the Belmont West um, development
[3:38:14] and
[3:38:16] as Nicole said, the homes are built
[3:38:19] quite a lot higher than our homes are.
[3:38:23] And um
[3:38:25] I went out yesterday and looked and from the
[3:38:32] uh activity pad that they have beside
[3:38:34] the garages
[3:38:36] um there's about a 45 degree angle,
[3:38:41] [clears throat] excuse me, uh down to my
[3:38:43] fence and then my fence is uh on the
[3:38:48] other side of the fence is flat and I
[3:38:50] have two bedroom windows on that side
[3:38:53] and I am likewise concerned about the
[3:38:56] drainage and hope that we'll be able to
[3:39:00] have something done about that. As
[3:39:02] Nicole said, they're beautiful homes and
[3:39:04] we're excited to see who gets to live in
[3:39:06] them and uh we hope that we'll be able
[3:39:10] to work something out on that line.
[3:39:12] Thank you.
[3:39:13] >> All right. Thank you,
[3:39:15] >> Mayor. Can I make a comment about that,
[3:39:17] too? Sure. So there's a number of
[3:39:19] subdivisions where that issue, the one
[3:39:21] on 1600 North, the other Belmont East, I
[3:39:24] think done by Patterson's, those are
[3:39:26] more like 8 ft out of the ground, higher
[3:39:28] than the 6 to 8 ft higher than the homes
[3:39:30] that they back up against. The Canyon
[3:39:33] Park development, the two buildings they
[3:39:36] took down there. I've received um you
[3:39:40] know, calls from residents, the west
[3:39:42] side. Uh Crystal, what are those? six
[3:39:45] feet higher again, eight feet. Um, this
[3:39:48] is a an issue that I I concur with those
[3:39:53] storms yes that we had yesterday. Um,
[3:39:57] there's an obvious problem. So, just to
[3:40:01] kind of add that to the list of
[3:40:03] something that we need to address as a
[3:40:05] council.
[3:40:05] >> Okay. Thank you, Miss McIn. I just took
[3:40:08] a picture of the sheet and and text it
[3:40:10] over to you so you have you have their
[3:40:12] contact information.
[3:40:14] Thank you. All right, Matteline. Is it
[3:40:17] Maline Dorton? Is that correct? All
[3:40:19] right, Matteline,
[3:40:22] welcome.
[3:40:25] Thank you. Dear Madame Mayor and
[3:40:28] honorable members of the Orm City
[3:40:30] Council, I am Maline Dorton, a student
[3:40:32] in fifth grade at Orchard Elementary. I
[3:40:35] am here to bring a safety concern to
[3:40:36] your attention and offer a solution. I
[3:40:39] walk along the road 950 north between
[3:40:41] 600 East and 700 East right in front of
[3:40:44] Canyon View Junior High to get to school
[3:40:46] and my parents often drive along that
[3:40:48] road. Problem. I have noticed that cars
[3:40:51] cannot park on the north side because of
[3:40:52] the fire lane. So, they must park their
[3:40:54] cars on the south side. This is a
[3:40:56] problem because there is not enough
[3:40:58] space to park cars on the south side and
[3:41:00] have cars driving east in that south
[3:41:02] lane. This is because the south side
[3:41:04] lane is only 16 ft wide and the north
[3:41:07] side is 23 1/2 ft wide. Solution. To
[3:41:11] solve this problem, I am proposing that
[3:41:12] this street center lines be repainted so
[3:41:15] that the lanes are equal at 19.75 ft,
[3:41:18] which should be in the middle. This act
[3:41:21] will help cars driving on the south side
[3:41:22] of the street drive safely and not need
[3:41:24] to drive over the center line. Thank you
[3:41:26] for your time and consideration.
[3:41:29] >> Thank you. Thank you for bringing that
[3:41:30] to our attention.
[3:41:35] Mr. Shery, I will text you the copy of Miss Dorton's information so you can
[3:41:42] follow up with her on that. So, thank
[3:41:44] you.
[3:41:46] All right.
[3:41:48] Next, we have Jenny. Is it Hannah Bomb?
[3:41:51] >> Yes.
[3:41:52] >> Oh, I'm glad I I said that right. You
[3:41:54] did. Oh, [laughter]
[3:41:55] >> good. Welcome.
[3:42:00] Oh,
[3:42:05] I apologize. Um, you did get that right.
[3:42:09] Thank you. Not many people do. My name's
[3:42:13] Jenny Hannibal and I am Grandma Jenny.
[3:42:17] Two very important people in my life. Um
[3:42:21] this morning I was driving my grandson
[3:42:25] to his school and he turned to me and he
[3:42:28] said, "Grandma, did you know that an art
[3:42:32] teacher in my um uh in the school that
[3:42:36] I'm going to go to um next year, the
[3:42:39] junior high,
[3:42:41] was arrested for sexual abuse of the
[3:42:43] some of the children?"
[3:42:45] And I looked at him and I said, "No, I
[3:42:47] did not know that." And I was kind of
[3:42:50] upset. So I dropped him off and I went
[3:42:53] home
[3:42:55] and pulled in my little grandma house,
[3:42:57] which is very small house. And I have an
[3:43:01] RBNB right next door to me. And it is 24
[3:43:05] feet and a couple of inches. Their wall
[3:43:09] is 24 feet and a couple of inches away
[3:43:12] from my back door.
[3:43:15] um my husband or Papa Mike to some
[3:43:19] important people. Um and I we live there
[3:43:24] and people who come in and they're there
[3:43:26] for a night or two and then they're
[3:43:27] gone. We don't know who these people
[3:43:29] are. We don't know where they come from
[3:43:30] all over the world. Who knows? Um we
[3:43:34] make jokes about it. And um after today,
[3:43:37] I kind of felt like after what my son
[3:43:40] said, Orm City is Family City, USA.
[3:43:44] Um,
[3:43:46] and I was upset and worried about who
[3:43:49] was coming in because I don't know when
[3:43:52] that house went up for sale, [snorts] we
[3:43:54] were in the neighborhood real excited
[3:43:56] and happy to hear about it about you
[3:43:59] know these people and we thought
[3:44:02] we will be getting a really cute family
[3:44:05] which will be a little family to add to
[3:44:07] our neighborhood. instead we got an
[3:44:10] autob
[3:44:12] and um I've unve I've I've learned a lot
[3:44:15] in just the past little while and let me
[3:44:17] tell you some of the stuff that I've
[3:44:19] heard that um outside investors
[3:44:25] increase and increase local rental costs
[3:44:28] because Airbnbs and vbo get vacation
[3:44:32] rental rates increase in home prices
[3:44:36] home purchase prices by reducing
[3:44:40] owner occupied house stock. It degrades
[3:44:42] our neighborhoods sometimes with
[3:44:44] partying noise and stranger danger
[3:44:48] including uncontrolled access of for p
[3:44:50] uncontrolled access of pedophiles, sex
[3:44:53] offenders, and even possibly felons,
[3:44:56] drug dealers, and terrorists of various
[3:44:58] sorts. overflow of our street parking
[3:45:02] and it reduces public school student
[3:45:04] body in our new district by occupying
[3:45:06] housing stock for purposes that do not
[3:45:10] include full school year occupancy of
[3:45:12] families with children. There are 527
[3:45:17] I believe houses
[3:45:21] and vacation homes in ORM. Those homes
[3:45:25] could be full of a family.
[3:45:28] We are having family housing shortages.
[3:45:32] Here's a start. And um [clears throat]
[3:45:41] that
[3:45:43] I'm sorry, this is very nerve-wracking.
[3:45:46] And um uh so [clears throat] of those fi
[3:45:48] 5 527 homes, I've heard some stories
[3:45:52] that they um one one lady said that an
[3:45:56] RBNB person, a man,
[3:45:59] she found him in her yard talking to her
[3:46:03] 5-year-old daughter. Not acceptable.
[3:46:07] And another one of a home up on up that
[3:46:09] had has a swimming pool. They woke up
[3:46:12] one night with a bunch of people in
[3:46:13] their swimming pool. And I don't know if
[3:46:15] you've already heard about that. I
[3:46:17] listen listened a little bit to your um
[3:46:20] to your previous um u meeting and it was a little bit it was very
[3:46:26] interesting. But I would like to share
[3:46:28] those thoughts with you. Thank you for
[3:46:30] your time.
[3:46:31] >> Thank you. Appreciate you coming this
[3:46:32] evening.
[3:46:33] >> I'll see if I can make it back to my
[3:46:34] seat.
[3:46:34] >> Oh, you're going to be
[3:46:37] Thank you. Um next we have David Busith.
[3:46:44] Welcome.
[3:46:45] >> Thank you, Mayor and Council. I'm
[3:46:48] grateful to be here and grateful for all
[3:46:50] you do. My name is David Busith and I
[3:46:52] have been thinking about rentals in
[3:46:55] residential zones in ORM for the past 8
[3:46:58] years. Wondering how we can discourage
[3:47:01] investor ownership of single family
[3:47:05] homes. Tamp down on illegal rental usage
[3:47:09] of owner occupied single family homes.
[3:47:13] enforce current accessory dwelling unit
[3:47:16] laws and avoid zone changes that
[3:47:20] increase population density in our city.
[3:47:23] All of these things are important to me
[3:47:25] as a resident of Orurin because of
[3:47:28] creeping urbanization.
[3:47:31] It degrades our familyfriendly
[3:47:33] neighborhoods.
[3:47:35] In my opinion, from my experience living
[3:47:38] 25 years in southwest Om and six years
[3:47:41] in Northeast Om, the decay to my eye has
[3:47:45] been horrible and accelerating as
[3:47:47] evidenced by school closures, traffic,
[3:47:50] and to my eye, yard upkeep.
[3:47:55] For the past year, maybe two, you have
[3:47:57] been debating whether and how to allow
[3:48:00] short-term rentals like Airbnb and BBO
[3:48:02] in the city, considering that transient
[3:48:05] lodging is not permitted land use in
[3:48:09] residential zones, but is increasingly
[3:48:12] common.
[3:48:14] It's incomprehensible to me that there
[3:48:17] would be any tendency toward further
[3:48:20] urbanization.
[3:48:23] STRs would add to that pressure.
[3:48:27] Yes, landlords would like to get high
[3:48:30] rental incomes, but the high rental
[3:48:32] incomes
[3:48:34] would attract even more investors.
[3:48:38] We need [snorts] single family homes for
[3:48:39] young families, in my opinion, with
[3:48:41] children to fill our schools, not
[3:48:44] vacationers.
[3:48:46] So, I fully oppose STRs and I recommend
[3:48:49] instead of doing that instead of doing
[3:48:52] away with the longstanding
[3:48:54] ordinance against trenchant lodging in
[3:48:57] residential zones that the city focus on
[3:49:01] discouragement of investorowned houses
[3:49:04] and illegal rentals, including
[3:49:06] short-term rentals, through all legal
[3:49:10] means possible. Thank you.
[3:49:12] >> Thank you.
[3:49:14] Right.
[3:49:16] We next we have Nico Romney.
[3:49:25] Hello. Thank you so much for hearing us
[3:49:27] out here. Um I uh have 37 short-term
[3:49:32] rentals all throughout the state of
[3:49:35] Utah. We have rentals from Ogden all the
[3:49:38] way down to St. George. We actually
[3:49:40] operate in 15 different cities. So, we
[3:49:43] just appreciate that the city is even
[3:49:45] willing to have a conversation and and
[3:49:48] discuss this with us. Just a little bit
[3:49:50] about us, we are very family centered.
[3:49:53] Our homes are very much set up
[3:49:56] encouraging families to stay in our
[3:49:58] homes and encouraging people who are
[3:50:01] traveling for work, who are bringing
[3:50:05] economic development into our cities and setting up our homes in that way. We
[3:50:11] are very neighbor conscious in anything
[3:50:14] that we set up. We encourage
[3:50:18] setting up quiet experiences for the
[3:50:22] renters. We lean towards movie theater
[3:50:25] rooms and pingpong tables in basement
[3:50:28] versus hot tubs and other outdoor
[3:50:31] activities so that if there is any
[3:50:33] noise, the noise is contained within the
[3:50:36] home. We have um we have decibel meters
[3:50:41] in our homes so that we can catch it
[3:50:43] before neighbors catch it if there is an
[3:50:45] issue. We encourage longer stays. Um as
[3:50:50] far as we push for at least a 2-day
[3:50:53] minimum, but most of our stays we're
[3:50:55] seeing anywhere from 3 to 6 weeks is
[3:50:58] what we're pushing for. The people
[3:51:00] staying for those times are people who
[3:51:03] are between real estate transactions.
[3:51:06] With such an interesting real estate
[3:51:08] market right now, many people are
[3:51:10] deciding to sell their home and get it
[3:51:14] completely closed, renting an Airbnb,
[3:51:17] and then going out shopping for a home
[3:51:19] so that they don't have those
[3:51:21] contingencies and so that they can get
[3:51:23] into the home that they would like. Um,
[3:51:26] we we push for
[3:51:29] these renters. We send reminders and as
[3:51:32] far as I know there's a lot of concern
[3:51:34] about who is in the home. Uh, one thing
[3:51:37] that we do to help us just understand
[3:51:40] who is in the home is we do collect IDs.
