[0:23] 4 5 6 7
[0:26] plus all of you. Welcome
[0:29] to our work session today.
[0:31] And Teresa, have you gotten everything I
[0:33] Okay, you're ready to go.
[0:35] Glad to have you here. We have a lot on
[0:37] our work session agenda as well as on
[0:40] our regular meeting agenda.
[0:42] So, we're just going to dive right into
[0:44] it. Our first presentation is from the
[0:47] Utah Transit Authority. And I would like
[0:51] to welcome Jay Fox, executive director,
[0:53] and I know you have some others with you
[0:55] from UTA. And so, I'll turn the time
[0:57] over to you.
[0:58] >> Thank you. Thank you so much. What I'd
[0:59] like to do that first one, I'd have
[1:01] everybody introduce themselves. I think
[1:02] we'll go with Sharon.
[1:03] go ahead.
[1:04] >> Uh good afternoon. I'm Sharon Robertson,
[1:07] UTA director of
[1:10] » Cameron Beutler, government relations
[1:12] for UTA.
[1:14] >> Uh Nicole Martin, just recently with UTA
[1:16] and working with Jay.
[1:20] » I'm Mary DeLamar Schaefer. I'm with UTA
[1:22] down here in Utah County. I just was
[1:24] reminiscing about my first government
[1:26] job was in 1982 with the U-1.
[1:29] Thank you all.
[1:32] » We're glad to have you and your team
[1:33] here.
[1:34] >> Yeah, yeah. Mary's a legend and she's
[1:36] going to be retiring soon, so
[1:40] Um
[1:41] All right. Yeah, I want to jump in and
[1:42] certainly give you enough time to ask
[1:44] any questions of us. Uh since I am
[1:46] sitting in the interview seat.
[1:49] That's what it feels like right now. Um
[1:51] I just wanted to tell you a little bit
[1:52] about myself cuz I've been here 5 years,
[1:55] but I think most of the cities in Utah
[1:57] County, most of the um
[1:59] staff and elected leaders
[2:01] interact a lot with Jeff Acerson or Mary
[2:05] who's taken you know a big lead on the
[2:07] political side and on the municipal side
[2:09] down here.
[2:11] I came to Utah
[2:13] in 2022 specifically for this job. I
[2:16] used to be with the Federal Transit
[2:17] Administration and the United States
[2:19] Department of Transportation for 15
[2:20] years
[2:22] and I can tell you and this is true even
[2:25] today that if you walk the halls of the
[2:26] Federal Transit Administration you say
[2:28] give me the top three transit agencies
[2:30] in the country
[2:32] UTA 95% of the time is in that list of
[2:34] first. So
[2:36] we have a stellar reputation. We're
[2:37] about to host the national conference
[2:40] the American Public Transportation
[2:41] Association's Mobility Conference which
[2:44] also has a bus operator and mechanics
[2:46] competition international one.
[2:49] And and we've already got a lot of
[2:51] requests to see some of the things we're
[2:54] doing our on demand work or commuter
[2:56] rail system. Really really exciting. Um
[3:00] did a little bit of time at Amtrak
[3:02] worked for SEPTA which is the
[3:04] Philadelphia area transit agency before
[3:06] I got the call here and my first
[3:09] question was why do you want a
[3:10] Philadelphia attorney to run the Utah
[3:11] Transit area?
[3:13] Just go out and see it and we fell in
[3:15] love with it right away. So Jan and I
[3:16] have been here and we're we're we no
[3:18] longer say we're in Utah, we say this is
[3:20] our home. So
[3:23] today.
[3:24] Uh wanted to talk to you a little bit
[3:25] about what's going on at UTA and
[3:28] specifically I'll start by talking about
[3:31] the governance changes
[3:33] because I think they're important and
[3:35] important in terms of how you're going
[3:36] to be interacting with the agency and
[3:39] then I'm going to turn the time over to
[3:41] Jarom who is our director of planning to
[3:43] go through the service that we have in
[3:45] Orem right now as well as connecting
[3:47] with the Utah County and talk a little
[3:50] bit about that and then answer any
[3:51] questions you have as we get on board
[3:53] with our planning efforts.
[3:55] Um so they uh Senate Bill 197, which was
[3:59] the bill uh for this last legislative
[4:01] session, that changed the governance
[4:02] structure
[4:03] uh was sponsored by uh Senator Harper.
[4:07] Um and this is his quote. Uh
[4:09] a you know, the focus was to uh have us
[4:12] better respond to growth within
[4:13] communities because
[4:15] uh the growth is enormous and they um
[4:17] uh you know, the the great thing and the
[4:20] hard thing about being UTA right now is
[4:21] that the demand for our services is over
[4:23] the top and uh the hard thing is the
[4:25] demand for our services is over the top.
[4:28] So so I think that's great. I I will say
[4:30] that um
[4:32] I don't know of any other community I've
[4:34] ever been in where the state's
[4:36] population size is 3 and 1/2 million
[4:38] that has a such a desire for transit and
[4:42] such support for transit and that is at
[4:43] every level including the state
[4:45] legislature. Uh so um I think part of uh
[4:49] Senator Harper's uh goal with this was
[4:51] to uh reinvest trust uh back in the
[4:54] executive team. Uh and we went through a
[4:57] little bit of a rough patch uh back in
[4:59] uh 2017
[5:01] um and we've come out of that very
[5:03] nicely. Uh and it was more uh you know, how
[5:07] people were
[5:08] uh handling some of our real estate
[5:09] assets. Uh we're long past that now and
[5:12] uh the agency's done 40 million
[5:14] customers 2 years in a row now. Uh so
[5:17] that's uh fantastic and we have now
[5:20] three successful bus rapid transits
[5:22] including UVX which you guys know well.
[5:24] Um
[5:26] for the governance changes, we have gone
[5:28] from three full-time uh trustees
[5:31] uh who I reported to uh over these last
[5:35] uh four plus years.
[5:37] Uh that uh will sunset
[5:39] uh on July 1st uh when a new part-time
[5:43] seven-member transit commission
[5:45] uh is um
[5:47] uh uh, to, uh, provide governance for
[5:49] our agency. I will not report to that
[5:52] Transit Commission. I will report to the
[5:54] governor. I'm a, uh, appointee by the
[5:58] governor. Uh, so all of our work will be
[6:01] done through that executive, uh, chain of command.
[6:06] Uh, however, the Transit Commission will
[6:07] be
[6:08] I shall go through some of those in a
[6:09] moment. And, uh, well, you know, we'll
[6:11] be
[6:12] I think in some ways we'll be playing a
[6:14] lot of the role that our local advisory
[6:15] council provided uh, prior to this
[6:18] sunsetting.
[6:19] Uh, and
[6:21] I can say in in speaking with some, uh,
[6:23] people that have been nominated for
[6:24] that, uh, position, we don't have a a
[6:26] commission yet. Uh, advocacy is the
[6:29] strong theme. How do we advocate for
[6:31] more transit? How do we advocate for
[6:32] more transit funding? More revenue
[6:34] streams uh, to make it, uh, that much
[6:36] more robust. Uh, the appointments, uh,
[6:39] which are now, um,
[6:41] uh, in process. I know there was a
[6:43] meeting yesterday to talk about, uh,
[6:45] commission membership. Two from the
[6:46] speaker of the house, uh, two from the
[6:48] Senate president. And then, uh, a a
[6:51] slate of local nominations, uh, which
[6:54] are before the governor right now. Uh,
[6:56] the only one that I would say is set is
[6:58] Salt Lake County nominated only one
[6:59] individual. Uh, they did a process where
[7:02] they had a group of, uh, potential nominees. They voted on on
[7:06] that slate and the person who had the
[7:08] most votes was the only person pushed
[7:10] forward. So,
[7:12] um,
[7:13] >> What's your term?
[7:15] >> So, it's, um, ultimately I believe it is
[7:17] a four-year term for each of them, but
[7:20] it's, um,
[7:21] it's going to be staggered as they as
[7:23] they fall off.
[7:24] There will be turnover. They won't all
[7:25] turn over at the same time.
[7:29] Um, responsibilities on the executive
[7:32] director side of the house. And I say
[7:34] the executive director side of the house
[7:35] because,
[7:36] um,
[7:37] uh,
[7:38] I can't do what I do with first without
[7:40] 3,000 plus employees at our agency who
[7:42] are tremendous, who knock operations out
[7:45] of the park every day. But with the
[7:47] out the executive team,
[7:49] so I consider the executive director and
[7:51] executive team responsibilities all the
[7:53] same discussion.
[7:55] As administration and leadership for the
[7:58] agency,
[7:59] specifically strategic leadership. We
[8:01] have a very um
[8:04] nimble uh this strategic business plan
[8:07] that has five very intuitive strategic
[8:10] priorities and a very intuitive
[8:13] and interpretive mission statement,
[8:15] which is we move you.
[8:16] Uh we just had our new employee
[8:18] orientation this morning. I love talking
[8:20] about it because one, there are so many
[8:22] mission statements that go on for
[8:23] sentences
[8:24] and nobody ever remembers them. But I
[8:26] can tell you that all 3,000 employees at
[8:28] the CTA know our mission. And and we and
[8:31] move and you can mean different things
[8:33] depending on where you are at the agency
[8:35] and that's the beauty of it. And so I
[8:37] always share in the morning
[8:39] of new employee orientation what you
[8:41] means to me. Um we are responsible for
[8:44] all of our budgeting,
[8:46] all of our procurement work is going to
[8:48] come through the executive director
[8:50] and then preparing the strategic
[8:52] long-range plan.
[8:54] is a little
[8:55] different than what I just talked about,
[8:56] which is our strategic business plan.
[8:58] This is our long-range transit plan,
[9:01] which ties together with the MPOs
[9:05] long-range plans as well as the state's
[9:07] unified plan.
[9:08] So the only difference with our
[9:10] long-range plan is it has local service
[9:12] in it, which you don't see in the MPO
[9:13] plans.
[9:15] Now on the transit commission side,
[9:17] their first order of business is
[9:19] regional representation. I'll talk to
[9:21] you about that because um
[9:23] at a moment because um
[9:26] certain
[9:27] very defined view of what that meant. Uh
[9:31] advocacy, as I said for transit,
[9:35] general governance of our agency and uh,
[9:38] and budget approval. There's a number of
[9:40] other responsibilities, but that
[9:42] regional representation representation
[9:44] was very important to the city of League
[9:45] and city of Leagues and
[9:48] in city in city like sorry, League of
[9:50] Cities and Towns, apologize.
[9:52] Um, and making sure that since there was
[9:55] no um, local advisory council anymore,
[9:57] there was that direct relationship uh,
[9:59] between uh, the governance leadership
[10:02] and municipalities. Um, I will say now
[10:06] uh, cuz I've um, insinuated at this uh, this statement from Senator Harper,
[10:11] which is that in the legislation, each
[10:14] transit commissioner serves and
[10:16] represents the whole of the large public
[10:18] transit district and does not represent
[10:21] a specific geographic portion of the
[10:23] district. Uh, I know that for Senator
[10:25] Harper and for Representative Briscoe
[10:27] for senior two chairs of the uh,
[10:29] transportation committees, having a
[10:32] regional perspective for this agency is
[10:35] incredibly important. We are made of 70
[10:37] seven municipalities. And without seeing
[10:40] ourselves as a large we, and making sure
[10:43] that we're always seeing what our
[10:45] services through that lens
[10:47] uh, is you know, would it almost become
[10:49] divisive over time and um, because we
[10:52] have so much service that goes through
[10:54] all municipalities including the spine
[10:56] of our service, uh, the front runner
[10:58] commuter line,
[10:59] um,
[11:00] seeing ourselves as a we was really
[11:03] important.
[11:04] Um, and then um, our three missions from
[11:08] the legislature's point of view is to
[11:10] provide efficient and cost effective uh,
[11:12] service, maintain a state of good repair
[11:14] and I can tell you that that is a
[11:16] full-time uh, job for our capital team.
[11:19] 60% of our capital budget is simply
[11:22] maintaining our system. Maintain making
[11:24] sure it's in a state of good repair and
[11:25] that's everything from maintaining the
[11:28] front runner in a state of good repair
[11:29] to replacing buses as they time out. Uh,
[11:32] we have a huge bus fleet and making sure
[11:35] that they're
[11:36] you know they're in good working
[11:37] condition is really important. And then
[11:39] finally reducing our debt and
[11:41] maintaining fiscal responsibility.
[11:44] So I'll pause there. I don't know if you
[11:47] have any immediate questions for me or
[11:49] we can turn it over to Jared talk about
[11:51] our existing service and our
[11:53] advanced sense.
[11:54] >> Legislative Council
[11:56] >> All right. Great. Thank you.
[11:59] Let me take a moment to just talk about
[12:00] existing services that we have here in
[12:02] the city of Orem.
[12:07] We have as Jay talked about regional
[12:09] significance. We have three regional
[12:10] routes that come through the city of
[12:12] Orem. Obviously being FrontRunner. We
[12:15] have the UVX line and then route route
[12:17] 50 which
[12:19] ultimately lay down to Provo station
[12:21] along State Street.