[3:51:44] So, we have photo identification for
[3:51:46] whoever is staying within the home. So
[3:51:48] if there were to be a problem that maybe
[3:51:51] the city gets involved or someone else
[3:51:53] is getting involved, we know exactly who
[3:51:56] was in the home and we can work with the
[3:51:59] city, we can work with the police
[3:52:00] department and just encourage people to
[3:52:04] let us know who they are. For the most
[3:52:06] part, we have families. We have people
[3:52:08] coming and staying, going to BYU
[3:52:10] graduations, BYU activities, UVU
[3:52:13] activities. And so, we just um ask for
[3:52:18] fair
[3:52:20] um regulation on it where you let us
[3:52:22] have it. Um in my experience working
[3:52:25] with so many different cities, knowing
[3:52:28] where they are is one of the biggest
[3:52:30] things that helps a city to enforce the
[3:52:33] rules. If they know where it is and they
[3:52:36] have a license and they have the means
[3:52:39] to revoke those licenses if there are
[3:52:42] continued issues,
[3:52:44] then most of those issues are solved. We
[3:52:47] have Park City, we have St. George, we
[3:52:49] have everywhere from Ogden to St.
[3:52:52] George. So, we just appreciate you guys
[3:52:54] considering it.
[3:52:56] >> Thank you so much.
[3:52:56] >> Nico, where do you live?
[3:52:58] >> I live in Bluffell. We have cleaners in
[3:53:01] Oram. We have several team members all
[3:53:04] over Utah County.
[3:53:06] >> How many owns do you own in ORM?
[3:53:08] >> Uh, we have one in Oram.
[3:53:11] >> Thank you.
[3:53:11] >> Uh-huh.
[3:53:12] >> All right. Thank you. I see that your
[3:53:14] name's on here twice. Looks like
[3:53:15] different people wrote uh maybe someone
[3:53:17] signed up for you before before you got
[3:53:19] here, so I'll just Okay. Just want to
[3:53:21] make sure. Okay. Um, thank you.
[3:53:25] Okay. Jordan Coway.
[3:53:37] Hi, my name is Jordan. I've been here
[3:53:39] before and spoken, so I'm not going to
[3:53:40] speak too long, but um I've from ORM,
[3:53:44] live in ORM, raising my kids in ORM, and
[3:53:47] um we had an Airbnb in our neighborhood.
[3:53:49] It's since been shut down. Um, but I'm
[3:53:52] just still really passionate about the
[3:53:54] issue. Um, but we're not here tonight to
[3:53:57] debate whether you enjoy short-term
[3:53:59] rentals or whether you use them or
[3:54:00] whether these hosts are fivestar hosts.
[3:54:03] We are here to decide whether or not
[3:54:04] short-term rentals are conducive to the
[3:54:06] building up of our city. And the answer
[3:54:08] is they're not. As I look back on what
[3:54:10] you as a city council have stated you
[3:54:12] represent and your desires for this
[3:54:14] city, short-term rentals do not align
[3:54:17] with those remarks. Mr. Lamson, you've
[3:54:20] mentioned that you miss the quaint small
[3:54:21] town feel and want your kids and
[3:54:23] grandkids to be able to live here and
[3:54:25] appreciate neighbors. Short-term rentals
[3:54:27] take all those away. The STR home in our
[3:54:30] neighborhood outbid two families because
[3:54:32] when it's a business and making several
[3:54:34] thousand a year, it's no problem. Mayor,
[3:54:37] you stated that you're not interested in
[3:54:39] building thousands more apartments or
[3:54:40] hundreds more apartments because we are
[3:54:43] already built out. What you're
[3:54:45] interested in is how can we make our
[3:54:47] neighborhoods stronger and how we can
[3:54:49] bring more people into our neighborhoods
[3:54:50] that are going to be living here.
[3:54:52] Short-term rentals are not the answer.
[3:54:55] Jen, you stated, "Hands down, ORM's
[3:54:57] biggest strength are the people in the
[3:54:58] city, the citizens of ORM. Short-term
[3:55:01] rentals do not bring citizens to ORM."
[3:55:03] I'm not here tonight because I have
[3:55:04] money on the line. I'm here tonight
[3:55:06] because I genuinely am concerned about
[3:55:08] what allowing short-term rentals would
[3:55:09] do to our neighborhoods, what they're
[3:55:11] already doing to our neighborhoods. I'm
[3:55:13] concerned what they're going to do to
[3:55:14] our schools. With 522 operating already,
[3:55:17] that's about an average of 37.7
[3:55:19] short-term rentals per elementary school
[3:55:22] boundary.
[3:55:23] That is devastating to our schools and
[3:55:25] the already declining enrollment. I know
[3:55:28] you all love the city or you wouldn't be
[3:55:29] up there on that stand. Please stand
[3:55:30] behind your words and keep ORM's
[3:55:32] neighborhood strong, full of families
[3:55:33] safe, and make them a place where our
[3:55:35] children and grandchildren can live. No
[3:55:37] amount of profit justifies destroying
[3:55:39] our neighborhoods and city.
[3:55:42] Thank you.
[3:55:46] Hey,
[3:55:46] >> next we have Stephanie Hathaway.
[3:55:48] Welcome.
[3:55:53] » Hi, my name is Stephanie Hathaway. I
[3:55:56] grew up in Oram and went to Tempenogus.
[3:55:58] I always dreamed of staying in Oram and
[3:56:00] raising my family here. I'm married to a
[3:56:03] state trooper and I care deeply about
[3:56:05] our neighborhoods and community. I can't
[3:56:08] even begin to tell you what a nightmare
[3:56:10] the last year and a half has been
[3:56:12] spending all this time fighting these
[3:56:14] Airbnbs.
[3:56:15] I live next door to the second goat
[3:56:17] house, if you will, that the city shut
[3:56:20] down after about a year of running it as
[3:56:23] a whole home Airbnb.
[3:56:25] The main owner, David, who by the way
[3:56:27] does not live in Orm either, um, got up
[3:56:31] here a few weeks ago trying to make it
[3:56:32] sound like he was an ORM resident when
[3:56:34] he isn't. He also got up here and lied
[3:56:37] and said, "We've sent in 750 complaints
[3:56:41] and tried making my husband and me feel
[3:56:43] very small for being renters in a house.
[3:56:46] My parents helped us out to buy to raise
[3:56:48] our family in long-term and tried to
[3:56:51] compare it to his illegally rented out
[3:56:53] short-term rental, and that is not the
[3:56:55] same thing at all. The owners have been
[3:56:58] nothing but horrible and nasty once they
[3:57:00] knew we were going to fight them on it.
[3:57:02] And I have it on video proof that they
[3:57:04] lied to a police officer that came by
[3:57:06] and told him they'd been given a
[3:57:08] variance by the city, which again would
[3:57:10] be illegal. Uh both lying to a cop, and
[3:57:15] if they were given the variance by the
[3:57:17] city, um they've lied to their guests,
[3:57:20] they've lied to our faces, which has
[3:57:22] made the guests be even more enemies to
[3:57:25] everybody on our street. We've dealt
[3:57:27] with them coming on people's property,
[3:57:29] arguing with us, flipping us off,
[3:57:31] calling us names, leaving trash
[3:57:33] everywhere, parking in front of our
[3:57:35] house, calling our neighbors work to try
[3:57:37] to get him in trouble, ringing our
[3:57:39] doorbell because they throw their balls
[3:57:40] in our backyard, smelling marijuana
[3:57:43] smoke, swearing non-stop, and being so
[3:57:45] loud after hours it wakes my family
[3:57:48] upstairs in our bedrooms. They
[3:57:51] didn't take care of their lawn well
[3:57:53] despite lying to me that they've they
[3:57:56] spent $700 a month on it. Their trees
[3:57:59] are encroaching on our property. Their
[3:58:01] sprinkler system has flooded into our
[3:58:03] backyard because again the owners don't
[3:58:05] live there to monitor everything. Their
[3:58:08] lawn person mowed into our grass super
[3:58:10] short and scalped it and they never made
[3:58:13] it right. Their guests would park school
[3:58:15] buses outside where people can't see
[3:58:17] around corners driving by. And [snorts]
[3:58:20] I'm not kidding, almost every other day
[3:58:22] they had a car blocking the sidewalk,
[3:58:24] which when I texted them, they didn't
[3:58:26] care at all about. Um, one of their
[3:58:28] groups even left out open alcohol that
[3:58:32] was half full outside on a truck bed and
[3:58:35] children could have easily grabbed it
[3:58:37] and drank it. Statistically, more
[3:58:39] homicides and drug deals and
[3:58:41] prostitution happens at Airbnbs, and
[3:58:44] we've dealt with absolute hell from
[3:58:45] them. Unfortunately, if the city hadn't
[3:58:48] done the right thing and shut the home
[3:58:50] down after all the proof was sent in, we
[3:58:53] were definitely planning on teaming up
[3:58:55] and suing. Um, I [clears throat] might
[3:58:57] not be super rich, but my parents are
[3:58:59] who own the house, and they sued their
[3:59:01] own city of Lynen a few years ago for a
[3:59:03] similar neighbor house situation.
[3:59:07] They won the lawsuit and I would hate to
[3:59:09] see that happen to the great city of
[3:59:10] Oram um at any time in the future by
[3:59:13] angry residents because I can guarantee
[3:59:16] you'll be seeing many of these same
[3:59:18] complaints I've listed happening again
[3:59:20] if you allow whole home Airbnbs.
[3:59:23] Uh please allow for long-term families
[3:59:25] versus short-term profits. Thank you for
[3:59:27] listening and appreciate your time and
[3:59:29] service to the community.
[3:59:31] >> Thank you.
[3:59:35] Um Val Huarez.
[3:59:44] » Um thank you, mayor, and uh city
[3:59:47] council. Um I want to read just a couple
[3:59:49] of things about the short-term rentals.
[3:59:51] Um I'm speaking as a resident who cares
[3:59:54] deeply about this city. I've been here
[3:59:55] for more than 65 years, so uh I think
[4:00:00] I'm a long-term resident. Um not long
[4:00:02] ago, uh the city council adopted a
[4:00:05] simple standard for major decisions is
[4:00:07] to make more and more Family City USA,
[4:00:10] not less. That filter brought clarity
[4:00:12] then and it can bring clarity now. The
[4:00:15] econ the um because let's be honest
[4:00:17] about what's actually on the table. This
[4:00:19] isn't just regulating short-term
[4:00:21] rentals. It's whether we open the door
[4:00:23] for our family neighborhoods to be
[4:00:24] commercialized. The economics are aren't
[4:00:27] ambig ambiguous. When short-term rentals
[4:00:30] expand, especially through platforms
[4:00:32] like Airbnb, housing supply contracts
[4:00:34] and prices rise, homes stop being homes.
[4:00:37] They become income producing assets that
[4:00:39] attracts investors, drives valuations
[4:00:42] higher, and pushes young families out of
[4:00:43] the market. Um,
[4:00:47] now connect that to a promise that was
[4:00:49] made. Mayor McCandless told this comm
[4:00:52] community that she would make housing
[4:00:53] more affordable for our kids and
[4:00:55] grandkids. Reducing supply and
[4:00:57] increasing investor demand um does the
[4:01:01] opposite. That's that is an opinion.
[4:01:03] It's the housing market period. Um
[4:01:06] there's also a second consequence, one
[4:01:08] that cuts into the heart of who we are.
[4:01:10] Fewer families in our neighborhoods
[4:01:11] means fewer kids in our streets, fewer
[4:01:13] kids in our schools, fewer young
[4:01:15] families putting down roots here. That's
[4:01:17] the opposite of Family City USA. That
[4:01:20] that's a different city than the one we
[4:01:22] built and the one we want to live in. Um
[4:01:25] I speak speak plainly about something
[4:01:28] else. Once a policy like this passes is
[4:01:30] extremely difficult to walk back. People
[4:01:33] invest based on your vote. Properties
[4:01:35] get converted and the moment you try to
[4:01:37] reverse course, you're told it would be
[4:01:39] unfair to the people who relied on your
[4:01:41] decision. So yes, technically
[4:01:44] we can re we can revisit this later, but
[4:01:47] in practice, you know, we set the
[4:01:49] direction for ORM for years. Um there is
[4:01:53] organized financial interests pushing
[4:01:55] hard for this outcome. They have
[4:01:57] lobbyists, lawyers, and platforms behind
[4:01:59] them. The residents of ORM do not. Your
[4:02:01] responsibility is not to those
[4:02:03] interests, but to the families that live
[4:02:05] here and raise their kids here and want
[4:02:07] to stay here. ORM's not ORM is not a
[4:02:09] resort town.
[4:02:11] Um we do don't need to turn family
[4:02:13] neighborhoods into vacation rentals um
[4:02:16] and inventory. What we need to do is
[4:02:18] protect the thing that makes the city
[4:02:19] different from every other place on the
[4:02:21] Wasatch FL was front. Um we all hope we
[4:02:26] make a promise to keep us ORM family USA
[4:02:29] city um that we keep that promise and
[4:02:33] when the vote comes whether it's tonight
[4:02:34] or in the weeks ahead that your decision
[4:02:36] will make that a slogan or a commitment.
[4:02:39] I have one more comment. Um, this is
[4:02:42] from actually from personal from my
[4:02:45] previous neighborhood I lived in, which
[4:02:47] I still have a lot of friends there and
[4:02:49] I can Len's been to her house. Crystal's
[4:02:52] been to her house, Mayor Young had been
[4:02:54] to her house. Um, almost the whole
[4:02:57] council has been there and it's a
[4:02:59] freaking disaster. This is a two, it's a
[4:03:02] two roads in,
[4:03:04] one way out.