[12:23] With that
[12:25] I I I guess if I can put that in context
[12:27] so the the the purple line being
[12:29] FrontRunner 850 running down State
[12:31] Street is the green line and then
[12:33] what am I missing? UVX here at the
[12:35] bottom of the screen here connecting the
[12:38] Orem station through UVU through UVU and
[12:42] to Provo station as well.
[12:45] Um
[12:46] Blue lines that you're seeing here are
[12:47] local routes so those operate on
[12:49] 30-minute services.
[12:51] You get east-west connection through
[12:53] those routes. You have connections to
[12:55] the Vineyard station
[12:57] into University Place and University
[13:00] Valley University as well
[13:02] those routes. We also run
[13:05] four express routes which are just run
[13:07] off uh during peak hours which connect
[13:09] various other local areas into Utah
[13:12] Valley University. So
[13:14] we have about 10 routes really operating
[13:17] in the city of Orem proper already. I
[13:19] think as as noted and Jay talked about
[13:22] that regional significance of
[13:25] FrontRunner of of UVX and the route 50
[13:27] really are the spine of transit service
[13:30] um in this community and we're really
[13:32] able to make those local connections
[13:34] with those other routes.
[13:35] Um and so investment into FrontRunner
[13:39] um the 850
[13:41] continuing to make that
[13:43] a very successful route um are really
[13:45] good opportunities for us as we think
[13:47] about regional connection um in the city
[13:49] of Provo.
[13:51] >> Was there a question?
[13:51] >> Yes, please.
[13:52] >> Two Two things to note.
[13:54] Uh
[13:55] You may have heard of the FrontRunner 2X
[13:56] project. So that is uh designed to bring
[14:00] FrontRunner to 15-minute service in the
[14:02] peak. Uh right now it's operating in
[14:04] 30-minute service. That's because we
[14:07] only 25% of our line and we own our line
[14:11] uh separate and apart from Union
[14:12] Pacific. We bought it from Union
[14:14] Pacific. Uh we only have 25% double
[14:17] tracking. So the ability for trains to
[14:19] pass each other is quite limited and so
[14:21] we can only run 30 minutes in the peak.
[14:22] We are looking to move to When I say we,
[14:26] along with the Utah Department of
[14:27] Transportation who's actually applying
[14:28] for the federal grant uh for the um
[14:31] expansion of the service uh to uh 50%
[14:35] double tracking which will give us
[14:36] 15-minute service.
[14:37] That will open up Sunday service uh to
[14:40] 15 minutes. Someone often asks question
[14:42] is not having service on Sunday on
[14:44] FrontRunner a religious thing. I say no,
[14:46] it is not. It is the only day that we
[14:48] can get out and actually maintain the
[14:49] lines uh because we can't maintain the
[14:51] lines during the week because of the
[14:53] limited amount of double tracking we
[14:54] have. The importance of that especially
[14:57] for Orem is that will give us uh
[15:00] 15-minute connection uh to Orem Central
[15:03] Station. So right now every time that
[15:06] UVX bus comes through uh is not picking
[15:09] up a lot of FrontRunner traffic other
[15:10] than on the half hour.
[15:12] Um the this will be true for actually
[15:14] our entire alignment. We have a lot of
[15:15] 15-minute services that connect into
[15:17] central stations including Orem Central.
[15:19] And so uh the ridership uh increases as
[15:23] a result of that are going to be quite
[15:25] significant. In addition to fact that
[15:27] once you, you know, you go to the train
[15:30] station, train's pulling away, and you
[15:32] realize that the next train's not coming
[15:33] for 29 minutes, there's a good chance
[15:35] you're going to get back in your car.
[15:36] That's not true at 14 minutes. That's
[15:37] the magic number in transit is 15
[15:39] minutes. That's what people hang around
[15:41] for if they miss their their ride. The
[15:43] other piece I want to pick up on real
[15:45] quick is that our Mount Olivet
[15:47] uh bus um
[15:49] facility uh which Mary is the general
[15:52] manager of,
[15:54] uh we're looking to expand that facility
[15:56] cuz we are really tight right now.
[15:58] The ability to expand with that with an
[16:01] uh what we have right now, so adding
[16:03] these adding facilities is really
[16:05] important. We are looking again to a
[16:07] federal grant to help that. We have had
[16:10] uh positive feedback from
[16:12] uh the Utah uh commissioners that they
[16:14] would like to uh provide a local share
[16:17] if we went in for that for that grant.
[16:19] Uh so that would make a big difference
[16:21] in in terms of how we could add service
[16:23] uh to all of Utah County out of that
[16:25] facility.
[16:26] >> What's the cost to double track the
[16:28] whole line?
[16:29] >> Uh so
[16:31] it's a good question, Representative.
[16:33] It's the the cost of the 50% to go from
[16:36] 25 to 50 is about $3 billion, and we're
[16:39] looking for federal participation
[16:41] somewhere in the range of about 74%.
[16:44] Uh one of the reasons we're asking for
[16:45] that that high is when we did build that
[16:48] ourselves, we actually took FrontRunner
[16:49] share. I say we, I mean the state of
[16:51] Utah, Utah Transit Authority, ourselves.
[16:54] Uh I I'd say in today's dollars, you're
[16:57] looking at probably somewhere in the
[16:59] area of another four to five to make
[17:02] that happen.
[17:03] Uh and that's in today's dollars.
[17:08] » All right. Sorry.
[17:09] >> I didn't answer too much slides and all.
[17:11] >> Sure. Sure.
[17:11] >> I'm going to go with the older no
[17:12] question.
[17:14] >> Um
[17:15] can you talk about the proposed timeline
[17:16] for the double track or for the two
[17:18] times FrontRunner and then secondly
[17:20] while this map is up I'm wondering if
[17:22] you could talk about ridership and where
[17:24] we are at in those different lines in
[17:26] terms of our capacity.
[17:27] >> Sure. I'll take the first one I'll give
[17:29] you the second one.
[17:30] So right now we are waiting to move into
[17:34] the engineering phase which is the final
[17:36] phase before grant agreement. It the
[17:38] application is literally on the US
[17:41] Department of Transportation Secretary's
[17:42] desk
[17:44] and I hear positive things. I
[17:48] we're hoping by the end of this month
[17:49] we'll be able to move into that and then
[17:50] that would mean we would most likely
[17:52] have that grant probably by the end of
[17:54] the year beginning next year which would
[17:56] get us to a timeline of 2030. Uh you
[17:59] know the the super goal is obviously to
[18:01] get it in by 2034. It's going to be a
[18:03] big game-changer for for the event
[18:05] that's coming our way
[18:07] but this is really a generational
[18:09] investment and you know as the
[18:12] representative said representative
[18:14] Peterson said I mean we we really want
[18:16] to we'd like to see the entire line
[18:18] double tracked. It's going to
[18:20] it's not only going to give us
[18:21] make us more nimble but it allows a lot
[18:23] more express service which we don't have
[18:25] the ability
[18:28] » You have a question?
[18:28] >> Oh I'm sorry. Um
[18:31] Does that include sound walls at all?
[18:33] >> I'm sorry which one?
[18:33] >> Sound walls.
[18:35] >> Um that is a good question.
[18:38] That would be probably part of whatever
[18:40] environmental process we would do if we
[18:42] bumped up to 100% double tracking
[18:47] because they they normally do that
[18:49] analysis as part of that work.
[18:51] So I would imagine that if that was
[18:53] needed that would happen at that time.
[18:56] Um
[18:57] Yeah. I
[18:58] It's hard to say beyond that you know
[19:00] because I I really would be guessing at
[19:02] this point.
[19:04] You said there was all right so I'll go
[19:06] ahead and go ahead and start so
[19:08] Great news is Um, regional routes that
[19:11] we talked about are some of the highest
[19:13] ridership routes that UTA has in in the
[19:14] system. So, for some context, we do
[19:16] about 40 million trips per year. Um,
[19:20] half of that is on bus. So, if you look
[19:22] at um UVX, for example, we're doing 2
[19:25] million trips per year on that route.
[19:27] Um, really successful service. Um,
[19:30] rivals are
[19:32] remind uh in Salt Lake when it comes to
[19:34] terms of ridership. Uh, the A 50 is
[19:37] talked about, we're doing almost 700,000
[19:39] trips a year. Um, and part of that
[19:41] success
[19:42] um is is noted as that 15-minute service
[19:44] that Jay talked about when the bus come
[19:46] here every So, it makes it very
[19:48] uh a usable service
[19:50] um and a regional significant service
[19:52] that connects to those local routes for
[19:54] transfers.
[19:55] Um, and then uh FrontRunner, just just
[19:58] think about trips we're picking up at at
[20:01] the warm station alone, we're
[20:03] almost 300,000 people at that location
[20:06] alone. That's the seventh highest out of
[20:08] the 16 stations we have along
[20:09] FrontRunner corridor.
[20:11] >> Yeah, one of the things that we're going
[20:12] to do, too, as well, uh we're we're
[20:15] already there, we're already
[20:16] manipulating the data right now, is uh
[20:19] give you
[20:20] uh cell utilization, because that's what
[20:23] I think a lot of communities want to
[20:24] know, like how many of our residents are
[20:27] using system. So, it's one thing to say,
[20:28] "Okay, people are boarding here," but
[20:30] they can be coming in from different
[20:31] communities. We had a question on the
[20:34] uh in Southwest Salt Lake County, and
[20:37] you know, we have a number of rail
[20:38] stations that are surrounding the
[20:39] county. So, we know who
[20:41] people are you know, we know how many
[20:43] boardings are happening there, but I
[20:45] think what a lot of those communities
[20:46] want to know, and I'm sure what your
[20:47] community wants to know, too, is well,
[20:49] how many of our residents are actually
[20:50] utilizing the system, because we can
[20:51] track them using that.
[20:53] Um, and that's
[20:55] um
[20:55] that work's being done right now. We're
[20:57] hoping to have that done by the end of
[20:58] the year.
[20:58] >> Can you also just talk about the other
[21:00] routes? I I'm speaking as somebody who tries to
[21:03] ride the bus when I can, and sometimes I
[21:06] get frustrated on those east-west routes
[21:08] in particular just I I miss it cuz I'm late and then I get stuck, right?
[21:14] I'm just wondering
[21:15] um where you are in terms of capacity on
[21:17] those other
[21:18] >> Yeah, and I'll ask my question before
[21:20] you go there.
[21:21] Uh in the Missionary Training Center, do
[21:23] you guys have numbers on UVX and
[21:25] FrontRunner?
[21:27] What that generates? Oops.
[21:29] >> From this for the center itself?
[21:31] >> For those two lines, UVX yeah, and
[21:34] FrontRunner.
[21:35] >> I think you can look at bus stop level
[21:37] warnings.
[21:38] >> Yeah, we can get that to you. We don't
[21:39] have
[21:40] >> Do you only have all the missionaries
[21:41] take that to the airport?
[21:43] >> They're using UVX to connect to
[21:45] FrontRunner.
[21:47] >> Okay, anyway, can
[21:48] >> to be that person, but you've got about
[21:50] 5 more minutes.
[21:50] >> Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
[21:52] >> I'm sorry.
[21:53] >> I'm back. So, I think personal one
[21:55] Council had requested
[21:58] you just brief them quickly on on-demand
[21:59] and what that is.
[22:01] Sure, Jay. So, uh I'll I'll be quick.
[22:04] So,
[22:06] uh in 2019, UTA's innovation innovative
[22:08] mobility department piloted an on-demand
[22:11] service, which is is very much not like
[22:14] a fixed route service um to really
[22:16] understand how we can serve communities
[22:19] from a coverage-based model approach
[22:21] versus a fixed route transit or bus
[22:23] system, which um operate very
[22:25] differently and and and serve very
[22:28] populations. And so, with that, what we
[22:30] do is we geofence a geographic region,
[22:32] we put vehicles within that region, and
[22:34] they really operate on-demand just like
[22:36] you'd see in the private sector with
[22:40] It's It's been a very successful
[22:41] service. There is a very
[22:44] public transit component to this when
[22:46] you look at how operates compared to
[22:48] on-demand sector operates. Well, you can hail a ride, um
[22:53] share rides, we have wheelchair
[22:54] accessible rides. You can't operate
[22:57] within in the service area, and really
[22:59] the idea is connect you into the bring
[23:01] your transit system. And
[23:02] we see within the existing service areas
[23:04] that we have, the majority of our trips
[23:06] do connect into a transit center and
[23:09] then people use those trips for first
[23:10] and last mile connections.
[23:12] We also do see very common locations
[23:15] such as grocery stores and hospitals
[23:17] with real needs for for our community to
[23:20] use those to get to those destinations
[23:22] and so, we've seen a lot of success with
[23:24] that service.
[23:25] We have five service areas right now
[23:27] including the newest one which is on the
[23:30] west side of Provo connecting
[23:32] both both the Provo FrontRunner Station
[23:35] and the Orem FrontRunner Station
[23:37] into that that that west side region
[23:40] along with the airport there.
[23:42] We are working right now with UDOT and
[23:44] UDOT County
[23:46] six zone this
[23:48] list which will be in northwest Utah
[23:50] County.