[4:03:06] um like a culde-sac but two blocks.
[4:03:10] >> Okay, we have the BYU fan house in that
[4:03:13] neighborhood. I can tell you right now
[4:03:15] it's the biggest disaster this side of
[4:03:17] Texas and that's a heck of a long ways
[4:03:18] away. The neighborhood impact with
[4:03:21] short-term rentals is very significant.
[4:03:23] They take up all the parking on the
[4:03:24] street. They block driveways. They block
[4:03:28] garbage pickup. They put their own
[4:03:29] garbage in other people's garbage and
[4:03:32] make messes. They also impact the area
[4:03:34] where children can't ride their bikes on
[4:03:36] the street because there are too many
[4:03:37] cars. It's like a culde-sac for crying
[4:03:40] out loud. There's not a lot of cars that
[4:03:41] go through there. This is ridiculous.
[4:03:44] And they bring they bring in bus loads
[4:03:47] of people to fill that house up. We're
[4:03:50] talking 60 kids in a house.
[4:03:54] Why? It's not a hotel. We're making community community
[4:04:00] personal homes into hotel rentals. Um
[4:04:04] short-term rentals should not be in
[4:04:06] neighborhoods. They should be in areas
[4:04:08] where there are other
[4:04:10] um there are other
[4:04:13] long-term whatever rentals that can
[4:04:15] accommodate those things. Not not our areas. We have laws for long-term
[4:04:21] rentals. Um no more than three unrelated
[4:04:23] people in a home. That's what our Orm
[4:04:26] City long-term rental is. You can't have
[4:04:29] So, why do we get 60 people in a home
[4:04:31] for short-term rentals? Why do they get
[4:04:33] to have a family memorial service for
[4:04:36] grandma with 50 60 people there? It's
[4:04:40] not a It's not a funeral home, crying
[4:04:42] out loud. And they spend a weekend
[4:04:44] smoking pigs and doing all kinds of
[4:04:47] stuff. So, next door. So, short-term
[4:04:51] rentals need to have rules. We need to
[4:04:54] not have them in our in our communities,
[4:04:56] in our homes, in our neighborhoods.
[4:05:00] Thank you.
[4:05:01] >> Thank you.
[4:05:03] All right. I just
[4:05:06] Okay. Um just want to just clarify
[4:05:09] something that we're not going to be
[4:05:11] making a decision on short-term rentals
[4:05:13] this evening. The work session next week
[4:05:15] is discussion only. We're not going to
[4:05:18] be making a decision next Tuesday when
[4:05:21] we continue our discussion from today,
[4:05:24] but we will hopefully have some more
[4:05:27] clarity and direction as to to the
[4:05:28] timeline after after next Tuesday. So,
[4:05:33] just just to clarify that. All right,
[4:05:36] Marcelin Gibby.
[4:05:45] » Hi. Um, my name is Marceline. I'm a
[4:05:48] Sorry.
[4:05:49] >> No, it's okay. Um, I'm a stay at home
[4:05:51] mom and my husband is a doctor in the
[4:05:52] area. We have two boys, age four and
[4:05:54] six. Um, I'm against legalizing
[4:05:57] short-term rentals in ORM neighborhoods
[4:05:58] and would like to share my experience
[4:06:00] with you as a resident of ORM living
[4:06:02] next door to an STR.
[4:06:04] We live in a great neighborhood and
[4:06:05] chose the neighborhood because it was
[4:06:07] familyfriendly. Um, two years ago, the
[4:06:09] family living next to us moved to Oregon
[4:06:11] and changed the roughly 5,000 square
[4:06:13] foot home into an STR. At the time, I
[4:06:16] tried to complain to the city of ORM,
[4:06:18] but when I called, they told me that
[4:06:19] STRs were allowed by Orm City, and I
[4:06:21] felt there was nothing I could do. Um,
[4:06:23] when we were we were then made to live
[4:06:25] in what is essentially live by what is
[4:06:27] essentially a commercial hotel. Since
[4:06:29] the home has changed over to an STR,
[4:06:31] we've had multiple concerns. The main
[4:06:33] issue is that we feel less safe in our
[4:06:35] home and in our yard. We have two young
[4:06:37] children and we don't know who is going
[4:06:39] or coming. This happens just feet from
[4:06:41] our house. We've had people staying in
[4:06:43] our rental talk to our children over the
[4:06:44] fence telling them things that disturbed
[4:06:46] and confused them. Um our kids see
[4:06:49] people in the yard next to us and can't
[4:06:50] understand that they're not safe people
[4:06:52] and not our neighbors. Uh in addition to
[4:06:55] safety concerns in relation to our into
[4:06:57] our children, um we're also disturbed by
[4:06:58] the following. The property uh erodess
[4:07:00] our neighborhood and community. um
[4:07:02] instead of the a neighbor living there,
[4:07:04] we have unknown and sometimes unfriendly
[4:07:07] occupants that come and go. Um the owner
[4:07:10] of the owner of owner of the property
[4:07:12] does not live there and doesn't know
[4:07:13] what is happening on their property. At
[4:07:15] times people stay in there hold events
[4:07:17] and fill the street with cars. Um while
[4:07:19] I I appreciate regulations have been
[4:07:21] proposed by the council that would help
[4:07:22] with some of these concerns, none of
[4:07:24] these regulations would address my
[4:07:26] safety concerns in regard to my
[4:07:28] children. If people are coming and going
[4:07:30] next door and talking to my children,
[4:07:32] um, this will not stop unless the STR is
[4:07:34] shut down. At the very least, we must
[4:07:37] make sure that the STRs are owner
[4:07:38] occupied. Um, I have yet to hear a
[4:07:41] really good reason for jeopardizing the
[4:07:42] well-being and safety of families in
[4:07:44] Orum just to help a handful of STR
[4:07:46] owners. The owners of these large STRs
[4:07:48] are lining their pockets, devaluating devaluing our neighborhoods,
[4:07:52] and moving their own families to
[4:07:54] locations where they aren't affected by
[4:07:55] the changes in the neighborhood. I think
[4:07:57] we can do better for the families of
[4:07:59] warm. Thank you.
[4:08:00] >> Thank you.
[4:08:04] Scott Johnson,
[4:08:12] mayor and city council, thank you for
[4:08:14] this time. Uh, as a 40 plus year citizen
[4:08:17] of ORM, I rise to fully oppose STRs in
[4:08:22] the city of Oram largely to maintain a
[4:08:24] safe and stable community for citizens.
[4:08:28] Uh, it STRs make it very difficult for
[4:08:31] law enforcement and local citizens to
[4:08:34] detect suspicious activity because of
[4:08:37] the transient nature. You don't know
[4:08:38] who's there and whether they should be
[4:08:40] there or not be there. Uh, I personally
[4:08:43] have experienced or seen party houses,
[4:08:45] aggressive driving, a school bus
[4:08:48] dropping off untold numbers of people in
[4:08:50] our in our neighborhood, and very noisy
[4:08:54] late night parties from an illegal STR
[4:08:57] in my community that's only three houses
[4:08:59] away. And this is not uncommon according
[4:09:02] to statistics that are easily
[4:09:04] searchable. Um, when you look at it,
[4:09:06] party houses, nuisance calls, and noise
[4:09:09] complaints tend to cluster around STRs.
[4:09:12] So, it's degrading the community safety
[4:09:15] and also occupying our law enforcement's
[4:09:18] time to respond to these nuisance calls.
[4:09:21] Enforcement is very difficult even in
[4:09:23] owner occupied settings because of
[4:09:26] limited resources to respond and the
[4:09:29] burden of the neighbors to enforce by
[4:09:32] complaint. These are complaint driven.
[4:09:35] Um, despite being meticulous, like the
[4:09:37] gentleman said, they do all these things
[4:09:39] to make sure that they have the right
[4:09:41] people in there. You cannot, investors
[4:09:43] cannot guarantee renters are safe or
[4:09:46] reasonable and friendly people because
[4:09:48] there is far less care given by these
[4:09:51] individuals occupying a space for a
[4:09:53] short term compared to somebody who
[4:09:56] lives in that area full-time. Um, in my
[4:10:00] opinion, I really see this as normal
[4:10:03] little guys, normal families against
[4:10:05] wealthy investors. And so, do we want to
[4:10:08] cowttow to wealthy investors or do we
[4:10:11] want to be family city USA and really
[4:10:13] maintain our families here and invite
[4:10:17] families who are going to make this
[4:10:18] their permanent residence in here into
[4:10:21] Orm City. Um, lastly,
[4:10:25] enforcement becomes really difficult.
[4:10:26] What kind of strict penalties will be
[4:10:29] enforced for those who have an STR that
[4:10:32] is problematic? I mean, we've we've
[4:10:35] heard from several people how there's
[4:10:36] been multiple multiple complaints, but
[4:10:38] there's no consequences. It's very
[4:10:41] difficult to get somebody out of there
[4:10:42] and get the home occupied by somebody
[4:10:44] else. So, thank you.
[4:10:46] >> Thank you,
[4:10:50] Debbie Lamb.
[4:11:06] Good evening. I have um letters being
[4:11:10] passed out to you from other members,
[4:11:12] other residents in ORM. Some come from
[4:11:15] grandparents, teachers, single mothers,
[4:11:18] all opposing um short-term rentals. so
[4:11:21] you can take time. And they were unable
[4:11:23] to make it tonight, so I figured a
[4:11:24] letter may be better than nothing. So,
[4:11:27] um, as a dedicated resident of 44 years
[4:11:30] and a voter in Orum, I'm here to express
[4:11:32] my strong support for our current
[4:11:34] prohibition of short-term rentals. While
[4:11:36] the purpose to monetize neighborhoods is
[4:11:39] high, the cost of our community safety
[4:11:41] and long-term viability is far too
[4:11:43] steep. Our neighbors are meant to be
[4:11:45] homes. Our neighborhoods are meant to be
[4:11:46] homes, not unlicensed hotels. Allowing
[4:11:49] STRs fundamentally alters our city in
[4:11:52] several critical ways. First, it erodess
[4:11:54] the long-term home ownership. When homes
[4:11:56] become STRs, we lose housing stock for
[4:11:58] people who volunteer for PTAs, look out
[4:12:01] for neighbors, or invest in ORM's
[4:12:03] future. Replacing permanent residents
[4:12:05] with a rotating door to transient turns
[4:12:07] our streets into ghost towns during the
[4:12:09] week and party hubs on weekends. Second,
[4:12:12] it is about generational continuity. A
[4:12:15] city thrives when children can afford to
[4:12:17] buy homes near their parents. By
[4:12:19] maintaining the prohibition, you are
[4:12:21] protecting the ability for families to
[4:12:24] remain deeply rooted, ensuring our
[4:12:26] community remains a place where legacies
[4:12:28] are built and residents are invested for
[4:12:30] the next 50 years, not just for the
[4:12:33] weekend. Third, we cannot ignore public
[4:12:36] safety and quality of life. Data shows a
[4:12:39] correlation between STRs and increased
[4:12:41] noise, parking congestion, and strain on
[4:12:44] police resources. Unlike permanent
[4:12:46] neighbors who respect communal
[4:12:48] boundaries, short-term guests lack the
[4:12:50] initiative to follow local norms. Mayor
[4:12:53] McCandless, you asked, "How can we make
[4:12:56] neighborhoods stronger and bring in
[4:12:57] people who are actually going to live
[4:12:59] here? Keeping STRs out is the answer."
[4:13:03] Quinn, you said every neighborhood
[4:13:05] deserves a committee that provides
[4:13:07] input. I'm on that committee. We asked
[4:13:09] our neighbors how they felt, and we are
[4:13:11] telling you we are against them. Jeff,
[4:13:14] you spoke about pre preserving
[4:13:16] tight-knit community and the small town
[4:13:18] feel. You can't have a tight tight-knit
[4:13:21] community with the house next door is a
[4:13:23] revolving door of strangers. Chris, you
[4:13:26] mentioned in a Zoom call with Tammy and
[4:13:27] I that the financial situation of STR
[4:13:30] owners is not the council's
[4:13:31] responsibility. They can sell their
[4:13:33] homes or rent them out.
[4:13:36] Legally, Jen, you say that it is a hard
[4:13:39] this is a hard decision. With all due
[4:13:41] respect, it's not a hard decision at
[4:13:42] all. There are over 90,000 residents in
[4:13:45] ORM. Listen to those residents. We are
[4:13:47] tired of the housing shortage and the
[4:13:49] declining enrollment in our schools.
[4:13:50] It's time the council listens to those
[4:13:52] of us who voted for you. We don't want
[4:13:55] short-term rentals. ORM is a community,
[4:13:57] not a resort. Stand firm. Prioritize the
[4:14:00] people who call the city home over the
[4:14:02] interests of investors. Thank you. Thank
[4:14:05] you.
[4:14:07] >> Right, Tony Merrell.
[4:14:19] Thanks for your time. Again, I know this
[4:14:21] is my third time, but I really
[4:14:23] appreciate the time and effort the city
[4:14:25] council has put into organizing the
[4:14:29] options that I saw at your planning
[4:14:31] meeting today. I think they're great
[4:14:33] options and I I think they're very
[4:14:36] workable. Um, I have a few concerns um
[4:14:40] about the generalization
[4:14:43] of STRs in the city of Oram. Um, that
[4:14:47] they make all communities bad and that
[4:14:52] u most of the citizens in Oram are
[4:14:55] against them and nobody's pulled my
[4:14:57] community, my neighborhood. So, I think
[4:15:01] if you did, then you would have
[4:15:03] different answers from my neighborhood.
[4:15:06] And I'm wondering how many people have
[4:15:08] actually been pulled to ask that
[4:15:11] question. Would you or would you not
[4:15:13] like an STR in Orum, if that's allowed?
[4:15:16] Um, another generalization,
[4:15:19] um, that I'm hearing over and over again
[4:15:22] that this is a very profitable thing for
[4:15:24] people to do. It is not.
[4:15:27] In my case, we rent out my mother's home
[4:15:30] so that it's still available for family
[4:15:33] when they come to town. And my rent for
[4:15:36] an SDR is very, very low. I have a
[4:15:40] negative income at the end of the year
[4:15:43] for taxes because we don't make a
[4:15:45] profit, but we make enough to help with
[4:15:47] the expenses of keeping that home in our
[4:15:50] family so that when family does come to
[4:15:52] town, they have a place to stay and they
[4:15:54] don't have to go to a hotel. Um, another
[4:15:57] thing
[4:15:58] that I'm I'm wondering about is that if you had a family of eight and they
[4:16:05] didn't have the option of an STR to come
[4:16:08] to ORM and stay in for a week, what
[4:16:11] would it cost them to stay in a hotel?
[4:16:13] It would be prohibitive for a family of
[4:16:15] eight to be in a hotel seven nights, eat
[4:16:19] out every meal. Can you imagine how much
[4:16:21] that would cost? I had a family come
[4:16:24] last week for BYU graduation. Um, they
[4:16:27] were there all week. They had a family
[4:16:29] dinner Saturday night outside, had a
[4:16:32] barbecue, and I didn't even hear him.
[4:16:35] And I live right next door. And that's
[4:16:37] another thing I was wondering about is
[4:16:41] in your um proposal
[4:16:43] um you mentioned having the SDRB owner
[4:16:47] occupied and I'm just wondering what the
[4:16:49] definition of owner occupied would be
[4:16:52] because I live right next door. I have a
[4:16:55] view overlooking
[4:16:57] the entire property. I can see
[4:16:59] everything that goes on there. So I know
[4:17:01] and I can you know if there were a
[4:17:03] problem which there has never been. And
[4:17:05] I've never had a complaint from any of
[4:17:07] my neighbors. Uh, and I've I have had
[4:17:11] good families stay. So, I'm just saying
[4:17:13] that there I understand there are some
[4:17:16] that need to be shut down. I totally
[4:17:18] agree. They shouldn't be allowed in a
[4:17:21] family neighborhood. But those of us
[4:17:23] that do it right, we should have the
[4:17:25] right to do that and to provide
[4:17:28] someplace for families to come to ORM to
[4:17:30] visit their family that lives here.
[4:17:33] Thanks for your time.
[4:17:34] >> All right. Thank you.
[4:17:37] All right,
[4:17:39] Casey. And I know your last name starts
[4:17:41] with a T, but I I if you True. Oh, okay.
[4:17:47] I see it now. Thank you.
[4:17:48] >> It's a German spelling. We can blame my
[4:17:50] husband's family.
[4:17:51] >> Okay. [laughter]
[4:17:52] >> My name is Casey TR. Thank you, uh,
[4:17:54] council members, mayor, and neighbors
[4:17:56] and friends. Um, I'm here to bring
[4:17:59] another perspective to, uh, the
[4:18:01] discussion. I appreciate everything
[4:18:02] that's been shared. And I think there's
[4:18:03] a lot of valid concerns on both sides.
[4:18:06] Um I'm not here to create further
[4:18:08] division of sides, but maybe create a
[4:18:10] little bit of additional context on a
[4:18:12] subcategory that I think has been
[4:18:13] missing. Um my husband and I are both
[4:18:15] ORM natives. He was born here, raised
[4:18:18] here. I was born here. We've been living
[4:18:19] now together here for uh about 8 years.
[4:18:23] We've been married for 12. Uh we're
[4:18:25] world champion ballroom dancers. And so
[4:18:27] our career is quite niche and um our
[4:18:31] goal was to become lifelong ORM
[4:18:33] citizens. This is where we have a lot of
[4:18:35] family. We have a lot of community and
[4:18:37] we just love the family focus here and
[4:18:40] everything that the community offers. In
[4:18:42] order to be able to purchase a home
[4:18:43] here, we needed to have something that
[4:18:45] would allow us to supplement with rental
[4:18:47] income. Uh when we were looking in the
[4:18:50] market four years ago, that's what
[4:18:51] everyone else wanted as well. And so
[4:18:53] home costs obviously, as we know, are
[4:18:55] substantially high for people of my age.
[4:18:57] I'm 33, my husband's 34, and the
[4:19:00] generational gap of being able to
[4:19:02] purchase a home is just getting wider
[4:19:03] and wider. For us, there was no
[4:19:05] opportunity to have a legal long-term
[4:19:08] rental home that we could afford.
[4:19:10] However, we have a property that has a
[4:19:12] basement suite, and we've been doing
[4:19:13] Airbnb ourselves in our international
[4:19:15] travels since 2014. that's allowed us to
[4:19:18] compete world over, contributed to our
[4:19:20] affordability to be able to get these
[4:19:22] national titles, and to now be involved
[4:19:24] in this community both with both
[4:19:26] collegiate programs, a number of high
[4:19:28] school programs and studios throughout
[4:19:30] the area and indeed the entire Mountain
[4:19:31] West. Um, this opportunity to have an
[4:19:36] owner occupied short-term rental space
[4:19:38] also allows us to host my family. I'm
[4:19:40] the oldest of seven kids, and when we
[4:19:42] get together, it's quite a group, as you
[4:19:43] can imagine. We're all having more kids
[4:19:45] now. And to be able to gather, we need a
[4:19:48] place where we can at least sit us down
[4:19:50] for dinner. Um, therefore, if I had
[4:19:53] someone living permanently in my
[4:19:54] basement, I would have less space to be
[4:19:56] able to host my family. We do have an
[4:19:58] Airbnb guest who stays two nights every
[4:20:01] week. He lives up in Brigham City and
[4:20:03] shared the following thought with me to
[4:20:05] share with you. He says, "I live in
[4:20:07] Logan but work in uh down in Utah
[4:20:09] County. Instead of moving down, I stay
[4:20:11] for in an Airbnb for two nights a week.
[4:20:14] If I had to get an apartment or hotel,
[4:20:15] I'd be paying much more and I can't
[4:20:17] afford to relocate my family, much less
[4:20:19] find another job. Um, it'd be a shame to
[4:20:21] lose this option. So, I'm just asking
[4:20:24] that we continue to explore the
[4:20:25] opportunities of what owner occupied
[4:20:27] means. Um, and we only host two guests
[4:20:31] in our home since it is our home and we
[4:20:33] have young children. I'm very scrupulous
[4:20:36] about who we invite into that space. and
[4:20:38] my neighbors have all been not only
[4:20:40] supportive but actually encouraging in
[4:20:42] our endeavors. We have plenty of parking
[4:20:44] and uh have had nothing but positive
[4:20:46] experiences both as Airbnb renters
[4:20:48] ourselves internationally and also here
[4:20:50] locally. One other benefit about people
[4:20:52] coming into our home is that they bring
[4:20:54] business to the ORM community. So by
[4:20:57] being able to come here and stay whether
[4:20:59] to support BEu or U uh sporting events,
[4:21:02] coming for family weddings, graduations,
[4:21:04] etc. they'reu contributing to the
[4:21:06] economy of our area and it'd be a shame
[4:21:09] to have obviously [snorts] the many
[4:21:11] negative effects coming in from outside
[4:21:13] uh investors and properties that are
[4:21:15] dangerous to the locals, but it also
[4:21:17] likewise be a shame to have local
[4:21:19] residents buying in good faith with
[4:21:22] support of the city. When we called to
[4:21:24] purchase this home, we checked if it was
[4:21:26] possible and and we want to raise our
[4:21:29] family here, but we won't be able to if
[4:21:30] we don't have that opportunity to
[4:21:32] supplement our income. So, thank you for
[4:21:35] your time. Thank you.
[4:21:38] » Right. Teresa Horn.
[4:21:46] » Hello.
[4:21:48] >> So, I have lived in my home since 1998.
[4:21:52] I have rented it, you know, two little
[4:21:55] families and everything. And then
[4:21:57] probably about oh, 3 years ago, I
[4:21:59] decided I'd go ahead and try the VBO.
[4:22:02] Um, I have loved the VBO. Um, I can tell
[4:22:05] you the families that I had, yes, you
[4:22:07] interviewed the families, you're excited
[4:22:09] for them to move in. Um, but you have
[4:22:12] those arguments. I've had the police
[4:22:14] called just having a full-time person
[4:22:16] living there. Um, I haven't had any
[4:22:18] problems at all with VBO. My home, it is
[4:22:22] owner occupied. And, you know, that's
[4:22:25] something that I love. I love chatting
[4:22:27] with the people that are coming to our
[4:22:29] city. again they are pay you know going
[4:22:32] out dining giving that ORUM you know
[4:22:35] that income too but I also pay the taxes
[4:22:38] through VBO
[4:22:40] um I feel you know it's both sides I
[4:22:43] could always raise my rent and rent it
[4:22:45] full-time but I feel with VBO I'm losing
[4:22:49] a little less money but it's less wear
[4:22:52] and tear on my house and so as you do
[4:22:55] the work sessions and I listen to the
[4:22:57] one that you were doing today I think
[4:22:58] you have some pretty good opt options in
[4:23:01] there. So, I agree with the party homes.
[4:23:05] Um, most of my neighbors didn't even
[4:23:06] know I had VBO. Um, there's homes in our
[4:23:09] neighborhood, too, that I didn't know
[4:23:11] they had VBO. Those are the ones that
[4:23:14] are doing it right. Um, we are also
[4:23:16] starred by VBO and I can say I have the,
[4:23:19] you know, 10 stars. I've not had
[4:23:22] complaints. And so, I feel that's
[4:23:24] important for you guys to understand,
[4:23:26] too. like I feel there should be a happy
[4:23:28] medium where we could all come together
[4:23:30] and and you know I liked the fines that
[4:23:34] you guys were discussing in your work
[4:23:35] meeting. I I think that's a good option
[4:23:38] as well. So that's my two cents for you.
[4:23:41] >> I appreciate it. Thank you.
[4:23:45] » And our last person is Chris Hammond.
[4:23:57] Thank you, mayor and city council. I
[4:24:00] know you've heard from me before, so
[4:24:01] I'll be as brief as possible.
[4:24:04] Uh once again, I'm have a legacy Airbnb.
[4:24:08] I have cameras, so anything that happens
[4:24:10] on the property, I'm notified
[4:24:11] immediately. Uh I wanted to bring a
[4:24:15] couple of data points to you tonight.
[4:24:18] Number one, occupancy rates for
[4:24:20] short-term rentals is about 50%. So 50%
[4:24:22] of the time a short-term rental has no
[4:24:25] in there. So we are saving money on
[4:24:28] utilities and water usage by using a
[4:24:30] short-term rental. Second, I have an
[4:24:33] associate, I know it's come up on
[4:24:35] several things, who is over sober living
[4:24:38] in Utah County, and um on a whim, I
[4:24:42] [laughter] going to talk to you about
[4:24:44] this. And I asked her if she felt like
[4:24:47] there would ever be a reason for sober
[4:24:49] living to sew it city based upon
[4:24:51] occupancy. And she said no. Number one,
[4:24:54] it's government money. And number two,
[4:24:56] increasing the number in a sober living
[4:24:58] home would be uh not recommended because
[4:25:02] of the people that are there and the in
[4:25:06] um uh fact that they need to be
[4:25:08] supervised. Plus, sober living is either
[4:25:11] a 60 to 90day stay. And when you ask AI
[4:25:15] about the comparison, short-term rentals
[4:25:18] and sober living, there's no comparison.
[4:25:20] It's apples to oranges. Um,
[4:25:24] another thing that has been brought up,
[4:25:26] uh, the 527
[4:25:28] number is overexaggerated because homes
[4:25:31] are listed more than once on, uh,
[4:25:34] Airbnb. So, it's much less than that.
[4:25:37] Um, there was a Senate Bill 108 that was
[4:25:40] just passed that says, um, that
[4:25:43] short-term rentals are legal. And so, I
[4:25:46] would suggest that as you do your
[4:25:48] information, you look into that. Um, it
[4:25:52] provide it protects short-term rental
[4:25:54] platforms like Airbnb as um patchwork of
[4:25:58] local regulations threatens the ability
[4:26:01] to take them away.
[4:26:02] >> I'm sorry, what was the bill number
[4:26:03] again?