[23:51] I'll be very quick and I know we're out
[23:52] of time but any questions on this is a
[23:55] I wish more people knew about this. The
[23:56] on-demand is an amazing service.
[23:59] >> Yeah, so one of the things that I think
[24:01] everybody was hesitant on when this
[24:02] service came out was
[24:05] we we these services get overwhelmed
[24:07] very quickly.
[24:08] Which is a good thing again. So there
[24:11] was the marketing on this one was not
[24:15] less than stellar. That's all changed.
[24:17] We are working on that now because we
[24:19] want to see the service use more of the
[24:20] annual see that
[24:23] recognize the value of it particularly
[24:25] your high school students
[24:27] really use it well
[24:28] in our other zones and will and will get
[24:31] a lot a lot of ridership in it.
[24:34] And and we we can get the we can get the
[24:37] amount of ridership on each of the
[24:38] services for you as well. So make sure
[24:40] we get them.
[24:42] I'll be very quick if you want me to two
[24:44] more seconds.
[24:45] What I wanted to just all highlight that
[24:48] we're going through all of this is um
[24:50] Orem City has been a great
[24:52] UTA is not successful without the
[24:55] collaboration and partnerships we have
[24:56] with our cities and municipalities,
[24:58] whether that's planning our services,
[25:00] whether that's capital construction on
[25:02] our projects, whether that's actually
[25:04] deploying the service. We can't do
[25:05] without our partners. And this quickly
[25:08] highlights a lot of work that we've done
[25:09] with city, whether it's building bus
[25:11] stops, whether it's coordinating on
[25:12] construction projects, whether it's
[25:14] detouring routes.
[25:15] Um your staff
[25:17] really goes really participates with us
[25:20] with UDOT with the MPOs and we we don't
[25:23] get to do that work without all of you.
[25:24] So we we want to thank you for that
[25:26] collaboration. There's a lot of
[25:27] opportunities I could tell you as we
[25:28] continue to move forward and grow our
[25:30] services, but um want to just note that.
[25:33] On my last note, if you'll
[25:35] one more slide. If you think about our
[25:36] opportunities right now,
[25:38] um
[25:39] we work hand in hand with Mountain
[25:41] Association of Governments as they
[25:42] develop their regional transportation
[25:44] plan. Your staff does it well, I believe
[25:46] um
[25:47] others are involved, but we're aligned
[25:49] in what we we and how that plan is
[25:51] developed and what goes into that plan.
[25:53] As Jay noted, we also do our own
[25:55] long-range transit plan, which which
[25:56] just builds upon what's in the regional
[25:58] transportation plan and really looks at
[26:00] local services and how we look at the
[26:02] broader transportation system
[26:04] altogether. We're about to go out for um
[26:06] engagement is that both this year and
[26:08] next year. And so we will be
[26:09] coordinating with the city um as we
[26:11] develop that plan and we work with
[26:13] staff, we work with with the MPO and
[26:15] UDOT. And so
[26:16] a lot of opportunity to engage with UTA
[26:19] as we develop that plan. Lastly, um just
[26:22] as the city develops their own um local
[26:25] plans as you begin your transportation
[26:27] planning, um
[26:28] opportunities to partner with you and
[26:29] support you on those efforts um is
[26:31] something we'd really like to do. Those
[26:33] efforts often inform our plans as well.
[26:36] And so having that collaboration up
[26:38] front
[26:39] in advance and as we develop our plans
[26:41] is a really way we
[26:42] need to develop and grow services as
[26:44] they are. So I'll just leave it at that.
[26:47] So Jane, that would be the underlying of
[26:49] >> We've got more time. Because
[26:51] I could talk especially I can talk about
[26:53] active transportation all day long. Um
[26:55] >> Does that Does that replace your 2030?
[26:57] Is that your goal?
[26:59] Replace the 2030 one.
[27:01] >> 2030? I'm sorry.
[27:03] >> Which one?
[27:04] What was the You had your 2030
[27:07] transportation plan, 2030 plan.
[27:10] >> Oh, the 20 The current long-range plan
[27:11] goes through 2050.
[27:13] >> Okay.
[27:13] >> We had a 2030 long-range strategic
[27:15] business plan, which was a 2030 plan.
[27:18] >> Okay.
[27:18] >> And that's bringing me real real data
[27:20] right now, but the the legislature
[27:22] redefined our strategic plan as our
[27:24] long-range transit plan to ensure that
[27:28] there was connectivity between that and
[27:31] uh both the NPO plans and the state
[27:32] unified plans.
[27:34] So.
[27:34] >> Okay. So, that's what you're trying to
[27:35] accomplish here.
[27:36] >> correct. Yes.
[27:37] >> So, you're merging all of these plans?
[27:39] >> They're not actually merging, but making
[27:40] sure they're aligned.
[27:41] >> You're aligned.
[27:42] >> Right.
[27:42] >> And we're on the same time cycle as the
[27:44] RTPs, both Wasatch Front Regional
[27:46] Council and Mountainland Association of
[27:47] Governments.
[27:48] >> Excellent.
[27:49] >> Let me hold me hold there.
[27:50] >> All right. Well, thank you for having
[27:52] us.
[27:52] >> Thank you.
[27:55] Good.
[27:55] >> Representative, we'd like to Next Next
[27:58] person on our agenda this afternoon is a
[28:01] legislative report from Val Peterson. He's one of our our
[28:07] state representatives here in Orem and
[28:09] say my neighbor, friend, and
[28:12] welcome.
[28:13] >> Thank you.
[28:14] I I went to a meeting earlier today and
[28:17] Val and Nancy Hale welcomed my
[28:20] And I said, "This is so awesome. My
[28:22] friends are welcoming me to this
[28:24] meeting."
[28:25] And as I come to council and I look
[28:26] around I look around and see all my
[28:28] friends. So,
[28:30] it's great to be with you. Um
[28:32] when I first was elected to the house,
[28:35] my house committee, my house district
[28:38] was all located in Orem.
[28:41] Today, I represent Northwest Orem,
[28:45] um
[28:46] Vineyard City from 8th on, which would
[28:49] basically be Utah City.
[28:51] Uh
[28:52] Lindon from
[28:54] State Street
[28:56] West to the lake.
[28:58] And then a little bit of Pleasant Grove
[29:00] and a little bit of American Fork.
[29:03] And so that just shows you the growth
[29:04] that's happened in Utah County and and
[29:06] where that growth has been to the north.
[29:08] It's pushed our legislative districts
[29:10] north, so
[29:12] Um so I have
[29:14] uh five city councils that I get to talk
[29:16] to and meet with and that's awesome, but
[29:19] uh it um
[29:21] I've been an Orem resident for the last
[29:23] 36 years, so
[29:25] all my kids went to school here.
[29:27] And uh it's been great honor to
[29:30] represent Orem.
[29:31] >> So, it's safe to say Orem's your
[29:33] favorite?
[29:34] >> That's right. Yes, yes.
[29:36] absolutely.
[29:37] Uh I try to meet with Brent. Brent and I
[29:39] try to go to lunch once a quarter and uh
[29:42] that's been awesome just to help
[29:43] coordinate and make sure that we're on
[29:45] the same
[29:46] uh cycles and looking at everything, so
[29:49] I'm in my eighth term and uh
[29:54] you can uh
[29:56] you can see that I've represented Orem
[29:57] since 2011.
[30:00] So,
[30:01] uh which is has been awesome.
[30:04] We have uh the largest uh Republican
[30:08] delegation in the house
[30:11] uh from Utah County and so
[30:14] Um I also wanted you all. You made me
[30:17] your grand marshal of the parade uh 2
[30:19] years ago
[30:21] and that was a great experience and uh
[30:23] just a great honor and so thank you to
[30:25] all of you for for allowing me that and
[30:28] uh Ann and I had a great time as we got
[30:31] to ride down the street and have all our
[30:33] friends and neighbors yell at us, so
[30:37] Um
[30:38] just so you know what my roles are right
[30:40] now. I currently am the executive
[30:42] appropriations chair in the house.
[30:45] Uh so the state budget is really what I
[30:47] focus in on.
[30:49] Uh I just got appointed to two other
[30:51] committees as chair. I'm chair of the
[30:53] rural health task force. Uh
[30:55] state of Utah was just given uh
[30:59] $200 million
[31:01] to go towards rural health. So
[31:04] uh we'll be providing oversight over how
[31:06] that money is expended. It is estimated
[31:09] that the federal government right now
[31:10] will give us a billion dollars over the
[31:13] next 5 years. And so we want to make
[31:15] sure that we're
[31:16] utilizing those funds to the best way
[31:18] possible.
[31:19] And then I also serve on the veterans
[31:21] and military affairs commission
[31:23] uh within the state. And so
[31:26] as you can see this year, this year was
[31:28] a tight budget year.
[31:29] Uh we started the year by telling our
[31:32] committees we would like them to cut 5%
[31:34] of their budget.
[31:36] Uh we ended up right about
[31:39] uh
[31:40] 2 and 1/2% is where most of the
[31:42] committees ended up cutting.
[31:44] Uh
[31:45] that is okay because uh when we did our budget revenue projections for
[31:51] February, they were up slightly. We had
[31:54] $88 million ongoing and $125 million
[31:58] one-time that was added to that which
[32:00] allowed us to to get through the year.
[32:02] Uh in other words, paying for uh
[32:05] inflation and public ed.
[32:08] Uh
[32:10] compensation for state employees, things
[32:13] like that. Those were the things that we
[32:14] ended up funding.
[32:16] And that pretty much took most of the
[32:18] money.
[32:21] Just so you know what kind of bills I
[32:22] sponsor, obviously since I'm uh so tied
[32:25] into the budget, most of my my bills
[32:27] right now are budgetary in nature.
[32:30] Uh
[32:30] the budgetary modifications bill is a
[32:33] relook at uh
[32:35] how we're doing the state budget and and
[32:37] setting up some parameters for that.
[32:40] Uh we changed the way we're doing uh the
[32:42] attorney general funding for each state
[32:44] agency, so
[32:46] uh instead of an ISF fund, we're making
[32:48] uh we're putting their money into an
[32:50] account that they can't utilize for
[32:52] other things other than for how they're
[32:54] going to use the attorney general's
[32:56] office.
[32:57] And then uh
[32:59] HB 342
[33:01] was uh a a follow-up bill. I had a bill
[33:03] on state grant processes, which defined
[33:07] basically set up guidelines for how
[33:10] uh grants would be given from the state
[33:13] to other entities within the state. This
[33:16] is one that ties back to the federal
[33:17] grants. It was originally targeted
[33:20] because of the rural um grant that we
[33:22] got cuz of how large it was. We didn't
[33:24] really have any guardrails around
[33:26] federal monies that come into the state.
[33:28] This sets up who's responsible for
[33:30] determining how monies are spent. Uh
[33:33] governor has
[33:34] 10 million that they can do without the
[33:36] legislature. Uh 25 million can be done
[33:40] by the executive appropriations
[33:41] committee. Um anything above 25 million
[33:44] requires the whole legislature to
[33:46] approve that expenditure process.
[33:48] >> So, you're comfortable with that?
[33:50] >> Am I comfortable with that?
[33:52] >> The guardrails for fraud that we're
[33:53] seeing in so many other states.
[33:56] >> Yeah, I I mean, we didn't have any
[33:57] guardrails up until that bill, and so
[34:00] uh right now we're watching to see how
[34:03] it works. Um obviously the legislative
[34:05] process.
[34:07] Uh there's nothing we do more than amend
[34:09] bills from previous things that we've
[34:11] done, so we'll see how this year goes.
[34:13] Uh we'll see how the rural task force
[34:15] goes.
[34:16] Uh and if we need to make some
[34:18] adjustments, we will.
[34:20] Um and then of course uh appropriating
[34:23] money for the state is what HB 2 and 3
[34:26] are, so.
[34:29] Some other bills that that been involved
[34:30] with uh
[34:32] the spaceport. Um is uh one that I've
[34:35] been the floor sponsor for.
[34:37] Um
[34:38] I've done a number of education bills,
[34:41] both in public ed and higher ed.
[34:43] And currently I serve on the education
[34:46] committee. I serve on political
[34:47] subdivisions. I also serve on
[34:50] uh criminal justice.
[34:55] And uh
[34:57] and so
[34:58] uh my bills usually kind of land in one
[35:00] of those areas, plus the veterans piece.
[35:06] And with that, I'm open to any questions
[35:07] that you might have, anything that
[35:08] you're interested in or
[35:12] wondering what's going on with.
[35:15] Uh obviously uh we're in May, we'll
[35:18] start interim next week.
[35:20] Uh just finished the session.
[35:24] Revenues uh are s-
[35:27] are on track. I wouldn't say they're
[35:29] great, but I would say they're on track.
[35:31] And uh
[35:33] um
[35:34] we're getting ready to start you know,
[35:37] what we're going to do next year and
[35:38] what our agenda will be.
[35:40] And obviously water is everywhere you
[35:44] go, the question is water.
[35:46] You know, where's water going to be?
[35:48] What's water going to be like? And and
[35:50] uh
[35:51] as we all know, it's going to be a dry
[35:53] summer.