[4:26:03] >> It's bill number 108. Now, part of the
[4:26:07] reason why that was sent to me, my
[4:26:09] doctorate is in special needs. And one
[4:26:12] of the things that was brought up in
[4:26:14] that build as someone was reporting it
[4:26:16] is that short-term rentals provide an
[4:26:19] opportunity for people with disability
[4:26:21] um members of their family to have a
[4:26:24] place where they can have um things that
[4:26:27] are protected. so their children are
[4:26:29] protected and they can go forward in um
[4:26:32] providing the meals and the things that
[4:26:34] they need versus being in a hotel. Um
[4:26:38] also
[4:26:39] um as far as declining from the access
[4:26:43] to homes, we have over 150 homes that
[4:26:46] are sitting on the market. We have over
[4:26:49] 150 rentals that are sitting on the
[4:26:51] market. So short-term rentals are not
[4:26:53] detracting from the availability of
[4:26:55] housing in ORM. Um,
[4:26:58] >> and I thank you for your time and your
[4:27:01] energy in doing this and providing
[4:27:04] something that is we can all work
[4:27:06] together and all live happily forever.
[4:27:09] >> Thank you.
[4:27:12] All right, that concludes our our public
[4:27:15] our personal appearances. I've been
[4:27:17] received a request to take a five minute
[4:27:19] bio break. So we'll convene here in what
[4:27:22] is it 54 after?
[4:27:26] So, at 8:00,
[4:27:28] we'll be back here at 8.
[4:38:20] micro. Oh, there it is. Okay, the
[4:38:23] microphone is now on. We're going to
[4:38:25] continue with item number 10.1. It's a
[4:38:28] public hearing for the ORM community
[4:38:30] development block grant CDBG annual
[4:38:32] action plan and proposed budget. Taylor,
[4:38:35] welcome and appreciate your patience as
[4:38:38] we went through this and thank you guys
[4:38:41] for your
[4:38:43] all right mayor just by way of or mayor
[4:38:45] and council by way of introduction.
[4:38:47] Taylor Drainy works for the Mountainland
[4:38:49] Association of Governments for community
[4:38:52] development block grant funding we are
[4:38:53] able to partner with an entity to do
[4:38:55] that and thus we do partner with MAG in
[4:38:57] order to help manage that funding. It's
[4:39:00] a great resource to have. And as she
[4:39:02] does this presentation then for what the
[4:39:05] upcoming fiscal year's budget will be
[4:39:06] when it relates to community development
[4:39:08] block grants. Uh we want I want to just
[4:39:11] make it clear also that these grants
[4:39:14] were presented then to the CDBG
[4:39:16] commission and they reviewed them and
[4:39:18] approved the amounts as well as along
[4:39:21] with the contingency.
[4:39:22] >> Are there any commission members here?
[4:39:24] >> Uh there are not any commission members.
[4:39:25] >> Okay. Could you express our appreciation
[4:39:27] to them?
[4:39:27] >> Absolutely. Oh, okay. And council member
[4:39:31] Kilpac says you're amazing. He's easily
[4:39:33] is on that.
[4:39:35] >> Um, by way, so we'll have a presentation
[4:39:37] on what the budget is and then open up
[4:39:39] time for a public hearing, no vote at
[4:39:41] this time to meet the 30-day posting
[4:39:43] period.
[4:39:47] » All right. So, there is the CDBG
[4:39:50] Advisory Commission along with council
[4:39:52] member Kilpac who's in charge of that.
[4:39:55] So, this is just a short presentation to
[4:39:57] talk about the funding that we have for
[4:39:59] next year. Like Bradley said, that's out
[4:40:01] for public comment right now. We have a
[4:40:03] public hearing today. Um, but these are
[4:40:05] the preliminary
[4:40:06] numbers that we're looking at approving.
[4:40:08] Um, so to break it down between rollover
[4:40:11] funding from previous years that was
[4:40:13] unused and current year, that's there at
[4:40:16] the top. We have 77,000 of prior year
[4:40:18] funds that are going to be in addition
[4:40:19] to that 563,721.
[4:40:23] and that is our actual allocation from
[4:40:25] HUD this year. So those numbers are set
[4:40:26] in stone. Then every year we have 15% of
[4:40:30] the allocation that we set aside for
[4:40:32] public service funding. So that's that
[4:40:34] breakdown in the middle. And then
[4:40:37] historically and this year as well, ORM
[4:40:39] has always set aside a percentage of its
[4:40:42] public service funding to go toward a
[4:40:44] regional effort with Provo City. Um and
[4:40:47] two of the members of the CDBG advisory
[4:40:49] commission uh had a interview process
[4:40:52] along with some members of a similar
[4:40:54] commission from Provo and they voted on
[4:40:56] those regional funds and those are just
[4:40:58] for nonprofit organizations in the
[4:41:00] community that serve more than just ORM
[4:41:02] residents um in order to
[4:41:05] uh reach reach everyone regionally so
[4:41:07] they don't have to do multiple
[4:41:08] applications. But for all of those
[4:41:09] projects we only reimburse for ORM
[4:41:11] residents served. So,
[4:41:15] and here's just an overview of those
[4:41:17] regional recommendations. So this year
[4:41:20] the commission decided to fund the
[4:41:22] refuge uh which provides emergency
[4:41:25] shelter for victims of domestic
[4:41:27] violence, Big Brothers Big Sisters which
[4:41:29] provides youth mentoring services,
[4:41:31] Tabitha's Way, the Food Pantry, uh
[4:41:34] Family Haven which provides therapy for
[4:41:37] abused and neglected children, and then
[4:41:39] the Fuller Center for Housing, which
[4:41:40] provides single family rehab. So those
[4:41:43] yellow highlighted numbers are the
[4:41:45] amount that ORM will be covering.
[4:41:50] And then for the non-public service
[4:41:52] funds, these are those the Fuller Center
[4:41:54] counts as non-public service. Um, and
[4:41:57] then we have administration costs for
[4:41:59] MAG and for Orm City staff. Um, we have
[4:42:02] tree removal, which is a new program
[4:42:04] that we're going to try out this year.
[4:42:06] Uh, it's using single family
[4:42:07] rehabilitation funds to get rid of trees
[4:42:10] that are a threat to health and safety.
[4:42:12] And, uh, the arborist here, Josh Story,
[4:42:15] is going to be handling that. We do code
[4:42:17] enforcement every year that just
[4:42:19] provides some funding for code
[4:42:20] enforcement activities through the
[4:42:21] police department. Critical home repair
[4:42:23] is also a year-over-year thing that
[4:42:25] we've done. MAG has been administering
[4:42:26] that. Um and then a lot of 170,000 this
[4:42:31] year to replace some flooring in the
[4:42:32] senior center.
[4:42:34] >> Can I ask you a question about um is the
[4:42:37] tree removal monies
[4:42:40] equipment? Is it personnel? What what is
[4:42:43] that? Um I believe it's just the cost to
[4:42:46] cover the contractor who's going to
[4:42:48] >> So we are hiring a subcontractor. Okay,
[4:42:50] perfect. Thank you.
[4:42:54] » Um these are those public service
[4:42:55] numbers. The ones in gray are the
[4:42:57] regional ones I already discussed. And
[4:42:59] then those two in blue at the bottom are
[4:43:01] year-over-year projects that we've
[4:43:03] always done. Some for a victim advocates
[4:43:06] salary. And then uh just a little bit of
[4:43:08] funding there for homeless services,
[4:43:10] which is just small resources for
[4:43:12] homeless residents that's given out
[4:43:13] through the police.
[4:43:17] Um and that's pretty much it. Our next
[4:43:19] steps, uh we'll be back on May 26 to get
[4:43:23] a final vote on that budget and then the
[4:43:26] program year starts on July 1. So
[4:43:28] >> do you know what did Can you go to that
[4:43:30] last slide?
[4:43:31] >> Yeah.
[4:43:31] >> The pre previous slide.
[4:43:34] um victim services.
[4:43:36] Tell um help me bring me up to speed,
[4:43:38] would you please? Um I know what was our
[4:43:41] last year's. Are we increasing that? Are
[4:43:43] we maintaining that?
[4:43:44] >> It's been 30,000 for several years.
[4:43:49] >> Okay. Thank you.
[4:43:50] >> Yes. Yeah, I know. We always want to
[4:43:52] give more to that one. Uh the public
[4:43:54] service amount is really really small,
[4:43:56] so it's it's tough to
[4:43:58] >> Yeah. I thought we were going to add an
[4:44:00] additional um some additional resources
[4:44:03] there, but um yeah, I'll just follow up
[4:44:06] with you on that. Thank you.
[4:44:10] » All right.
[4:44:12] Oh, I'm sorry. Are you are you I don't
[4:44:14] want to
[4:44:15] >> Yeah, that's everything. Do you have
[4:44:16] anything?
[4:44:16] >> Oh, you got Okay. Thank you, council.
[4:44:18] Any more questions?
[4:44:21] All right. This is a public hearing.
[4:44:23] We're not going to be voting on it this
[4:44:24] evening. We're going to be voting. It
[4:44:26] appears we will be voting on May 26. So,
[4:44:29] this is a public hearing to start the
[4:44:31] 30-day
[4:44:32] clock on on public whatever like the
[4:44:37] comment. Isn't there like a public not
[4:44:39] comment period or notice period or
[4:44:40] something? I can't remember what it is.
[4:44:42] >> That's correct. And it has begun. This
[4:44:44] is just a time when we
[4:44:45] >> Oh, okay. Because I was say we're kind
[4:44:47] of short. Yeah. Okay. So, the public
[4:44:49] hearing is open. And is there anyone who
[4:44:50] would like to speak to the CDBG funding
[4:44:53] recommendations?
[4:44:58] All right, since there isn't anybody,
[4:45:00] I'll go ahead and close the public
[4:45:01] hearing. All right, so we'll go ahead
[4:45:04] and look forward to seeing you again on
[4:45:07] May 26. Thank you.
[4:45:10] >> Perfect. Thank you.
[4:45:11] >> Okay. Item 10.2 2 is a public hearing
[4:45:14] resolution declaring certain parcels of
[4:45:16] real property located in the vicinity of
[4:45:18] 1020 South 2300 West as surplus and
[4:45:22] authorizing the execution of an
[4:45:24] agreement with the state of Utah to
[4:45:26] convey surplus parcels to the state in
[4:45:28] exchange for a lease of a portion of the
[4:45:30] properties to the city for a period of
[4:45:32] 99 years. And I think that's one of the
[4:45:35] longest sentences I've read in a long
[4:45:37] time. All right.
[4:45:41] That's because an attorney wrote it.
[4:45:43] >> Okay. [laughter]
[4:45:49] » All right. Welcome.
[4:45:50] >> Thank you, Mayor and Council. I'm joined
[4:45:52] today by Sam Bger. He's the deputy
[4:45:54] director of the Utah Lake Authority. We
[4:45:57] also hope to have Luke Peterson here who
[4:45:59] is the executive director, but he was
[4:46:01] unfortunately wasn't able to join us due
[4:46:03] to some uh some health issues he's
[4:46:05] dealing with. So, um, today we're here
[4:46:08] to present to you, um, kind of a history
[4:46:12] lesson here in Oram, a little bit of
[4:46:13] going back in time, and we're going to
[4:46:16] talk about some properties down around
[4:46:17] Utah Lake. And so, looking at this map
[4:46:20] right here, we have four parcels that
[4:46:22] are identified that three of them are
[4:46:25] owned by Oram City. The large I'm going
[4:46:28] to use my little mouse here. this large
[4:46:30] parcel right here. There's a skinny
[4:46:33] little parcel right here with a little
[4:46:35] dog leg. And then there's a parcel that
[4:46:37] runs through here and runs up into this
[4:46:39] with a little narrow piece. That narrow
[4:46:41] piece will remain um in ORM ownership.
[4:46:44] So, and then this parcel is actually
[4:46:47] owned by the state of Utah, but if you
[4:46:48] do a title search, it shows that ORM has
[4:46:50] an interest in it. There's an ORM deed
[4:46:52] recorded on that parcel, even though
[4:46:53] it's in the state's name. [snorts]
[4:46:55] So, how did ORM end up owning these
[4:46:58] properties? Well, back in 2003 when the
[4:47:00] city was building the golf course, they
[4:47:03] acquired these properties from uh
[4:47:05] Charles Garner and
[4:47:09] up before that point, these properties
[4:47:11] were essentially quick claimed to
[4:47:13] Charlie Garner by Charlie Garner. So, he
[4:47:16] then operated these properties as if he
[4:47:18] owned them. Um, research has come to
[4:47:21] show that those properties were likely
[4:47:23] not owned by him and therefore the city
[4:47:26] does not own them as well.
[4:47:28] There is a meander line from 1856 from
[4:47:31] an 1856 survey that runs approximately
[4:47:34] along the city boundary through here.
[4:47:37] City boundary is shown in the pink, but
[4:47:38] it it runs a little bit through here and
[4:47:40] you'll see it on a different slide in a
[4:47:41] moment. Um
[4:47:44] what's going on is we're working on a
[4:47:46] project called the Wakara Way Trail and
[4:47:48] Sam will give you an update on that in a
[4:47:49] minute um before we do some Q&A. And in
[4:47:53] order for that project to happen, all of
[4:47:56] these properties that are in question
[4:47:58] down in this area need to be cleaned up
[4:47:59] and title needs to be cleaned up. And
[4:48:01] that title needs to be transferred to
[4:48:04] the state of Utah. And then the federal
[4:48:06] government, which actually owns the
[4:48:08] underlying title, which is lakeward of
[4:48:11] this meander line, will then transfer
[4:48:13] ownership to the state. They have a
[4:48:14] verbal agreement to do so. Once that
[4:48:17] happens, then the state can move forward
[4:48:19] with the Wakar Way project. And that's a
[4:48:22] trail that will run north south along
[4:48:24] the shoreline of the lake somewhere in
[4:48:27] the high water area or high
[4:48:31] what would you call high there's a
[4:48:33] sandbar down there. It's a high kind of
[4:48:35] a higher elevation where it wouldn't be
[4:48:37] underwater ever and it would connect to
[4:48:39] a trail and vineyard and a trail in
[4:48:40] Provo.
[4:48:42] So the feds have said we'd love to
[4:48:44] transfer this but we're not going to do
[4:48:46] it until it's all cleaned up because we
[4:48:47] don't want to mess with it. So that's
[4:48:48] why we're here today is to help clean
[4:48:50] that up. We're here to ask you as a
[4:48:52] council to surplus these properties that
[4:48:54] ORM owns but we don't own and then to
[4:48:57] execute an agreement with the state of
[4:48:59] Utah. So the state of Utah in exchange
[4:49:02] for us transferring ownership of these
[4:49:04] properties is willing to give us a
[4:49:05] 99-year lease that allows us to continue
[4:49:08] to maintain and run our golf course
[4:49:10] where it's located. Some of it is
[4:49:12] located on this property. It'll allow us
[4:49:14] to install future trails, trail
[4:49:16] connections, open space, um, utilities,
[4:49:20] and it'll allow us to continue to
[4:49:21] operate our storm water facilities and
[4:49:23] sewer facilities that are located in
[4:49:25] this area, which happens to be where our
[4:49:27] outfall is for our sewer treatment plant
[4:49:30] and our spring water sewer lift station.
[4:49:33] So, this is a drawing or an exhibit
[4:49:37] showing the 99-year lease of the
[4:49:40] property that they would allow ORM to
[4:49:43] use. And if we zoom in, you'll notice up
[4:49:46] here on this north end, you can see golf
[4:49:49] cart paths. You can see this is the
[4:49:52] collect pond and right here is our lift
[4:49:54] station. Right here is our sewer
[4:49:56] outfall. And then down in here in that
[4:50:00] area, we will eventually have a parking
[4:50:03] lot for the trail project. So this
[4:50:06] exhibit here will show you kind of a
[4:50:07] comparison between the deeds that we are
[4:50:10] transferring in yellow or orange and
[4:50:12] then the 99year lease area in blue. Um,
[4:50:16] of particular note, you'll notice these
[4:50:18] three properties are in that blue area.
[4:50:22] a chunk of this bigger property and then
[4:50:24] these other blue areas almost equal the
[4:50:27] rest of this in size. Oddly enough, this
[4:50:30] deed went out into the lake and so a lot
[4:50:32] of this is underwater. It's not even
[4:50:34] land we could use. So the reality is the
[4:50:36] land that's down there now is being used
[4:50:40] in its current state for what purposes
[4:50:42] the city's using it and going forward
[4:50:44] nothing would really change um with a
[4:50:46] 99-year lease. So I'll turn the time
[4:50:48] over to Sam. Sam will uh give you a
[4:50:50] quick update and then we'll open it up
[4:50:52] for questions.
[4:50:53] >> Thanks Ryan. Um so some of you may be
[4:50:56] aware, actually I should say at least
[4:50:58] three of you have served on the Utah
[4:50:59] Lake Commissioner Util Lake Authority
[4:51:00] board and so probably well aware um that
[4:51:02] there's a goal to have a trail go all
[4:51:04] the way around Utah Lake eventually. Um
[4:51:06] this has been on the county's uh general
[4:51:08] plan, I believe it is, for 15 or 20
[4:51:10] years now. Um we're actually working
[4:51:12] with the county to try and update that
[4:51:14] alignment to current where it's at.
[4:51:15] There's also several planning projects
[4:51:17] going on right now. Um, one will soon be
[4:51:20] kicking off on Provo Bay, um, all the
[4:51:22] way down to West Mountain. Um, we hope
[4:51:24] to start another one, I believe, in 2027
[4:51:27] for the remaining portions of the
[4:51:29] southern and western side of the lake.
[4:51:31] Um, there are currently over a little
[4:51:33] over 25 miles of existing trail
[4:51:35] completed as a part of the Utah Lake
[4:51:37] Shoreline Trail. Um, you can actually
[4:51:39] find out um, where which sections are
[4:51:41] completed if you go to our website,
[4:51:42] util.gov, and under recreation, there's
[4:51:44] a trail plan page. Um most of those
[4:51:47] sections are all between um or I should
[4:51:49] say all of them are between Provo and
[4:51:50] Saratoga Springs, but there are a few
[4:51:52] gaps in between. Um currently there's a
[4:51:54] gap between Lynen and Lehi. Um and
[4:51:57] there's also this gap here from Vineyard
[4:51:58] down to Provo. And then um once you get
[4:52:01] to the intersection of Lake View Parkway
[4:52:04] and I-15 and Provo all the way around
[4:52:06] the lake clockwise back to Saratoga,
[4:52:07] there's no trail. So those will be
[4:52:08] coming hopefully in future years. Um, in
[4:52:11] regards to this section in particular,
[4:52:13] um, there's been more concerted efforts
[4:52:15] over the last, I would say, nine years,
[4:52:18] if I recollect correctly. Um, I've been
[4:52:19] at the lake for 10, so most of my time,
[4:52:22] um, there's been discussion around this
[4:52:23] section and trying to clear up things
[4:52:25] and be able to bring a trail through. um
[4:52:27] including um the Utah Division of
[4:52:29] Forestry, Fire and State Lands, and the
[4:52:30] Utah Lake Authority hired a mediator to
[4:52:32] help in some of these discussions back
[4:52:35] in uh 2024. And that mediation wrapped
[4:52:38] up in 2025. Um, and as Ryan stated, uh,
[4:52:42] this is the next step that's been
[4:52:44] identified is that FFSL,
[4:52:46] um, state, uh, division of forestry,
[4:52:48] fire, and state lands is working to
[4:52:49] secure, um, clarifying agreements in
[4:52:52] order to facilitate that handoff from
[4:52:54] the Bureau of Reclamation so that we can
[4:52:57] conserve, protect this section of
[4:52:59] shoreline, and hopefully bring a trail
[4:53:00] through as well. Um, as Ryan
[4:53:03] illustrated, um, the area he highlighted
[4:53:06] on the map is right at the end of
[4:53:07] University Parkway. It's a very logical
[4:53:09] location for a trail head. Um he didn't
[4:53:12] mention but we also plan to connect the
[4:53:14] trail um up through into the Oram city
[4:53:16] connection so there anybody within the
[4:53:18] ORM city trail network can also get down
[4:53:20] to Utah Lake similarly to how Lynden
[4:53:22] completed their historic trail section
[4:53:24] recently. Um we like to try and have the
[4:53:26] lake shore trail connect into every city
[4:53:28] network if possible so there's easy
[4:53:30] access for um uh both recreational and
[4:53:33] transportational use. um where it stands
[4:53:37] right now um currently, as I mentioned,
[4:53:39] is still in resolving some of these uh
[4:53:41] land ownership
[4:53:43] discrepancies. Um the county has already
[4:53:45] secured through MAG, I think it's either
[4:53:48] 12 or 16 million a few years ago for
[4:53:52] this section of trail to connect Provo
[4:53:54] to Vineyard. So, there is already some
[4:53:56] funding in place. Um Utah Division of
[4:53:58] Forestry, Fire and State Lands also has
[4:53:59] some remaining appropriation dollars
[4:54:01] assigned to this. So, I think we're in a
[4:54:03] good place with continuing to move
[4:54:05] forward on resolving the land ownership
[4:54:07] clarity um with funding already to be
[4:54:10] ready and available to begin planning,
[4:54:12] engineering, design, and construction of
[4:54:15] uh this section of trail at the lake.
[4:54:20] » And ma'am, do you mind uh mentioning on
[4:54:24] the public record how the trail head
[4:54:26] that'll be built here will be the best
[4:54:28] trail head possibly? Should I also
[4:54:31] mention on the record just how amazing
[4:54:32] the ORM city staff has been on this
[4:54:34] project too.
[4:54:36] >> Um yeah, in in all sincerity though,
[4:54:38] Bren, Ryan, uh Steve, and Chris, and I'm
[4:54:41] sure there's probably somebody else
[4:54:42] who's been in the meetings I'm
[4:54:43] forgetting, have all been wonderful to
[4:54:44] work with. They've been very
[4:54:45] informative, very patient, willing to
[4:54:47] discuss and find amicable solutions and
[4:54:50] shared objectives, which is something
[4:54:51] that's really important at Utah Lake.
[4:54:52] Without partners like Orm City and the
[4:54:54] other cities, we we can't manage the
[4:54:56] lake appropriately. It requires that
[4:54:58] collaborative effort. So, yes, it's
[4:55:00] going to be my my personal favorite.
[4:55:02] I'll say that trail head at the lake.
[4:55:04] Um, it'll be a great spot, I believe,
[4:55:06] for everybody accessing, especially off
[4:55:07] of uh University Parkway with a lot of
[4:55:09] college students in the area. I think
[4:55:10] it's a great recreation option for them,
[4:55:12] too.
[4:55:13] Is that satisfied, Bren? Were you good?
[4:55:16] >> Thank you.
[4:55:16] >> You're welcome. [laughter]
[4:55:20] » Any questions?
[4:55:21] >> Council Gail.
[4:55:22] >> Um, first of all, thank you for your
[4:55:24] work on this. I I can't even imagine
[4:55:25] what an undertaking it is to try and get
[4:55:26] all these records sorted out. So, thank
[4:55:28] you for that. Um, and the second, this
[4:55:30] is kind of a silly question, but what happens after 99 years? Are we
[4:55:32] like, you know, our stuff is there, we
[4:55:34] need to use it. I assume they just let
[4:55:36] us keep using it. We renew.
[4:55:38] >> That that would be the goal that this
[4:55:40] trail is so successful and the amenities
[4:55:42] are so great that no one will ever want
[4:55:44] to touch it. I mean, the thing we have
[4:55:45] going for us is a lot of it is wetlands
[4:55:48] already and it's open space and the hope
[4:55:51] is the state will want to protect it in
[4:55:52] perpetuity. If I remember correctly too,
[4:55:54] FFSL can't extend a perpetual lease on
[4:55:58] it. Otherwise, they would. 99 is the
[4:56:00] longest term they can offer, but the
[4:56:01] understanding is always it's usually
[4:56:03] with government partners and it's
[4:56:04] intended to be renewed.
[4:56:06] >> I won't be mayor then, but I'll make
[4:56:07] sure I come to the public personal
[4:56:09] appearances and and stick up for it.
[4:56:11] Okay.
[4:56:14] >> Yes. Yeah. I'll be aunt.
[4:56:17] >> Can I just say one?
[4:56:19] >> Oh, go ahead, Quinn.
[4:56:21] >> Okay. Uh, Mayor, I I just had a comment.
[4:56:23] Um, you know, thi this is a really
[4:56:28] interesting creative solution that this
[4:56:30] seems like a win-win for the city uh and
[4:56:34] for the state and for Utah Lake. And I
[4:56:37] I'm just really grateful um that
[4:56:40] uh we were able to be flexible and
[4:56:42] creative on this. Uh I think it's it's a
[4:56:45] wonderful solution uh for all of us.
[4:56:47] Thank you.
[4:56:51] I I just want to say um just one thing
[4:56:53] kind maybe um would you talk about the
[4:56:57] science center?
[4:56:59] >> Sure.
[4:56:59] >> Just kind of kind of bring this full
[4:57:02] circle. Tell them what else we have
[4:57:03] behind besides path here. Sure.
[4:57:06] >> This is bigger and brighter and better
[4:57:07] than anything.
[4:57:09] >> I appreciate the softball there,
[4:57:11] Councilman Mlette. Um she's served for
[4:57:12] quite a while on the board, so I
[4:57:13] appreciate that. Um Utah Lake has a lot
[4:57:16] going for it. I hope you've seen some of
[4:57:18] our our ads last year or they've started
[4:57:20] up again recently. That's one example of
[4:57:23] so many things that are going on at Utah
[4:57:25] Lake, whether it's trail planning and
[4:57:27] projects or vegetation restoration
[4:57:30] efforts, carp removal, um community
[4:57:33] outreach and education, uh special
[4:57:35] events. Little tip, come to the Utah
[4:57:38] Lake Festival May 30th. It's got the
[4:57:40] Provo Farmers Market in partnership with
[4:57:41] it. We've got paddle board jousting, all
[4:57:43] kinds of fun stuff. Um the nature center
[4:57:46] is a part of this as well. So um Utah
[4:57:49] Lake has needed a nature center for
[4:57:50] longer than I've worked at Utah Lake. Uh
[4:57:53] the current plan is a discussion with
[4:57:55] Lynen City and UVU to host that on some
[4:57:58] land owned by Lynden City directly
[4:58:00] behind the Lynen Marina. Um it's we've
[4:58:03] received 4 million in federal funding
[4:58:06] for this and we're working with partners
[4:58:07] to try and secure the remaining amount
[4:58:09] through the state um and through some
[4:58:12] other funding sources. Uh but the goal
[4:58:14] is to have an actual science research
[4:58:16] and nature center at Utah Lake. So this
[4:58:18] would be a both a university resource
[4:58:20] for not just UVU but the other
[4:58:22] universities to come and use lab space
[4:58:24] and and classroom space and such for
[4:58:25] their students to learn. It's a site for
[4:58:27] us to be able to educate the community.