[35:55] >> Is that what you anticipate the interim
[35:56] session
[35:57] focusing on is water or what do you
[35:59] anticipate?
[36:00] >> P.
[36:00] >> Uh no, uh actually so next week uh we'll
[36:04] start uh looking at rural health care
[36:06] transformation. We'll look at how that
[36:08] money's going to be expended, that 200
[36:09] million.
[36:10] Uh we will have executive appropriations
[36:12] next week, so we'll look at revenues and
[36:14] where they're at as we're coming into
[36:17] uh
[36:17] this this next year. We'll start to look
[36:19] at revenues for the coming session.
[36:22] And uh
[36:23] um
[36:25] education.
[36:27] I'm trying to think what's on the
[36:28] education agenda.
[36:30] Um
[36:31] I think you're going to see some more
[36:33] discussion about uh district splits
[36:36] as you see some other districts looking
[36:38] at those possibilities. So, what does
[36:39] that look like?
[36:41] And then then I would tell you that uh
[36:44] the other big thing that we talked a lot
[36:45] about is obviously growth as you look at
[36:47] Utah County,
[36:49] as you look at the state, uh
[36:51] and then you have Eagle Mountain
[36:53] uh where a tremendous amount of growth
[36:55] is happening and and roads and
[36:57] infrastructure are tied back to those
[36:59] issues. Those are really the biggest
[37:01] issues. Those are issues of growth.
[37:06] » I'm turning it over to questions.
[37:10] Mike, we just want to thank you. Thank
[37:12] you for coming and thank you for your
[37:13] service in in and looking out for
[37:15] veterans, your military service, and in
[37:17] your in your public service here in the
[37:19] legislature. And
[37:21] do Have we invited Representative
[37:23] Peterson to our Gold Star dedication?
[37:26] >> Crystal invites.
[37:27] >> Okay. Okay.
[37:29] >> Um so,
[37:31] I uh I haven't uh
[37:33] I don't remember. I can't remember what
[37:34] day it was. I was looking at it.
[37:35] >> from Saturday.
[37:36] >> So.
[37:38] yeah, I do have it.
[37:39] So.
[37:40] But anyway, if you have any issues,
[37:42] there's anything you want to talk about,
[37:43] you're welcome to call me and discuss if
[37:45] there's a concern.
[37:48] Um there's some questions about property
[37:51] tax and things like that that
[37:52] everybody's interested in and I'm sure
[37:54] that will be a discussion throughout the
[37:55] year as we approach the session. Um
[37:58] happy to discuss with any of you.
[38:01] And always excited to go to a ribbon
[38:02] pulling with all of you like weeks ago
[38:04] at Mighty Lights.
[38:06] This is so Anyway, thanks for all you
[38:08] do. I know city councils uh
[38:11] where the rubber hits the road where all
[38:13] of your neighbors are calling you about
[38:15] every issue that you're dealing with in
[38:16] the so
[38:18] thank you for what you all do.
[38:20] >> Mayor and council, I'll
[38:21] also just add
[38:23] really that Representative Val Peterson
[38:26] is one of those that is actively,
[38:29] proactively, energetically
[38:31] available and wanting to partner and
[38:34] align with us and and it's great working
[38:36] with us, so um
[38:39] every both privately and publicly has
[38:42] always been sincere and genuine in that
[38:44] regard, so
[38:46] Thank you.
[38:46] >> And I'll I'll also add obviously the VRC
[38:50] uh might not work out trying to do some
[38:51] things to
[38:54] maybe re-energize isn't the right word,
[38:56] but do some additional looking at uh startups and things like that that we
[39:02] can add to that with the startup
[39:04] businesses and
[39:07] excited about some of the directions
[39:08] we're seeing from it as well.
[39:11] >> Now, where did he go? Oh, there he is.
[39:13] So, I don't know, Representative, if
[39:14] you've had the opportunity to meet our
[39:15] new economic development director.
[39:17] >> I I've heard of him. I haven't met him.
[39:20] >> Yeah, we're excited about
[39:22] >> I don't I think you've talked to Steve
[39:23] though, right?
[39:24] >> Hopefully.
[39:25] >> Yeah, I think you've talked to Steve
[39:26] down or something. So.
[39:28] >> Okay.
[39:29] >> All right, thanks.
[39:30] >> Thank you.
[39:32] >> Appreciate your time.
[39:32] >> Thanks thanks for all you do.
[39:34] >> Thank you.
[39:41] All right.
[39:43] Oh, you're up.
[39:44] >> All right.
[39:45] >> I think I'm doing it. Wait.
[39:48] Uh next, we have a presentation from
[39:51] Roger Timmerman from Utopia.
[39:54] And so, it looks like it's 15-minute
[39:56] presentation and 10 Q&A, so
[39:59] I'll go ahead and turn the time over to
[40:01] you
[40:02] when it looks like they're setting up
[40:03] your presentation.
[40:14] » Oh, I'll talk first.
[40:16] Anyways, that I for having me here.
[40:18] >> Welcome. It's always good to be back to
[40:19] Orem. Uh it's my favorite city.
[40:24] Uh it's actually the only Utopian city
[40:25] that I've lived in. I was resident of
[40:27] Orem for a little while.
[40:28] Um
[40:29] but uh anyways, glad to be here.
[40:33] Uh it's always good to talk about
[40:34] Utopia. I mean, how could it be anything
[40:36] other than great and wonderful being
[40:38] called Utopia, but you know, those of
[40:40] you been around a while realize there
[40:41] were some challenges in the early years
[40:43] of this.
[40:44] Um well, they'll I want to cover a
[40:46] little bit of the history cuz I the
[40:48] context is very important for what we're
[40:50] doing today
[40:51] uh based on what's happened. Uh just
[40:53] structurally, so you understand there
[40:55] are 11
[40:57] founding cities that bonded for the
[40:59] project. So, technically there was like
[41:00] 16 members, but when it came time to
[41:02] actually move forward, pledge sales tax
[41:04] revenues towards bonds, and build this
[41:07] network, there were 11 cities on board
[41:09] at that time.
[41:10] Uh
[41:11] since that time, we've come up with
[41:13] various structures of partnership for
[41:15] expansion.
[41:16] Um this is very important for future
[41:19] because
[41:20] I remember the day going back uh with
[41:23] Utopia and and uh explaining that like,
[41:26] "Hey, we're never going to be able to
[41:27] pay these bonds with the original
[41:29] cities."
[41:31] Um
[41:32] but we'll be able to build the network
[41:33] and get customers.
[41:35] But with growth and expansion, we're
[41:37] able to service previous debt and
[41:40] improve the overall financial position
[41:41] of the organization.
[41:43] Uh and we'll show you how that's kind of
[41:44] worked.
[41:46] Um Utopia phase one is colored here uh
[41:48] in red for a reason. It was a little
[41:50] rough. Now, phase two wouldn't exist if
[41:53] it weren't for phase one. You know, this
[41:54] was very important. We built the
[41:55] backbone. We
[41:57] uh
[41:58] got a lot of things in place. Um
[42:01] and that's uh uh
[42:03] this was
[42:04] I mean, depending on how you look at it
[42:05] on payments or or whatever, it's
[42:07] anywhere from 185 to 205 million dollars
[42:09] of project under that phase. And that's
[42:13] the pain point. Okay, so there is there
[42:15] payments being made every year by all of
[42:17] the member cities towards the bonds that
[42:19] finance this phase and that was a 33-year
[42:23] refinancing from 2008. It was originally
[42:27] 2004 but
[42:29] there was incremental bonds and it ended
[42:30] up being refinanced for 33-year
[42:32] structure.
[42:34] So that ends in 2040.
[42:37] The status of those gets better every
[42:38] year in the sense that
[42:41] uh
[42:41] more and more of the debt payment gets
[42:43] paid by UTOPIA but the problem is it
[42:45] works against us a little in the sense
[42:46] that the payments go up every year. Um
[42:49] for many years we've been as these
[42:51] covering the increase of every year so
[42:54] the city's cost to those bonds has
[42:56] stayed flat in the recent history. You
[42:58] know, obviously there was times when
[43:00] paying all of it and then we kind of up
[43:03] the amount we were reimbursing back to
[43:04] the cities.
[43:06] Uh we'll show that a little bit more.
[43:07] And then it was about 2008-2009 when UIA
[43:10] was created and bonded and about 2/3 of
[43:13] the network was built under this for
[43:15] these original cities. So even Orem city
[43:17] are like, "Hey, we bonded for the
[43:19] project back here but most of your
[43:21] network and most of the network for all
[43:22] the cities was done here and these are
[43:26] not being paid for by the cities any of
[43:27] the cities. These are all sustainable
[43:30] and profitable and paying for
[43:31] themselves.
[43:33] Um couple accomplishments on the system.
[43:36] We are the largest open access network
[43:38] in the US and we're now actually the
[43:40] largest municipal system in the United
[43:42] States. So whether it's open or not open
[43:44] um it's the largest municipal system
[43:47] with we're at about 260,000 locations
[43:50] and that's
[43:51] where we own them or we're at least
[43:52] partnered in those. So that would
[43:54] include projects like Idaho Falls,
[43:56] Yellowstone Fiber. Um you know, you call
[43:58] for those for support someone in our
[43:59] call center but we get revenue in these
[44:02] partnerships and we don't do them unless
[44:04] they're financially beneficial to us. We
[44:06] have no obligation to serve those
[44:07] communities.
[44:09] Um but if we can help with our costs uh
[44:11] and and bring in some revenue, then we
[44:13] do like those partnerships.
[44:15] Uh we have the fastest speeds in the
[44:17] United States. Oh, I I kind of bolded
[44:19] some of the things that have changed
[44:20] since the last time I was here. Well,
[44:21] that number's gone up, obviously. Um
[44:24] this was a 100 gig. We do have 400 gig
[44:26] customers now. So, the University of
[44:27] Utah has a couple of those from us.
[44:29] Um and uh that's probably the fastest
[44:33] connection in the state.
[44:35] Um we also service the state and the
[44:36] state data centers and we I mean we do a
[44:38] lot of really big things. We're not kind
[44:40] of a local small ISP type of thing. We
[44:42] are
[44:43] uh one of the largest, if not the most
[44:47] significant fiber provider in the state.
[44:50] Uh it's the most competitive system in
[44:52] the United States with 19 different uh
[44:55] providers offering services to
[44:56] residential customers. We actually have
[44:58] other providers doing business, too. So,
[45:00] technically, we have like 30 plus
[45:01] providers, but uh again, this is a
[45:04] structure where we're not here to
[45:05] compete with the private sector. This is
[45:07] a pro private sector thing. The private
[45:09] sector loves us. You go talk to the ISPs
[45:11] in Utah,
[45:12] and they pretty much all use us. Even
[45:14] those that are wireless providers that
[45:16] aren't listed as one of these providers,
[45:18] they buy connectivity from us.
[45:20] Uh so, we are powering broadband across
[45:23] the state for
[45:25] almost everybody.
[45:26] No companies that don't like us.
[45:28] You can guess who they are, probably.
[45:30] Um we've been the number one awardee
[45:32] from the school system for last several
[45:35] years.
[45:36] Each year, we get
[45:38] anywhere from 50 to a few hundred new
[45:41] circuits. This last year was our best
[45:43] one.
[45:44] Uh we got about 250 awards. Actually,
[45:46] no, it was 280
[45:48] uh circuits uh from the high education
[45:51] telehealth network
[45:53] for the schools. So, we've been very
[45:54] busy building those, and those will
[45:55] start billing in July. So, we
[45:58] future will go up. We'll show you our
[46:00] revenue charts.
[46:01] Um but that's been a very important
[46:03] partnership. Uh,
[46:05] we love to service our schools. They get
[46:07] a very good price. They don't give us
[46:08] business cuz they like us. They give us
[46:10] business cuz we are the best price and
[46:13] uh, and check all the boxes for
[46:14] reliability and service and things like
[46:16] that. Um, same time we really like the
[46:19] revenue we get from that. They're really
[46:21] good partners.
[46:22] Uh, we do a lot of other cool stuff like
[46:24] air quality sensors and offer detection
[46:26] systems and things like that. We have a
[46:28] very high uh, Net Promoter Score which
[46:30] is a survey that goes out to our
[46:32] customers.
[46:33] Um, and our Google rating's very high.
[46:37] Last I checked that was higher than
[46:38] Google Fiber.
[46:39] I like to We think
[46:42] They're not Google Fiber anymore.
[46:44] They're G Fiber. It's been sold to a
[46:45] cable company and private equity firm.
[46:47] So,
[46:48] don't know what their future looks like,
[46:49] but it's not with Alphabet.
[46:52] Uh, as as a majority owner. I think
[46:54] they're still
[46:56] majority owner.
[46:57] Um,
[46:59] Okay, next thing. This is kind of This
[47:00] is the landscape. We provide a fiber
[47:02] system and all these different
[47:03] companies, most of them local companies,
[47:05] benefit from this system. So, again,
[47:07] this is not something that harms our
[47:09] private sector in the Utah in Utah. It's
[47:11] something that helps them.
[47:14] Uh, our network is the best out there.
[47:15] We in fact even other fiber networks
[47:18] that use the PON technology where
[47:19] everybody shares it. Feel a lot like a
[47:21] cable network. If your neighbors are
[47:23] hogging the bandwidth, your speed slows
[47:25] down. Um,
[47:26] you say, "Does that even happen on
[47:27] fiber?" Cuz fiber's so fast. Uh, it
[47:30] absolutely does. People use a lot more
[47:31] broadband now and so, uh, you'll see
[47:33] other providers are like, "Yeah, you get
[47:35] up to a gigabit or up to this." And at
[47:38] 10:00 at night when everybody's
[47:39] streaming, it doesn't quite get there.
[47:41] We have a dedicated connection
[47:43] everywhere in the network.
[47:44] So, if you have a gigabit, you get a
[47:46] gigabit. You have two and a half gig,
[47:47] you get two and a half gig. It's 24/7.
[47:49] Doesn't matter what your neighbor's
[47:50] doing.
[47:51] The whole system is built on dedicated
[47:53] fiber connectivity to every single
[47:55] location.
[47:57] Couple of other things, uh
[47:59] we have This is relatively new with the
[48:01] 2.5 gig tier. It's kind of a mid between
[48:03] the ultra premium user and the common
[48:06] gigabit. We've seen a lot of uptick in
[48:08] 2.5 gig. Um
[48:10] still the most popular is gigabit, uh
[48:12] which is cool cuz we have a 250 meg
[48:14] option. People aren't picking our
[48:15] cheapest option. They want the fire the
[48:17] faster speeds. So, it's not just based
[48:20] on price. Uh demand is increasing for
[48:23] faster and faster connectivity. We're
[48:24] seeing a good uptick on 2.5 gig. And we
[48:27] did lower the price of 10 gig relatively
[48:29] recently.
[48:30] Okay, quick some charts here. So, this
[48:32] is kind of total subscriber base across
[48:35] all the UTOPIA cities and the
[48:36] partnerships. It's our best year ever,
[48:38] over 10,000 subscribers coming on over
[48:40] the last year.
[48:42] Uh for context, we only have about 82 to
[48:44] 83,000 subscribers, so 10,000
[48:47] is really big growth, right?
[48:48] Percentage-wise. This is a very good
[48:50] year for us.
[48:52] This is by city. And so, each city
[48:54] you're going to see they're they're in
[48:56] there. Idaho Falls, something in the
[48:57] water there, they're doing really well.
[48:59] They have less They have less
[49:00] competitive options there though, so
[49:01] it's really nice. But they've just shot
[49:04] up to be uh number one in as far as
[49:06] subscribers. Uh Orem is this one right
[49:08] here,
[49:09] uh this brown one. And you'll see right
[49:11] here it took a big jump up in the
[49:13] summer.
[49:14] And that was a result of a door-to-door
[49:16] marketing effort.
[49:18] So, we did have people doing
[49:20] door-to-door. We We call that our light
[49:22] touch door-to-door marketing.
[49:24] You know, we try not to be like some of
[49:26] the other campaigns out there can be
[49:27] pretty pushy.
[49:29] Um so, we manage that very closely, make
[49:31] sure, "Hey, this this got to be a
[49:32] positive experience. Can't be pushy.
[49:34] Can't be bugging people."
[49:36] Um
[49:37] you know, cuz those complaints, rather
[49:38] than just some private companies like,
[49:40] "Ah, we don't really care. We just care
[49:41] about revenue." Here we do care. We, you
[49:43] know, we report to you and you report to
[49:46] your constituents and you know, we don't
[49:48] want them to be upset with any of the
[49:50] things that we're doing at UTOPIA.
[49:52] Um but it's been received pretty well.
[49:54] Um
[49:55] generally people are pretty happy to pay
[49:56] less for broadband for a better
[49:58] connection. So, uh it's gone well, and
[50:00] that's going to be picking up again uh
[50:02] this summer in the next couple of weeks.
[50:06] This is Orem specific. Uh this is
[50:08] availability. So, this is where we built
[50:10] the network. You say, "Well, we're done.
[50:13] Should just stop."
[50:14] But even in the city like Orem, we
[50:16] continue to see some growth there.
[50:18] Through that's redevelopment or still
[50:20] finding some pockets where you can put
[50:22] some homes in.
[50:23] Uh we do continue to expand how many
[50:26] people have access to this.
[50:28] Uh this is your subscribers on the
[50:30] system. So, again, you'll see that bump
[50:32] there in the summer sales uh season. We
[50:34] hadn't done that before. Uh and that was
[50:36] the biggest increase we've had. So, last
[50:38] year when we presented Oh, the green
[50:40] line is last year's snapshot. So, just
[50:42] so you see, we presented
[50:44] uh in May last year.
[50:46] So, since then, we've had that little
[50:47] jump there.
[50:49] Last year when we presented, we're
[50:50] presenting that we had grown an average
[50:52] of 27 customers every month over the
[50:54] previous year.
[50:56] This year, we're up 45 customers every
[50:58] month year-over-year on an uh
[51:01] average. So, it was a total of 534
[51:04] Sorry, 39 customers that come on over
[51:06] the last year just in Orem. It's uh
[51:09] fantastic. 5.8% growth.
[51:13] Uh this is kind of hard to tell cuz we
[51:14] have so many customers in the city.
[51:17] You stare at it long enough,
[51:18] you see some differences.
[51:21] But there's another 540 dots on the on
[51:23] the right side than there were on the
[51:25] left. And it's interesting. I was
[51:27] looking at them like, I don't know.
[51:28] Whatever reason, right there, there's
[51:29] kind of a cluster that came on. I don't
[51:31] know what happened there. And it was
[51:33] it's definitely denser.
[51:35] There's a couple places, but overall, we
[51:36] did see them mostly spread across the
[51:39] city. Uh and then a bunch of uh business
[51:41] type connections. We saw some uh
[51:43] churches come online over here and some
[51:45] school connections and things like that.
[51:47] So,
[51:48] um but it's obviously trending in the
[51:50] right direction. People really like it.
[51:53] Also, something I didn't actually
[51:54] observe or make this point. I I got it
[51:57] out of Centerville, but they came back
[51:58] and made the point and say, "You know,
[52:00] this is the most successful service we
[52:01] offer as a city
[52:03] um because it's it's not like mandatory.
[52:05] Like, every single one of these people
[52:07] had other options.
[52:09] And all of these people chose the
[52:11] city-provided service, right?
[52:13] And so, when you look at other things
[52:15] that that are out there, you know, it's
[52:16] like, "Well, how many people in the
[52:17] city, you know, went to the rec center?
[52:19] How many people went to the the pool or
[52:21] the park or the golf course or whatever
[52:23] it may be?" It wouldn't look like this,
[52:25] right? This is something that's reaching
[52:26] a lot of the people in the city and
[52:28] they're benefiting from it.
[52:30] So, um
[52:31] I don't know if that's holds true here,
[52:32] but if we would hope that we're the
[52:34] most popular voluntary service in the
[52:36] city. It's something we would strive to
[52:38] do.
[52:40] Financially, this is what it's looked
[52:41] like. Um this is combined revenue for
[52:43] UTOPIA UIA. Remember when we celebrated
[52:46] about a million dollars a month in
[52:47] revenue and
[52:48] we pushed past that to almost 5 and 1/2
[52:50] million dollars of of revenue per month.
[52:53] Um that's obviously a good thing. This
[52:55] is our debt burden basically at UIA on
[52:59] these lines.
[53:01] And then our revenue at UIA. So, this is
[53:03] UIA only. And you see the delta here
[53:05] continues to get better.
[53:07] Uh so, that's a good thing. That that
[53:08] creates revenue that we use to to fund
[53:10] those installations. It was a very
[53:12] expensive year cuz we had to go connect
[53:14] 10,000 subscribers, right? Um but we are not increasing the pace of debt
[53:20] new debt because we're able to fund more and more of that from that delta,
[53:24] while also increasing our payments back
[53:26] to the cities.
[53:28] Uh so, it's it's great. I want to
[53:30] continue to see these trends.
[53:32] This is the uh debt service
[53:36] uh repayment back to cities. So, this is
[53:38] what's posed. We just had our
[53:40] preliminary budget uh meetings
[53:43] where we show like hey this is what
[53:45] we're going to do this year.
[53:46] What's proposed is to increase
[53:50] the amount we pay to cities by 318,000
[53:52] and there's it's about 22% of that I
[53:55] think.
[53:56] >> 71,000
[53:58] >> So it'll go up by 70,000 but that's
[54:02] that would keep the amount the city pays
[54:04] flat.
[54:06] This was our preliminary budget. We're
[54:07] actually looking to modify this a little
[54:10] bit and more in favor and add another
[54:11] 100,000 to this number so it'll bump it
[54:14] up a little bit more. It's not approved
[54:16] till we have full budget approval.
[54:18] But the real goal of it is actually to
[54:20] put us on an more aggressive trajectory,
[54:22] right? So over the last
[54:24] several years it's been let's hold the
[54:26] line on the amount going to back to city
[54:29] there what the cities are paying
[54:31] even though the debt payments are going
[54:33] up.
[54:34] So we're going to try to we're going to
[54:35] put in place a curve where it's not only
[54:37] 100,000 this year more but it would be a
[54:40] 100,000 more every year perpetually.
[54:43] Then
[54:44] next year we're going to try to do
[54:46] better than that. Say okay, now that's
[54:48] the standard. Let's try to do 200,000
[54:51] and and kind of ramp that down so that
[54:53] your payments are getting lower and
[54:55] lower but we hesitate to say
[54:57] hey it's going to happen that way for
[54:58] the next 14 years
[55:01] because we are always worried about
[55:03] competitive pressures, right? There's
[55:04] things in the marketplace of you know,
[55:06] here comes AT&T fiber. They just bought
[55:09] Lumen which is CenturyLink.
[55:12] Are they going to be offering
[55:14] services and promotions at a loss just
[55:16] to try to compete? You know, there's
[55:20] those types of competitive pressures out
[55:21] there. Like right now things are going
[55:22] really well. So we just hesitate to say
[55:24] hey we want to relieve the pressure as much
[55:27] as we can.
[55:28] We also don't want to find ourselves in
[55:30] 3 years and say hey you know what, we
[55:31] got to roll this step back.
[55:33] And really the attitude is once we
[55:34] started making these payments back
[55:37] uh our in our board meetings we're like,
[55:40] "We love this and we hope this stays
[55:41] forever, but
[55:43] just remember this is always subject to
[55:44] availability, right? We have to have and
[55:47] preserve those revenues in order to make
[55:49] these payments to the cities and if for
[55:51] whatever reason it is some market
[55:53] disruption, we may not be in that
[55:54] position. But we're going to push as
[55:56] hard as we can
[55:58] to do that and to keep ramping that up
[56:00] as well.
[56:02] Um so a couple things that's just kind
[56:04] of ongoing approval improved financial
[56:06] situation, increasing take rates,
[56:09] payments have
[56:12] The original bond increased every year.
[56:17] The amount we're paying comes out to
[56:20] nearly 30%
[56:22] of because it's a the total payment is
[56:24] about $17 million. So we're paying like
[56:26] five, whatever it is, then
[56:28] we're paying fit $5.2 million of that
[56:32] this year.
[56:33] And it's going up every year.
[56:35] effectively we're paying a
[56:36] bigger portion of that.
[56:39] On the newer stuff, um
[56:42] Oh yeah, this is the the bad one, right?
[56:44] The payments for the original bonds are
[56:46] still an obligation out there, but as as
[56:48] the cities pay that, we're counting that
[56:50] as an IOU. So
[56:52] in 2040 things get dramatically
[56:54] different.
[56:55] And we're still charging the same rates
[56:57] that we have now or whatever's
[57:00] appropriate for that time,
[57:02] um suddenly a lot of
[57:04] revenue becomes available for payment
[57:05] back to cities.
[57:07] And the way we're accounting for that is
[57:09] that we would pay you back with interest
[57:11] all the amounts you've ever paid towards
[57:13] the bonds.
[57:14] The way we account for it, I think most
[57:16] cities are kind of writing it off as
[57:17] just an expense. That's probably the
[57:20] responsible thing to do.
[57:22] Um but we are hoping that in 2040 gets
[57:26] uh
[57:27] is a very good year
[57:28] and many years after that.
[57:31] Um I want to make this point here. This
[57:33] is based on a study that was done by
[57:36] uh it was done mostly on the EPB system,
[57:39] which is Chattanooga.
[57:40] Um, I guess up until year or two ago,
[57:42] they were the largest municipal fiber
[57:43] system in the country
[57:45] till we surpassed them.
[57:47] Um, but anyways, the study was very
[57:49] good. It went in there and analyzed all
[57:50] sorts of impacts of having this
[57:52] municipal fiber system in their city.
[57:54] And we said, you know, that's pretty
[57:55] applicable to what we do. Not all of it.
[57:57] They had a power system that they
[57:58] leveraged. Um, but we took the pieces of
[58:01] that that were applicable to Utopia
[58:03] Fiber in our cities.