[4:58:29] Currently we do field trips for fourth
[4:58:31] graders twice a year for example at the
[4:58:32] lake but this would provide an ongoing
[4:58:34] home where we could expand that program
[4:58:36] to other grades and uh year round. Um
[4:58:39] it'll also provide community space. We
[4:58:40] want to have uh probably not something
[4:58:42] quite as beautiful and spacious as this
[4:58:44] room here. I hope to have something
[4:58:45] maybe half this size of a a
[4:58:48] multi-purpose space that can be used for
[4:58:50] events and public meetings and other
[4:58:51] things about the lake. Um and there will
[4:58:53] also be educational diaramas and such.
[4:58:55] Um we wanted to think something similar
[4:58:57] to what you see at Thanksgiving Point.
[4:58:59] Um uh being able to educate the public
[4:59:01] about the flora and fawn at Utah Lake
[4:59:03] and the work that's being done to manage
[4:59:05] it and protect it and preserve it for
[4:59:06] the future.
[4:59:09] And I guess to maybe tie these together,
[4:59:11] once we connect this trail, someone
[4:59:12] could walk from Orum along the trail up
[4:59:14] to the nature center because the trail
[4:59:15] goes right past it. Oh, nice. All right,
[4:59:18] council. Any other questions?
[4:59:21] All right, we're going to go ahead and
[4:59:23] open the public hearing and I'm going to
[4:59:26] be a little facicious in the public.
[4:59:28] We're going to declare property [gasps]
[4:59:30] as surplus and execute agreement to
[4:59:32] convey property we do not own that we
[4:59:35] thought we owned. Right.
[4:59:37] Okay, that's I'm not that that's not the
[4:59:39] official, huh? I'm going to open the
[4:59:41] public hearing [gasps]
[4:59:43] for anyone who would like to come speak
[4:59:45] to the city declaring certain parcels of
[4:59:48] real property to be surplus and to
[4:59:50] authorize the execution of an agreement
[4:59:52] to convey the parcels in exchange for a
[4:59:55] lease for 99 years. Is there anyone who
[4:59:57] would like to speak to that?
[5:00:01] Okay, go ahead and close the public
[5:00:04] hearing. Bring it back to the council.
[5:00:07] it looks like
[5:00:09] there are a couple of different options
[5:00:11] in on the agenda. If if you would like
[5:00:14] to move forward on this, there's a
[5:00:18] motion. And if you would like to not
[5:00:20] move forward on this, there's a motion
[5:00:23] that you can refer to. I move that the
[5:00:26] city council by resolution declare
[5:00:29] certain parcels of real property located
[5:00:31] in the vicinity of 1020 South 2300 west
[5:00:34] as surplus and authorize the execution
[5:00:36] of an agreement with the state of Utah
[5:00:38] to convey such properties to the state
[5:00:40] of Utah in exchange for a lease of a
[5:00:42] portion of the properties to the city
[5:00:44] for a period of 99 years.
[5:00:46] >> Right. Thank you. We have a motion. Is
[5:00:47] there a second?
[5:00:48] >> Second.
[5:00:49] >> Okay, we've got several seconds.
[5:00:52] >> Council member Lansson. Okay. Any more
[5:00:54] discussion?
[5:00:56] Okay. Council member Mulestein, how do
[5:00:57] you vote?
[5:00:58] >> I,
[5:01:00] >> Council
[5:01:00] >> I.
[5:01:01] Um, Council Member Mikum.
[5:01:04] >> I
[5:01:06] >> You I
[5:01:07] >> I
[5:01:10] >> All right. Motion passes. Thank you.
[5:01:12] We've just I know I can still Never
[5:01:15] mind. I'll be quiet.
[5:01:17] >> That's the best thing that we could do
[5:01:18] of what's considering the circumstances.
[5:01:19] >> I think it's kind of cool. We can all
[5:01:21] say we just made a 99-year law. How
[5:01:23] about that?
[5:01:24] >> Yes, that's right. And I've conveyed
[5:01:26] property that I haven't owned.
[5:01:29] Never done that before. [laughter]
[5:01:32] No, but it's just a situation. It was
[5:01:34] the best we could do. All right. Um,
[5:01:38] item 10.3,
[5:01:40] public hearing, ordinance, request to
[5:01:42] amend portions of article 22-6-8
[5:01:45] of the ORM city code relating to
[5:01:47] allowable height of primary buildings in
[5:01:49] single family residential zones.
[5:01:52] Welcome Jared of great fortitude
[5:01:56] to sit through this. Okay.
[5:01:59] >> No, absolutely. It's my pleasure to sit
[5:02:01] through it. So, the I saw one of those
[5:02:03] Utah Lake spots at a at a movie last
[5:02:05] summer and it was far and away the best
[5:02:07] part of that movie. It's what we talked
[5:02:08] about all night, but my family's
[5:02:09] obnoxious, so don't go by me. Uh this is
[5:02:13] um the the proposed changes for
[5:02:16] residential allowable height. Um we we
[5:02:18] talked about some of these in work
[5:02:19] sessions and then we've we've made these
[5:02:21] into one um potential change that might do some good. Um just a
[5:02:27] couple of quick things. What does this
[5:02:28] proposed amendment do? Uh three things
[5:02:31] basically. It differentiates between
[5:02:32] flat roofs and pitched roofs as we
[5:02:34] talked about in order to to allow things
[5:02:36] differently for those different types of
[5:02:37] roofs and the effects that they have. uh
[5:02:40] it lowers the base height that we allow
[5:02:42] or creates a base height rather than
[5:02:43] just a straight straight allowed height
[5:02:45] and then allows additional height with
[5:02:46] setback back up to what it used to be.
[5:02:49] So for example, 35 is what we currently
[5:02:51] allow. Spoiler alert for what we're
[5:02:52] going to talk about in the next slide,
[5:02:53] but 35 is what we allow. This would
[5:02:55] reduce that to 30 and then let you get
[5:02:56] to 35 as you increase setbacks to kind
[5:02:58] of offset the effects of those taller
[5:03:00] walls at property lines. And then it
[5:03:03] also implements that graduated building
[5:03:04] height envelope that we can talk about
[5:03:06] again tonight and make sure we all are
[5:03:07] on the same page with that. Uh, a couple
[5:03:09] of things that it doesn't do. It doesn't
[5:03:11] change the way that we measure height,
[5:03:12] uh, by our code. Uh, it doesn't take
[5:03:14] away any of the exceptions that already
[5:03:16] exist for things like chimneys and
[5:03:17] koopas, uh, uninhabitable domes and that
[5:03:20] kind of thing. Uh, it also doesn't
[5:03:22] remove this very sort of niche, um,
[5:03:24] height allowance. It's only in the R12
[5:03:25] and R20 zones where you meet really
[5:03:27] great setbacks. It's a very, it's not
[5:03:29] used, it's an outlier, and we didn't
[5:03:30] eliminate that by this either. Um,
[5:03:34] just to start out, let's talk about how
[5:03:36] we measure height. Height is actually
[5:03:38] the measurement of height in our zoning
[5:03:39] code currently is controlled by two
[5:03:41] definitions. Our definition for height
[5:03:42] and our definition for grade. So height
[5:03:44] is just the highest point of the
[5:03:46] structure above grade. And grade is
[5:03:49] determined as the average elevation of
[5:03:51] the finished ground level at the center
[5:03:52] of all the walls of the building. So you
[5:03:53] have to do a little a little work to
[5:03:56] determine that. But that basically in
[5:03:58] short it accounts for grades at
[5:04:00] property. So if the property's on a
[5:04:01] slope etc. still we establish an average
[5:04:04] grade for all of that and then we
[5:04:06] measure up from there. Uh we wouldn't
[5:04:08] propose changing that. What we are
[5:04:09] proposing is that we we measure things
[5:04:12] differently for different types of roof
[5:04:14] structures. We talked about this in the
[5:04:15] work sessions as well, but as a
[5:04:16] reminder, um what we're proposing
[5:04:18] currently is that uh pitched roof would
[5:04:20] be anything that's a 312 pitch or
[5:04:22] greater. And as a reminder, that's this
[5:04:24] kind of look. uh anything less than 312
[5:04:27] so all the way up to 2.912 is going to
[5:04:30] be flat roof as far as the the uh code
[5:04:33] is concerned if that's if that's
[5:04:34] acceptable. Um
[5:04:39] the the rub of that becomes this this
[5:04:41] text amendment would apply the way we've
[5:04:43] written it to all of our single family
[5:04:44] residential zones. There's an R5, R six,
[5:04:47] 65, 67 or 75 and and uh I almost said
[5:04:50] 67, I'm sorry, and R8. That's tricky to
[5:04:53] avoid. Um we we would apply this to all
[5:04:57] of these. The difference in these zones
[5:04:58] is not the height that's allowed. You
[5:05:00] get 35 feet in all of these, but uh
[5:05:02] current in our current zoning, but the
[5:05:03] setbacks are different. And really the the issues that we have maybe been
[5:05:07] seeing and are trying to respond to are
[5:05:08] not so much just height, but height in relativity to the surrounding area,
[5:05:12] right? So um you have to look at those
[5:05:14] things. So what we're proposing is that
[5:05:16] pitched roofs at minimum setbacks would
[5:05:18] get 30 ft of height and then as you go
[5:05:21] one set back one foot of setback greater
[5:05:23] you get an additional foot of height up
[5:05:24] to that maximum of 35. So if you're set
[5:05:27] back um we I have an example we can go
[5:05:30] through in a minute but that's what
[5:05:32] we're proposing for flat roofs. Again
[5:05:33] that's anything less than 312 pitch. You
[5:05:36] just get 20 ft at the minimum setback.
[5:05:38] So, if you're just meeting the bare
[5:05:39] minimum setbacks, you get 20 ft of
[5:05:40] allowable to height and then one
[5:05:42] additional foot of height for setback
[5:05:44] foot up to 24 ft. And uh I we explained
[5:05:47] to the planning commission when we
[5:05:48] presented there why 24 ft. That was the
[5:05:51] most common number I could find in all
[5:05:53] the other codes that we looked at doing
[5:05:54] this. Um there's no nothing magic about
[5:05:56] it. It just works for builders more
[5:05:58] often than than not.
[5:05:59] >> Um in the R12 and R20 zones.
[5:06:01] >> So, hold on just a sec.
[5:06:02] >> Yeah, go ahead.
[5:06:03] >> Okay. So, we're taking our 20 foot from
[5:06:05] the rear boundary line. Yeah.
[5:06:08] >> Okay. That's your setback. That's your
[5:06:09] standard. And then you're saying you get
[5:06:11] a one one.
[5:06:12] >> You get one to one beyond that initial
[5:06:14] 20 up to 24.
[5:06:15] >> Up to 20. Okay.
[5:06:16] >> So if you're 40T for your rear yard,
[5:06:18] doesn't matter. 24 is the
[5:06:20] >> 23 ft. You get 23T height. 22 22. Okay.
[5:06:23] >> Right up to the 24 and then no more
[5:06:24] beyond that.
[5:06:27] Maximum still applies. You just get one
[5:06:29] additional to get to the maximum to
[5:06:30] create a little extra buffer there. Um,
[5:06:33] for the R12 and R20 pitch roofs, uh,
[5:06:35] minimum setbacks 35 ft and then they
[5:06:37] have that exception that's already
[5:06:39] written in, so I just labeled that out
[5:06:41] for you. 20% of the total roof area can
[5:06:42] be up to 45 ft if you're at least 50 ft
[5:06:45] from property lines. You still only get
[5:06:47] the 20%. Uh, those don't come up very
[5:06:49] often, but when they do, it hasn't ever
[5:06:51] been a problem that we can find. Uh in
[5:06:53] flat roofs we applied because we we're
[5:06:56] defining roofs now. So we did have to
[5:06:57] make one small change to that. We just
[5:06:58] added this section for them. 24 ft in
[5:07:00] height and minimums and then you get
[5:07:02] that additional foot of setback uh up to
[5:07:04] 28 ft. And that exception still applies
[5:07:06] to 20% but only up to 32 ft if you're 50
[5:07:09] ft from property lines.
[5:07:12] Does that make sense? Okay. Um couple of
[5:07:15] things about the graduated building
[5:07:16] height. So what this would do is I'm
[5:07:19] just going to read a little part of it.
[5:07:20] The height of all principal dwellings in single family residential zones is
[5:07:24] subject to limitation by the graduated
[5:07:26] height envelope created by starting at a
[5:07:27] point on the property line 8 ft above
[5:07:29] ground and then sloping a line at a
[5:07:30] 45°ree angle towards the center of the
[5:07:32] lot. The entire building must fit under
[5:07:34] that envelope without with the following
[5:07:35] exceptions. So regardless of all those
[5:07:37] other rules we just read through, if you
[5:07:40] don't if the building you're proposing
[5:07:41] does not fit under that envelope that's
[5:07:43] created, it it doesn't matter if you're
[5:07:45] less than 35 feet. It still has to fit.