[58:05] We said, let's see what that
[58:07] what those benefits would be scaled and
[58:09] made you know, inappropriate for our
[58:10] system.
[58:12] And we also look at some of our market
[58:15] things like Comcast as opposed to their
[58:17] competition. But what but the result was
[58:20] that we
[58:21] This is actually cheating a little bit
[58:23] on the conservative side.
[58:25] Their point was that the entire market
[58:27] rates go down by about $29 per
[58:30] household, whether you sign up for the
[58:31] system or not. That's the competitive
[58:33] impact of having this there.
[58:35] Um, we're only counting those that
[58:37] signed up for the service.
[58:38] But the reality is that people have a
[58:40] lower cost Comcast or whatever other
[58:42] service they have as a result of us
[58:44] being here.
[58:45] So, if we just count the ones that we
[58:46] have,
[58:48] um
[58:49] I actually have to update this number
[58:51] here. Um
[58:53] So, we're actually over 3 million now,
[58:55] but that would we're saving the
[58:56] residents of Orem over 3 million dollars
[58:59] a year by having this. If you're a
[59:00] little bit off on that one. Um
[59:02] We're also saving the businesses over a
[59:04] million dollars a year. So,
[59:06] a lot of things that we're looking at
[59:08] um from a city perspective, they're
[59:10] important,
[59:11] but they've gotten expensive, right? And
[59:13] they continue to get expensive. There's
[59:14] inflation, there's increased costs,
[59:16] whatever it is, and you know, it's not
[59:18] unique to Orem. It's
[59:20] cities everywhere. Generally, costs are
[59:21] going up, but this is a great place that
[59:23] we can point to that the what the city
[59:25] has done is actually saving the
[59:26] residents money.
[59:28] Um
[59:30] And if you look at the study applied to
[59:32] all of UTOPIA over a 10-year period it's
[59:35] like, "Hey, this would be like $900
[59:37] million of economic benefit." But based
[59:39] on just the size of Orem relative to
[59:41] that, you would could point to a $200
[59:43] million economic benefit over a 10-year
[59:45] period. Obviously, we're into it some
[59:47] more than 10 years. We expect it to last
[59:49] much more than 10 years.
[59:51] Um but the total benefit including all
[59:53] the educational benefits and all the
[59:56] tie-in smart city functions and just,
[59:58] "Hey, this is better cheaper broadband
[1:00:00] for people in their homes."
[1:00:02] There's an enormous benefit uh as a
[1:00:04] result of this this project. So
[1:00:06] anyways, there's a link here uh if you
[1:00:08] ever want to dive into the details and
[1:00:10] how that's substantiated.
[1:00:12] I just like to share that, but anyways,
[1:00:13] that's
[1:00:15] And my number changed, sorry. That's a
[1:00:17] 35 now.
[1:00:19] Somebody redid our phone system by the
[1:00:22] Uh any questions?
[1:00:24] >> Sure. And also, do you have any
[1:00:25] questions?
[1:00:26] >> Um I I do want to express appreciation
[1:00:28] for our board members, too. You know,
[1:00:30] it's uh time commitment to
[1:00:33] just being our board members. Last year,
[1:00:34] it was Jeff Lamson and we appreciate his
[1:00:36] service there. And now we have uh Renee
[1:00:38] Millet on the on the board and as and
[1:00:40] Brent's always been on the board. So we
[1:00:41] have two boards. We've got UTOPIA and
[1:00:43] UIA.
[1:00:45] But uh you know, it's something that
[1:00:46] they've got to take time out of their
[1:00:48] schedules to
[1:00:49] attend those meetings and it is
[1:00:51] appreciated and they've been great.
[1:00:53] It's their job to hold our feet to the
[1:00:54] fire, but but uh
[1:00:56] you know, I think they do that in a good
[1:00:58] way and work with other board members to help guide the organization.
[1:01:02] >> I won't take credit. It's not me. It's
[1:01:04] you, Jen.
[1:01:06] >> Yes, and I I I really enjoyed actually
[1:01:07] the meetings and the discussion we've
[1:01:08] had.
[1:01:10] >> So much pressure on Pamela.
[1:01:12] >> Sorry, Jen. That's right.
[1:01:13] >> I'm sorry.
[1:01:15] >> I have three assignments.
[1:01:16] >> So I'm the one who who made the
[1:01:17] assignments.
[1:01:18] >> So many things.
[1:01:20] >> It's going all kinds of places. So I
[1:01:21] appreciate you stopping.
[1:01:23] >> Yeah. Appreciate all the councils I
[1:01:25] interact with.
[1:01:27] >> Good job, Roger.
[1:01:28] Um just curious if you're going to
[1:01:31] continue that soft touch approach,
[1:01:34] and have you done that in other cities
[1:01:35] and had as as favorable of response as
[1:01:37] you did here in Orem?
[1:01:39] And will that be an ongoing part of your
[1:01:41] marketing and sales
[1:01:43] >> brand?
[1:01:44] >> Yeah, so we we were pretty hesitant to
[1:01:46] do it. We had done it the first time
[1:01:48] like back in 2010 in Brigham City, and
[1:01:50] it was not so soft of a touch. And there
[1:01:53] was a lot of backlash. A lot of people
[1:01:54] were upset. We had used um
[1:01:58] you know, I don't know, there were
[1:01:59] people tied in with like development
[1:02:00] companies and stuff like that that had
[1:02:02] kind of formed this group, and they just
[1:02:04] were like numbers and sales, and that's
[1:02:06] all we care about. And it it it didn't
[1:02:08] go well, and that kind of burned our
[1:02:11] desire to use that as a tool.
[1:02:13] Um
[1:02:14] over the years we said, you know, this
[1:02:16] if it's done right, this could be great.
[1:02:18] We started it actually we tried doing it
[1:02:21] in Bozeman. We were like, you know, if
[1:02:23] Bozeman gets mad,
[1:02:24] it doesn't hurt us. But if it goes well,
[1:02:27] it's a great partnership, right? So we
[1:02:29] actually started using these teams, and
[1:02:31] they were Utah-based teams in Bozeman to
[1:02:33] see if we could do this without
[1:02:35] generating conflicts and things that are complaints. And it went really well,
[1:02:39] you know, boosted sales dramatically,
[1:02:41] and you know, we went back to the city
[1:02:43] and said, you know, what do you how do
[1:02:44] you feel about this? And they were like,
[1:02:46] we haven't heard a word. It was great.
[1:02:48] So we used that same team and started
[1:02:51] doing it in Utah, and and there was
[1:02:53] still RFP process for all of that, too,
[1:02:55] but uh this team is leveraged
[1:02:59] primarily uh sales people based out in
[1:03:01] this area, Orem and Provo, uh are the
[1:03:04] ones going across all the other cities,
[1:03:06] and we just
[1:03:07] it's working great. We're managing it
[1:03:09] well as far as complaints. We've had to fire a couple people off their team.
[1:03:13] I mean, we have that ability in our
[1:03:14] contract to say, "Hey, too many
[1:03:16] complaints. This guy's too pushy. He's
[1:03:18] off." And uh uh
[1:03:20] you know, we we've done that pretty
[1:03:22] tightly and it's worked out really well.
[1:03:24] So, yes, we're planning to continue that
[1:03:25] and and uh
[1:03:27] we're starting up in the next couple of
[1:03:29] weeks uh here.
[1:03:31] Maybe even sooner. It's We get most of
[1:03:33] them right after graduation cuz most of
[1:03:35] them are college kids.
[1:03:37] >> If this came to my house, so
[1:03:39] >> They're good.
[1:03:39] >> They were they were great.
[1:03:42] >> Well, tell me how to sign up for this.
[1:03:44] >> I haven't yet because I haven't had time
[1:03:45] to do all the other parts to it, so
[1:03:48] I can't say. Come back in another month.
[1:03:53] » Now, uh
[1:03:54] can you estimate what the average
[1:03:56] homeowner, let's say who does the 1 gig
[1:03:58] plan, is paying
[1:04:00] for them?
[1:04:02] Um and I'm also curious as to
[1:04:05] what your
[1:04:06] uh
[1:04:07] what your percent rate of people who
[1:04:09] might leave the service in a given year
[1:04:11] is. Obviously, you're growing
[1:04:13] as a whole, but I'm wondering how many
[1:04:14] people leave the service annually.
[1:04:17] >> Yeah, those are good questions. Um so,
[1:04:18] our gigabit pricing is variable based on
[1:04:20] which provider you pick, but it's about
[1:04:23] 70 to 80 dollars. It's in that range
[1:04:25] depending on who you pick. You pay
[1:04:26] Utopia fee and a provider fee together.
[1:04:29] It's about 70-ish dollars. And And so,
[1:04:31] why would one person choose one of your
[1:04:34] 19 providers over another one?
[1:04:36] Um lots of reasons. In fact, our most
[1:04:39] popular provider is actually our most
[1:04:41] expensive. Um
[1:04:43] so uh
[1:04:45] you know, they do what they can to
[1:04:46] differentiate. Uh so, some of them
[1:04:49] target like gaming and latency and
[1:04:51] peerings with with the different gaming
[1:04:53] servers, right? The gamers are like, "I
[1:04:55] I need the lowest ping for this gaming
[1:04:57] server" or whatever. Uh others are more
[1:04:59] like, "Hey, we'll help you more with the
[1:05:01] kind of a white glove installation.
[1:05:02] We'll have a managed router in your
[1:05:04] house so we can help troubleshoot
[1:05:05] in-home issues." Uh some of them
[1:05:07] differentiate based on having a cable TV
[1:05:09] option that they offer uh or phone
[1:05:12] services. We've got one that's launching
[1:05:14] uh mobile phone bundle, so your cellular
[1:05:17] phone is bundled in with their billing.
[1:05:20] Um So, it's kind of that sort of stuff,
[1:05:22] and then different promotions. Some of
[1:05:24] them will say, "Hey, when you sign up,
[1:05:25] you get a couple months free."
[1:05:27] Uh one of them does a gift card. Um
[1:05:30] They'll do like a free Apple TV,
[1:05:32] something like that. So,
[1:05:33] >> vision of the same.
[1:05:35] >> Uh
[1:05:36] It's So, so we provide a connection from
[1:05:39] the house to usually a data center where
[1:05:43] that service provider meets us. Now,
[1:05:47] how they handle their internet traffic
[1:05:49] from there can be dramatically
[1:05:51] different, and the features they offer
[1:05:52] you can be different. And sometimes they
[1:05:54] matter to people, and sometimes they
[1:05:55] don't. So, some people are like, "I need
[1:05:58] to have an IPv6, or I need it I I need
[1:06:00] IPv4 address." And some people are like,
[1:06:03] "I don't even know what that means."
[1:06:05] Uh
[1:06:06] doesn't matter to them. But, if somebody
[1:06:07] wants their own IP address, and and and
[1:06:10] then you can even have it static IP
[1:06:12] address versus a dynamic address. Like,
[1:06:14] some providers offer those services, and
[1:06:16] others don't. Um if you don't care about
[1:06:18] any of that stuff, then you usually just
[1:06:19] kind of pick low price.
[1:06:21] Um
[1:06:22] others pick like, "Hey, they're
[1:06:23] sponsoring the you know, they got their
[1:06:26] ad at the local baseball game, or the
[1:06:28] school, or whatever." And they they pick
[1:06:30] up customers based on sponsorships, uh
[1:06:33] cuz they can see that there's local
[1:06:34] benefit.
[1:06:35] Um one of them just started advertising
[1:06:37] at Utah Mammoth games.
[1:06:39] Um so, you know, like, "Oh, I recognize
[1:06:41] that that logo, right?" So, things like
[1:06:44] that. You'll also see on Facebook, you
[1:06:46] know, you and and even on the Orem
[1:06:47] group, you'll see people like, "Hey, uh
[1:06:49] which provider should I pick?" And you
[1:06:51] see right there, people are like, "Oh, I
[1:06:52] love these guys. They've been awesome. I
[1:06:53] had them for 10 years. Never had an
[1:06:55] outage, whatever." Maybe, you know,
[1:06:56] stuff like that. That helps a lot. So,
[1:06:59] recommendations from other people.
[1:07:02] But, yeah, I we always wonder like, it's
[1:07:04] pretty cool that it isn't just cost. And not even that that's like the
[1:07:09] driving factor and there's ability to
[1:07:10] differentiate. It's the differentiated
[1:07:12] ones have actually been more successful.
[1:07:15] And and
[1:07:16] the higher priced I mean it was
[1:07:19] obviously looking up on a website. So
[1:07:20] XMission has the highest price. They are
[1:07:22] the largest provider by number of
[1:07:24] subscribers on the system. So.
[1:07:26] >> And then quit rate?
[1:07:28] >> What's that?
[1:07:28] >> Quit rate, people who leave your service
[1:07:31] annually.
[1:07:31] >> Oh. Yeah, so our churn rate
[1:07:34] we're it's gone up just a little bit. Uh
[1:07:37] we were pretty steady at about 3 to 3
[1:07:39] and 1/2% annually.
[1:07:42] In this last couple years it's gone up
[1:07:44] to about 4 and 1/2 to 5%. Um There you
[1:07:49] know we're just seeing a lot more
[1:07:50] competition and promotions from like the
[1:07:52] wireless bundles and things like that
[1:07:54] cuz you can get like a T-Mobile hotspot
[1:07:57] type service or I mean it's it's more
[1:07:59] than a hotspot. It's their fixed
[1:08:01] wireless. So they're running a totally
[1:08:02] separate network from the cell towers.
[1:08:05] Uh that's a fixed wireless product and
[1:08:06] it works in some locations and doesn't
[1:08:08] in others. Slows down during peak. But
[1:08:11] they're marketing it very heavily.
[1:08:13] Doing bundles
[1:08:15] that are pretty
[1:08:17] enticing. So we have we were losing
[1:08:20] customers to that occasionally.
[1:08:22] We usually get them back if they have a
[1:08:24] bad experience. Um does affect our our
[1:08:27] churn rate.
[1:08:29] Uh now the charts I showed when I said
[1:08:30] 10,000 customers that's net growth. So
[1:08:33] you know we probably signed up closer to
[1:08:35] 12,000 but you know lost a couple
[1:08:38] thousand through churn.
[1:08:42] » Well thank thank you.
[1:08:45] This is I I'm
[1:08:47] >> Well.
[1:08:48] >> I've been the one who was who was who's
[1:08:51] been
[1:08:51] back when I was on the council was
[1:08:53] involved and heavily involved in UTOPIA.
[1:08:55] In the beginning it's good to see these things happening.
[1:09:01] >> Yeah, I get that. The early phase was a
[1:09:04] little rough, but
[1:09:05] we wouldn't have the current phase if it
[1:09:07] weren't for that phase. So,
[1:09:09] it was the right decision. It just
[1:09:11] took some patience.
[1:09:13] >> How long is this my haircut?
[1:09:16] Thank you. Appreciate you coming, Roger.
[1:09:19] >> See you.
[1:09:19] >> All right, our next presentation
[1:09:22] is Fred Bilotta from
[1:09:25] LRB
[1:09:27] talking about our general fund
[1:09:28] sustainability study follow-up. And so,
[1:09:31] it looks like we've got 20 minutes, 10
[1:09:34] minutes presentation, 10 minutes Q&A.
[1:09:42] » See if this refreshes the room.
[1:09:47] Let's go over here and see.
[1:09:49] He did Laura the last time
[1:09:51] connecting on this.
[1:09:53] Get on.
[1:09:55] So, main console, we also have Laura
[1:09:57] here.
[1:09:59] >> Was Laura here? Somewhere?
[1:10:01] >> No, I'm only here on screen.
[1:10:03] >> Oh, hello, Laura.
[1:10:05] >> And that's cuz I messed up and didn't
[1:10:06] put the meeting in my calendar. I was
[1:10:07] like, I'm running I'm running a little
[1:10:09] bit late. He sent me a text. I'm like,
[1:10:10] uh-oh, you're not as late as me.
[1:10:14] So, thank you.
[1:10:14] >> We'll remember that.
[1:10:16] >> Yeah, and thanks for getting another
[1:10:17] system to get me online.
[1:10:20] Thank you.
[1:10:20] >> They came before and talked about the
[1:10:22] sustainability plan and we gave some
[1:10:23] direction, and now we welcome you back
[1:10:27] to your information.
[1:10:28] >> Yes, thank you. Uh so, I thought I'd
[1:10:31] refresh on what we're what we're here
[1:10:34] for.
[1:10:35] Um
[1:10:36] we've been working with staff on the
[1:10:38] sustainability model and developing
[1:10:40] um a pro forma that allows us to make
[1:10:42] projections.
[1:10:43] And
[1:10:45] a tool that's very flexible and allows
[1:10:47] us to
[1:10:48] change those assumptions and see what
[1:10:49] happens. The intent being
[1:10:52] uh establishing fiscal policies relative
[1:10:54] to the general fund.
[1:10:57] Um
[1:10:58] the objective here is to have a model
[1:11:00] that can be reviewed on an annual basis.
[1:11:02] So, we're not suggesting that this is
[1:11:04] something you're kind of one and done.
[1:11:07] Uh it's also not necessary that LRB
[1:11:09] involved involved in every step of that
[1:11:11] process, but we at least have a tool
[1:11:13] that the city can use to evaluate
[1:11:15] sustainability and
[1:11:17] uh also evaluate decisions that you have
[1:11:20] through you.
[1:11:22] Um
[1:11:23] one element that uh
[1:11:25] the uh can consider, which uh you're
[1:11:29] looking at, which is property tax
[1:11:31] increases and
[1:11:32] a potential uh
[1:11:34] small increase relative to uh your your
[1:11:38] property tax.
[1:11:39] So, as we look at that um and evaluate
[1:11:41] that in the context of the model,
[1:11:43] essentially what we can do is again look
[1:11:46] at trends and see the impact of that uh
[1:11:48] relative to the benchmarks that we're
[1:11:49] looking at, your uh cash reserves.
[1:11:53] Um
[1:11:54] and as again, uh measure the the impact
[1:11:56] of that. And in this case, as we look at
[1:11:58] a potential 7% increase,
[1:12:01] while important, it won't have a huge
[1:12:03] impact on long-term sustainability
[1:12:05] relative to the charts that I showed you
[1:12:07] in previous
[1:12:08] uh
[1:12:09] discussions and I'll I'll follow up here
[1:12:11] with you.
[1:12:12] >> Yeah, I just want to clarify this 7%
[1:12:15] we're talking about a farm's portion.
[1:12:17] >> Yes.
[1:12:18] >> of property tax.
[1:12:20] >> Yes.
[1:12:20] >> So, it's not one's entire property tax
[1:12:22] bill.
[1:12:23] >> Correct.
[1:12:23] >> Yeah, right?
[1:12:24] >> Yes, yep and that that percentage, while
[1:12:26] it's 7% of your the municipal tax levy,
[1:12:29] it would be a much smaller percentage
[1:12:30] when you look at the overall property
[1:12:32] tax bill of an individual because you're
[1:12:35] you know, 10% of the total tax bill
[1:12:38] when it comes to property taxes.
[1:12:41] But, what this does do is it it allows
[1:12:43] uh you to start looking at again impacts
[1:12:45] and establishing a a policy that you can
[1:12:48] perpetuate moving forward.
[1:12:51] Uh the objective there is to ensure that
[1:12:53] your revenue streams address,
[1:12:56] um,
[1:12:56] cost changes over time, recognizing that
[1:12:58] those costs rarely decrease,
[1:13:01] um,
[1:13:02] unless their level of service changes,
[1:13:04] meaning you opt to change the level of
[1:13:07] service that you provide and minimize
[1:13:09] that, then that's typically where we see
[1:13:10] cost decrease.
[1:13:12] Uh, however, inflation, uh, will affect
[1:13:15] you just just like anybody else.
[1:13:18] Uh,
[1:13:19] this I wanted to remind you again that
[1:13:21] the idea of your buying power over time,
[1:13:23] uh, showing you what your tax levy as
[1:13:26] percent of the total tax bill was in
[1:13:27] 2005 versus 2025.
[1:13:31] You've gone from 17% of the total in
[1:13:33] 2005 down to 9% of the total tax bill,
[1:13:36] speaking to that idea of municipal levy
[1:13:38] is only a small percentage of the total
[1:13:40] tax bill.
[1:13:42] Um,
[1:13:43] this is purely a percentage, a percent
[1:13:45] of total comparison. In reality, every
[1:13:47] entity provides a specific level of
[1:13:50] service that will adjust according to
[1:13:52] their needs.
[1:13:53] But, it does reflect, uh,
[1:13:56] again, your piece of the pie, showing
[1:13:58] that the property tax or that Orem
[1:14:01] assesses has not kept pace with other
[1:14:03] entities as they have raised the
[1:14:06] property tax levy.
[1:14:10] Already, um,
[1:14:11] here are the assumptions that we've used
[1:14:13] in the model. I wanted to highlight this
[1:14:14] and really focus on, um,
[1:14:18] this line item here. This uh, second to
[1:14:21] the top, um,
[1:14:22] you know, what what we're proposing in
[1:14:24] the model, which is a 3% increase in
[1:14:26] your sales tax revenue.
[1:14:29] Um,
[1:14:30] and then we have uh, some growth in some
[1:14:31] other areas, but primarily we're keeping
[1:14:33] revenues constant other than the sales
[1:14:36] tax revenue growth.
[1:14:38] Right now, the model that we've been
[1:14:39] working on does not propose any property
[1:14:41] tax increases, um, just showing, uh,
[1:14:45] you know, then happens if we have
[1:14:46] natural growth in our revenue stream?
[1:14:49] Now, there is I do want to remind you
[1:14:51] that there is growth in your property
[1:14:53] tax base as it relates to new growth on
[1:14:56] and your system, new brick and mortar
[1:14:59] essentially.
[1:15:00] But that's a very small component of
[1:15:02] Orem City's property tax, which is a
[1:15:04] small component of your overall revenue.
[1:15:06] So, it's
[1:15:07] a small piece of a small thing.
[1:15:11] Um
[1:15:13] uh down here at the bottom, the colored
[1:15:14] areas in blue and light blue, those are
[1:15:17] our assumptions relative to inflation,
[1:15:19] inflationary pressure on the general
[1:15:21] fund. So, you can see these percentages
[1:15:23] are much higher. We have some
[1:15:25] um
[1:15:25] growing at 10%.
[1:15:28] Uh our public safety, um which we do see
[1:15:31] pressure in public safety,
[1:15:33] that those expenses often grow at a
[1:15:35] higher rate due to um market factors and
[1:15:38] competition.
[1:15:40] Um
[1:15:41] our general growth, we're looking at uh
[1:15:43] somewhere between 3% and 4% growth and
[1:15:45] just general inflationary pressure,
[1:15:47] which, as we've all felt recently, um
[1:15:51] that really depends, right, on the
[1:15:52] market and national
[1:15:54] uh or other environmental factors.
[1:15:58] Uh so, that could that could go much
[1:15:59] higher, right, relative to those
[1:16:01] assumptions. But we do have some
[1:16:03] inflation
[1:16:04] inflationary pressure
[1:16:06] brought in.
[1:16:08] Um this gives you an idea of the of the
[1:16:10] trends that um the general fund has
[1:16:13] experienced. I have highlighted the
[1:16:15] sales tax since that's our uh
[1:16:17] a critical component in this evaluation.
[1:16:20] Historically, from 2019 to 2024, actual
[1:16:23] sales tax revenues grew at slightly
[1:16:25] above 6%. Our model is assuming 3%.
[1:16:29] Uh the caveat there is when you look at
[1:16:31] the last 2 years, '23 and '24, '25
[1:16:34] actuals, you're actually seeing hardly
[1:16:37] any growth in sales tax revenues. It's
[1:16:39] plateaued and stabilized.
[1:16:42] Uh so, 3% could be aggressive with
[1:16:45] regards to growth and revenue. Meaning
[1:16:47] if you don't get that, then we're in a
[1:16:48] worse situation than what our model
[1:16:52] shows.
[1:16:53] Overall, revenue is growing at a little
[1:16:56] under 2%. We believe had a little bit
[1:16:58] higher, but that that will fluctuate
[1:17:00] based on grants and our revenue those
[1:17:03] types of things.
[1:17:05] Uh, with regards to expense, we have a
[1:17:07] little bit higher expense growth than
[1:17:08] 2019 to 2024 at 6.41%
[1:17:12] versus a little over 5% historically.
[1:17:15] This has to do with again discussing
[1:17:17] with departments what you need and what
[1:17:20] new
[1:17:21] inflationary pressures might there be
[1:17:23] relative to some of these expense line
[1:17:25] items and so forth and account for that.
[1:17:27] Um, and then try to show
[1:17:29] uh, your need. For example, that public
[1:17:31] safety bucket of saying what do we think
[1:17:33] we really need program there recognizing
[1:17:35] that historically
[1:17:37] uh, you've done a very good job at
[1:17:39] rolling and trying to minimize
[1:17:41] inflationary pressure, but
[1:17:44] that will eventually
[1:17:45] undo that little something.
[1:17:48] All righty, so we showed this uh, the
[1:17:50] unrestricted general fund balance under
[1:17:51] our
[1:17:52] all-inclusive scenario
[1:17:55] um, versus a scenario where we took out
[1:17:57] some of our one-time expenses
[1:17:58] essentially showing
[1:18:00] this this is not possible. We we cannot
[1:18:03] survive on 3% sales tax revenue, no new
[1:18:05] property tax, and fund everything we
[1:18:07] want to fund.
[1:18:08] Uh, so that's that's not really doable.
[1:18:11] All righty, so I I did want to give an
[1:18:13] opportunity to kind of look at the model
[1:18:16] and play around with
[1:18:18] at least one scenario to show you
[1:18:21] uh, how you as a community could maybe
[1:18:24] um,
[1:18:25] not engage in property tax policy and
[1:18:28] still maintain your fund balance which
[1:18:31] may not be possible, but
[1:18:34] let's uh,
[1:18:36] let's go into the model.
[1:18:38] So, this is a lot of numbers, right? Uh
[1:18:41] so, I'll make it bigger.