[5:07:47] And we we've got a an illustration we
[5:07:49] can go through that'll show that. Um the exceptions are gables and dormers.
[5:07:53] Uh dormers not allowed above the the
[5:07:55] maximum height in any case and not above
[5:07:57] the ridge line of the roof that they're
[5:07:58] on. And then for gables not above
[5:08:01] maximum height in any case and not more
[5:08:03] than 1.75 times higher than the point of
[5:08:05] intersection with the envelope. All this
[5:08:07] sounds way more complicated than it
[5:08:08] really is. So we'll we'll get to that in
[5:08:10] a second. If it's math that planners can
[5:08:12] do. This is all based on math that
[5:08:14] planners are able to do. So, it is
[5:08:16] pretty basic really when you get into
[5:08:18] it. And the gable shouldn't be more than
[5:08:19] 25% of a facade's length. So, not too
[5:08:23] flat of a gable, for example. Let me
[5:08:25] just show you in this in this picture.
[5:08:26] So,
[5:08:28] yep, there's this is the part that
[5:08:30] starts to make sense. So, um to um let's
[5:08:35] start with the sideyard, for example. So
[5:08:37] this is the 8 ft that we draw and say if
[5:08:39] we want to make that envelope, we go to
[5:08:41] the property line and we go up 8 ft and
[5:08:43] that's where we start our 45° plane. And
[5:08:46] so what that means is and you get to go
[5:08:48] 1.75 times higher if you're a gabled end
[5:08:51] like this. So I'll make more sense in a
[5:08:53] second. You can go 1.75 times the height
[5:08:56] that's allowed
[5:08:59] uh when you when you measure it um from
[5:09:01] this 8 ft. So, for example, in an R8
[5:09:04] zone, that's our most common single
[5:09:05] family zone. R8 zones, the smallest
[5:09:08] setback you can have from a side is 8
[5:09:09] ft. So, let's take that as an example.
[5:09:12] If this is an 8ft sideyard, we measure
[5:09:14] up 8 ft and we start our 45°ree plane.
[5:09:17] With 8 ft of distance to cover at 45°,
[5:09:19] you're going to go up 8, you're going to
[5:09:20] get 8 ft of rise. So, you're going to
[5:09:22] intersect that wall at 16 ft in height.
[5:09:26] and where you intersect that wall at 16
[5:09:28] ft in height. Then you can if you're a
[5:09:30] gabled end, you either have to fit
[5:09:32] everything under. So maybe you're this
[5:09:34] maybe this slope works and you're you're
[5:09:36] changed around. Everything fits under
[5:09:37] it. Or if you're going to project above
[5:09:39] it, you can project 1.75 times that 18
[5:09:42] ft. That 18 ft that's 20 I wrote it down
[5:09:44] cuz I knew I wouldn't remember.
[5:09:47] That's 28 ft in height. So this gable
[5:09:50] could go up to 28 ft in height measured
[5:09:52] from the ground. the way we measure
[5:09:53] height. So, it doesn't get to that 35
[5:09:56] ft, but it it also doesn't do one other
[5:09:58] thing. You could measure that gable up
[5:10:00] to 32 feet or sorry, 28 feet, but that
[5:10:03] is and that is under the um 30t
[5:10:06] allowance, the base allowance at the
[5:10:07] minimum set back just barely. So, this
[5:10:09] would be possible. And what that does is
[5:10:12] keep you from having a situation where
[5:10:16] this massive wall is way above you like
[5:10:18] that. If we go back to this, you can
[5:10:20] imagine that while this is still tall,
[5:10:22] it's not the same effect as if this
[5:10:24] whole square were filled up with that
[5:10:26] projection. So you either fit under that
[5:10:28] envelope and are less obtrusive or you
[5:10:30] protrude but only the way that we allow
[5:10:32] that 1.75. So it pulls it down a little
[5:10:33] bit and forces the architecture from the
[5:10:36] front end. You can if you do the math in
[5:10:38] your head again and say say we have a 25
[5:10:39] ft front yard setback that's required
[5:10:41] that plane you're going to be all under
[5:10:43] that because of that distance that's
[5:10:44] required. You're just not going to be
[5:10:45] above it.
[5:10:47] Okay. Does that make sense? So the the envelope is not as complicated as it
[5:10:51] seems. Um
[5:10:54] >> so instead of having the the building
[5:10:56] envelope be like a rectangle, it's this shaded area rather than rather
[5:11:03] than having it all go up and be
[5:11:05] >> right
[5:11:06] >> straight. So it you just fit underneath
[5:11:08] that. So if you're really close to a
[5:11:10] another home, for example, let's just
[5:11:12] use this one. if you're really close to
[5:11:13] another home. In this case, I don't have
[5:11:15] a way to do the math, but you can kind
[5:11:16] of imagine if we come 8 ft up here and
[5:11:19] this is probably right on its 8ft
[5:11:20] required sideyard. Um, it would
[5:11:22] intersect and get to go up if it were a
[5:11:24] gable then to maybe this area, but right
[5:11:27] this wouldn't be possible that massing
[5:11:29] like that. And that's kind of the point
[5:11:31] of of what we've proposed here is really
[5:11:34] to deal with the fact that ORM has a lot
[5:11:37] of um single lots that are going to be
[5:11:39] developed and four or five lot
[5:11:41] subdivisions and there's no way to deal
[5:11:44] with those adjacencies except to to
[5:11:45] introduce more complicated code. Um we feel like this would help. We have a
[5:11:50] couple of examples of um newer homes
[5:11:52] that have come through where we would
[5:11:53] have done a better job if we had this
[5:11:55] kind of code. We feel like it would be
[5:11:57] uh usable. So, um, with that,
[5:12:02] uh, this is just a horrible example of
[5:12:04] what can happen. This is an addition to
[5:12:06] a home. So, this is to point out that we would propose this for not just new
[5:12:10] construction, but for any new
[5:12:12] construction. So, additions to existing
[5:12:13] homes, uh, especially where older homes
[5:12:15] are selling and they're going to want
[5:12:17] people are going to want to make
[5:12:18] additions to them. Let's make sure those
[5:12:19] aren't too obtrusive to the adjacent
[5:12:22] homeowners.
[5:12:24] Um,
[5:12:26] let's see. That's that's all I have
[5:12:28] really unless you have some questions
[5:12:29] for me. The full text was attached to
[5:12:31] your reports. Um it it takes it out of
[5:12:34] this table form that it's in because
[5:12:35] it's too complicated to
[5:12:36] >> Right. Council, thank you. Do you have
[5:12:38] any questions?
[5:12:41] » So
[5:12:43] yeah. So this
[5:12:46] does not take into account the grade
[5:12:47] issue that was spoken about earlier
[5:12:49] today.
[5:12:50] >> That's right.
[5:12:50] >> And do you recommend then that is a
[5:12:52] separate ordinance? that would I I do I
[5:12:54] would recommend a separate we we need to
[5:12:56] approach that one carefully and make
[5:12:58] sure that we don't um cause unended
[5:13:02] problems with that. I think we're less
[5:13:03] likely to do that. This is probably not
[5:13:05] a perfect ordinance but
[5:13:06] >> and it can't with what we've got the
[5:13:08] information we have so far. We can't
[5:13:10] really address the grade differences
[5:13:11] other than to to keep measuring from
[5:13:14] grade and and these will help in some
[5:13:16] regards uh but not as much as a
[5:13:18] >> a grade differential ordinance. And it
[5:13:20] probably belongs that probably belongs
[5:13:22] in the subdivision ordinance instead of
[5:13:23] in the zoning ordinance where this
[5:13:25] height is contained.
[5:13:26] >> Okay. Thank you.
[5:13:29] » All right. Anyone else have a comment or
[5:13:31] question?
[5:13:32] >> Mayor, can I make a comment?
[5:13:34] >> Okay.
[5:13:36] Go ahead.
[5:13:38] >> Um I I was uh with planning commission
[5:13:41] when they were considering this and I
[5:13:44] think you know on the surface it does
[5:13:47] seem fairly complex. It took me a while
[5:13:48] to get my mind around it. [snorts] Um, I
[5:13:51] think it does
[5:13:53] um
[5:13:55] make progress for us and some of our
[5:13:57] concerns about the effect of of our
[5:14:00] current building regulations on
[5:14:01] neighborhoods and so uh the planning
[5:14:03] commission was universally supportive of
[5:14:05] it. Uh they felt like it was a good step
[5:14:08] in the right direction and I agree with
[5:14:10] that.
[5:14:12] >> Right. Thank you for reporting on the
[5:14:14] planning commission.
[5:14:16] Anyone else comment? All right, we have
[5:14:19] a public
[5:14:20] >> if I can just express gratitude and
[5:14:22] appreciation for Jared Hall and Gary
[5:14:24] McInn and our our staff for for
[5:14:28] >> the tremendous work they've they've put
[5:14:29] into this. It this took a lot of
[5:14:31] research and analysis and even some
[5:14:34] creativity and thinking outside the box,
[5:14:37] pun intended. I just
[5:14:41] » I appreciate their how as well. you
[5:14:43] know, they they uh approach this in a in
[5:14:46] a friendly, approachable, accessible
[5:14:48] way. So,
[5:14:49] >> great. Thank Yes. Thank you.
[5:14:51] >> Well, it is a public hearing, so I'm
[5:14:54] going to go ahead and open the public
[5:14:55] hearing. Anyone who would like to make a
[5:14:57] comment on the proposed ordinance to
[5:15:01] make these changes to the allowable
[5:15:03] height of primary buildings in single
[5:15:05] family residential zones. Is there
[5:15:06] anyone who'd like to speak to that?
[5:15:09] [sighs]
[5:15:10] Oh, I'm seeing heads like, "No, nope. I
[5:15:13] have nothing to say. Okay, with that,
[5:15:16] we'll go ahead and close the public
[5:15:17] hearing and bring it back to the
[5:15:18] council.
[5:15:20] All right, Council Member Kilpac. Mayor,
[5:15:22] I move that we approve by ordinance the
[5:15:24] proposed amendments to article 2-6-8 of
[5:15:27] Worm City Code relating to allowable
[5:15:30] height for primary buildings in a single
[5:15:32] family residential zone.
[5:15:33] >> Right. Thank you. We have a motion. Is
[5:15:34] there a second?
[5:15:36] >> I'll second that.
[5:15:36] >> Right. Thank you, Council Member Mallet.
[5:15:38] Is there any further discussion?
[5:15:42] Um hearing none, we'll go ahead and
[5:15:44] council member Kilpac
[5:15:45] >> I
[5:15:46] >> vote I and Council Member Mikum
[5:15:49] >> I
[5:15:55] >> All right, motion passes unanimously.
[5:15:57] Thank you.
[5:15:58] >> Thank you all so much.
[5:15:59] >> Thank you. All right. Item number 11.1
[5:16:02] is a financial summary from February and
[5:16:05] March of 2026. And you'll find that in
[5:16:07] your city uh council meeting packet. And
[5:16:10] our fate now lies with item 12, city
[5:16:12] manager information items. What you got?
[5:16:16] >> Uh, pay attention to some calendar invites that are that have come
[5:16:21] to you uh from Lorie Kryman. Uh, so
[5:16:25] Tuesday is officially the city's 107th
[5:16:28] birthday. We are going to throw a little
[5:16:30] party on Wednesday at opening night at
[5:16:32] the farmers market at the stage in the
[5:16:35] city center park. and the neighborhood
[5:16:37] commission is serving 1,070
[5:16:40] pieces of cake and there will be live
[5:16:43] music and um and then the Oram's farmers
[5:16:47] market which as you know has been just
[5:16:50] more and more successful every year it's
[5:16:52] also kicking off that night um and it'll
[5:16:55] be its sixth year and there will be you
[5:16:58] know just lots of excitement and and
[5:17:00] participation all around.
[5:17:02] >> Will you remind me what time the
[5:17:03] birthday party birthday's part of the
[5:17:05] event is? is at 6.
[5:17:08] >> Pete, do you
[5:17:10] >> Yeah. 6 o'clock.
[5:17:11] >> 6 o'clock.
[5:17:13] >> Um, and then also to celebrate our
[5:17:16] birthday and our annual kindness week,
[5:17:18] we are doing a community service project
[5:17:19] at Nelson's Grove next Saturday at 9:00
[5:17:22] a.m. And as per usual, we feel like the
[5:17:25] best way to celebrate is to ser, you
[5:17:28] know, provide additional opportunities
[5:17:29] to serve the the community. So that's
[5:17:32] all I've got. All right, that is all he
[5:17:35] has. All right, we have made it to um
[5:17:39] item number 13. I motion to adjurnn.
[5:17:43] >> I'll make a motion to adjourn. But
[5:17:45] before I do that, I just want to give a
[5:17:47] shout out
[5:17:49] to Council Member Mikum
[5:17:53] who is awake at 3:45 a.m. where he's at.
[5:17:58] Quinn, I don't I don't know how you did
[5:18:00] that, but you're amazing. So, with that,
[5:18:02] I'd like to make a motion to
[5:18:06] close the meeting. All right. Have a
[5:18:08] motion. Do we need to do the second? I
[5:18:10] can't remember.
[5:18:11] >> Second.
[5:18:12] >> Have a second. Do we have to vote? I
[5:18:14] >> I
[5:18:15] >> We're not doing a roll call, Mr. Earl.
[5:18:19] >> All right. See you next week