[1:18:43] >> Thank you. I mean, you can't read.
[1:18:45] >> Um
[1:18:47] And the numbers, I mean, obviously are
[1:18:49] important, but there's so many here that
[1:18:52] we don't want to get lost in the
[1:18:54] in all this
[1:18:56] uh this junk here on the spreadsheet. Um
[1:18:59] But, there are there elements that I can
[1:19:02] control, right? I can turn on and off
[1:19:03] scenarios that we could say, "Okay, what
[1:19:05] happens if
[1:19:07] And in our discussions uh with staff, we
[1:19:10] said, "Okay, what happens if you just
[1:19:11] turn everything off? Let's Let's turn it
[1:19:13] all off and see what happens, but keep
[1:19:15] in that 3% sales tax." So, I have
[1:19:17] triggers here that say, "These are our
[1:19:19] one-time expenses
[1:19:21] um and our new O&M that we've said,
[1:19:23] 'Hey, these are things that we think we
[1:19:25] need to to maintain our level of
[1:19:26] service, but let's turn all that off.
[1:19:28] Say, 'Okay, we're not going to fund any
[1:19:30] of that.'
[1:19:31] And what happens to our pro forma?"
[1:19:34] So, that helps, right? So, you saw the
[1:19:36] charges shifted and we got back to this
[1:19:38] green line,
[1:19:39] but we're not uh we're not preserving
[1:19:41] our fund balance. And what this
[1:19:43] represents is our unrestricted general
[1:19:44] fund balance
[1:19:46] um trying to keep that at about $20
[1:19:48] million
[1:19:49] uh where where you're at now.
[1:19:51] Um so,
[1:19:53] uh turning off those requests doesn't
[1:19:56] achieve what we
[1:19:58] uh what we'd hoped, which is keeping us
[1:20:00] stable. Now, we go into our uh other
[1:20:04] assumptions in this model. So, one area
[1:20:06] that we could look at is say, "Well,
[1:20:08] what if
[1:20:10] um
[1:20:11] Here, I look at those uh those
[1:20:13] assumptions, right? That were on that
[1:20:15] slide relative to inflation.
[1:20:17] Let's say I turn all of those off and
[1:20:19] say, "Well, we're going to We're going
[1:20:21] to be really efficient and whatever it
[1:20:24] is, technology, artificial intelligence,
[1:20:26] whatever we plug in there for our
[1:20:28] efficiency tool, that's going to make it
[1:20:30] so we don't have
[1:20:31] uh growth and expense. While we may
[1:20:34] experience inflation, efficiency helps
[1:20:36] mitigate to that and keeps our costs the
[1:20:39] same.
[1:20:40] So, if I turn all of that off, that
[1:20:42] that's a pretty big assumption, right?
[1:20:43] Turn all of that off, what happens to
[1:20:45] our sustainability model? And there you
[1:20:47] can see, yes, we actually we can
[1:20:51] keep our fund balance, maybe maybe even
[1:20:53] produce a little bit
[1:20:55] surplus because our expenses aren't
[1:20:56] growing. So,
[1:20:58] essentially, that 3% can uh save the day
[1:21:01] if we have no inflationary pressure and
[1:21:04] no requests, no one-time requests, no um
[1:21:09] uh ongoing uh level of service requests.
[1:21:12] So,
[1:21:13] that that gives me some, you know,
[1:21:15] context, right? Our bookend to this
[1:21:16] analysis to say, well, is that possible?
[1:21:19] Do we really think that we could keep
[1:21:21] our expenses that that controlled? In
[1:21:24] the short term, maybe, right? When we
[1:21:25] look at budgeting, we can say, "Hey,
[1:21:27] this year we have to tighten our belt.
[1:21:29] We're not going to have any new growth
[1:21:31] in an expense." But, over 5 years, is
[1:21:34] that is that possible? And, you know, my thought is no, that would not be
[1:21:38] possible to to try to achieve that.
[1:21:41] So, let's turn those back on.
[1:21:43] They're okay, let's keep our inflation.
[1:21:45] We have some trouble there. Uh what if
[1:21:48] we assume that 6% growth in sales tax
[1:21:51] revenue? Say, "Okay, we're going to rely on that, what we
[1:21:56] experienced in the past, and put that 6%
[1:21:59] growth back in there."
[1:22:00] you can see it helps, right? That
[1:22:02] is
[1:22:03] uh putting us in a better position,
[1:22:06] meaning that our negative is not as
[1:22:08] negative as before.
[1:22:10] Um
[1:22:11] but that that's not enough, either,
[1:22:14] right? So,
[1:22:15] at the end of the day, um we're not telling you what you have to
[1:22:19] do, or um
[1:22:21] uh you know, we can't force
[1:22:22] municipalities to to to make change.
[1:22:24] But, what it does help me understand is
[1:22:27] uh what we need to do relative to all of
[1:22:29] the tools that we have in front of us.
[1:22:31] So, efficiency, yes, we need to do we
[1:22:34] need to look at efficiency and how do we
[1:22:35] control our expenditure increase?
[1:22:38] Looking at economic development and pro-
[1:22:41] promoting that as a potential tool
[1:22:42] because that generates sales tax
[1:22:44] revenues that the general fund relies
[1:22:46] on. So, yes, we need to do that.
[1:22:49] But even with sales tax revenue growth
[1:22:52] and inflation, we still have some some
[1:22:54] substantial pressure. So, it leads me
[1:22:57] back to that discussion of property tax
[1:22:59] and what sort of policy do we we put in
[1:23:01] place
[1:23:02] to actively manipulate that revenue
[1:23:05] stream.
[1:23:06] Recognizing that it's not the lion's
[1:23:08] share of your revenue, right? We're
[1:23:09] talking about controlling a portion of
[1:23:12] your revenue stream that is a smaller
[1:23:14] percentage of the overall total. So, if
[1:23:18] we were to try to mitigate this funding
[1:23:20] gap with property tax alone, we would be
[1:23:22] talking about
[1:23:23] ginormous percentages, right? And that's
[1:23:26] not what we're what we're recommending
[1:23:28] here. What we're looking at is saying,
[1:23:29] "How do we
[1:23:30] think about this on an annual basis and
[1:23:32] take
[1:23:33] a proactive approach?"
[1:23:35] I also wanted to just show you that the
[1:23:37] model is interactive like that, right?
[1:23:40] We can go through in here and make
[1:23:42] assumptions, change those assumptions,
[1:23:44] see what happens so that we can isolate
[1:23:47] um
[1:23:48] what do we want to do? What are the
[1:23:49] policy decisions we want to make as a
[1:23:51] council as we look toward the future.
[1:23:55] So, jumping back here,
[1:23:57] uh
[1:24:00] Again, what we want to do and what we're
[1:24:02] recommending is taking that proactive
[1:24:04] approach relative to your model, your
[1:24:07] general fund, and the revenue streams
[1:24:09] within that model.
[1:24:11] Bonding may be an option, right? As we
[1:24:14] look at one-time expenses,
[1:24:16] uh maintaining a level of service from a
[1:24:17] capital perspective, that you might use
[1:24:20] that tool strategically relative to
[1:24:23] amortizing cost over a longer period of
[1:24:25] time rather than having that upfront
[1:24:27] cost that that has to have tax policy
[1:24:30] mitigate that. So, looking at bonding um
[1:24:34] in reality the general fund analysis
[1:24:37] didn't have a huge amount of um
[1:24:39] one-time capital investment, but there could be components of that that
[1:24:43] could be uh
[1:24:45] utilize bonding.
[1:24:47] And then I highlighted this last in our
[1:24:48] last discussion, but looking at all
[1:24:51] alternative revenue uh resources
[1:24:54] uh so, all of your fee uh uh the fee
[1:24:57] that you assess should be backed up with
[1:24:59] studies and those should be updated on a
[1:25:01] regular basis.
[1:25:03] New revenue sources the model does
[1:25:04] include an an
[1:25:06] uh an assumption relative to the
[1:25:07] transportation utility fee
[1:25:09] uh starting at 250,000 growing to
[1:25:12] 500,000. But, even with that you'd see
[1:25:14] if we still have a need, right? So, it's that proactive approach the general
[1:25:19] fund that that is our big takeaway and
[1:25:22] what we're recommending is is keeping on
[1:25:24] top of the fund.
[1:25:26] We also wanted to highlight a community
[1:25:28] that has done this approach. Um so, uh
[1:25:33] you're not the first to look at the
[1:25:34] general fund from this perspective nor
[1:25:36] will you be the last, but you are
[1:25:38] um one of uh a few communities across
[1:25:41] the state that are proactively
[1:25:43] addressing the general fund.
[1:25:45] West Valley City uh this year adopted a
[1:25:48] policy based on this type of evaluation
[1:25:51] and analysis that essentially ensures
[1:25:54] that uh there's a framework to take
[1:25:57] action. Now, it's non-binding, so their
[1:25:58] resolution doesn't bind future councils,
[1:26:01] but it establishes a framework for them
[1:26:03] to continue to perpetuate that that
[1:26:05] action.
[1:26:06] Essentially, their tax policy is is governed by
[1:26:11] inflation indices that they say we're
[1:26:13] going to adjust our uh property tax rate
[1:26:17] uh based on those indices, whichever
[1:26:19] they feel is appropriate. They have some
[1:26:21] guardrails in there. They're um
[1:26:24] uh resolution that uh suggests uh
[1:26:28] maximums that that they uh don't allow
[1:26:31] their property tax levy to increase uh
[1:26:33] at a certain percentage.
[1:26:35] Um it preserves the discretion of the
[1:26:36] council, so it it doesn't take away any
[1:26:38] of that. Um and it has requirements
[1:26:41] relative to truth in taxation. Yes. MCI
[1:26:44] That's municipal cost index.
[1:26:46] Uh and the consumer price index. So,
[1:26:49] those are two standard uh indices that
[1:26:51] are utilized to capture inflation
[1:26:54] changes. Those are national statistics.
[1:26:57] There are other indices that I've seen
[1:26:58] used. Um there's a Western Region CPI
[1:27:01] consumer price index that uh captures
[1:27:03] more of
[1:27:04] uh Intermountain states, and that does
[1:27:07] differ um
[1:27:08] compared to a national CPI.
[1:27:11] But, the concept here is saying, "Let's
[1:27:13] establish a resolution or policy that
[1:27:16] our tax rate will adjust to account for
[1:27:18] inflation at a minimum." And that's
[1:27:20] again what we're trying to look at,
[1:27:22] right? Is there's this pressure of
[1:27:23] inflation
[1:27:25] on your general fund that is not
[1:27:27] addressed in the truth in taxation
[1:27:30] process in your certified tax rate
[1:27:31] calculation.
[1:27:32] So, uh West Valley City uh opted to
[1:27:35] remedy that by creating this resolution,
[1:27:37] and others are exploring that. Uh we've
[1:27:40] seen it more commonly on utility rates
[1:27:43] uh because there's a little bit of you
[1:27:45] know, less political pressure
[1:27:47] essentially on those and and a direct
[1:27:49] connection between revenue and expense,
[1:27:51] but
[1:27:52] um
[1:27:53] but we're seeing now that spillover
[1:27:55] general fund elements.
[1:27:57] Already.
[1:27:59] Uh uh
[1:28:00] I did have have some additional uh
[1:28:02] information here relative to um
[1:28:05] resolution language and those caps. So,
[1:28:07] if the CPI increases less than 3%, the
[1:28:10] adjust adjustment shall be limited to
[1:28:12] the actual CPI percentage. So it says
[1:28:15] if we only have one account
[1:28:17] and if we have a 3% target every year,
[1:28:20] let's adopt the lower of that. But we're
[1:28:22] capping it at that 3%.
[1:28:25] That can be dangerous, right? Because in
[1:28:27] some years we've experienced
[1:28:30] a 20% inflationary pressure.
[1:28:33] Sometimes that's just on a component of
[1:28:35] expense like construction costs. So I
[1:28:37] saw those indices at a much higher rate.
[1:28:40] But there's ways to massage that, right?
[1:28:42] In the resolution to ensure that there's
[1:28:44] guardrails on that.
[1:28:46] Preserve the intent while allowing
[1:28:49] continued dialogue as it relates to
[1:28:51] truth and taxation.
[1:28:54] All righty.
[1:28:55] Uh
[1:28:56] Try to get through that question.
[1:28:58] >> Yes. You go back to the first graph that if we did not do any changes
[1:29:04] that one.
[1:29:06] All right. I just want to point out this
[1:29:08] is something I
[1:29:09] thinking a lot about this as we've
[1:29:11] talked about some of these items because
[1:29:13] when I was on the first on the city
[1:29:15] council, I was 36 years old.
[1:29:18] And I'm not 36 anymore.
[1:29:21] Um
[1:29:21] but but it seemed like when we would see
[1:29:24] this happen, we thought oh this is going
[1:29:25] to happen
[1:29:27] later. Later later. And as I look at
[1:29:29] this council, there are at least four of
[1:29:32] us
[1:29:33] who will be on the city council when
[1:29:36] those dip below into the negative.
[1:29:41] We don't do anything. I just wanted to
[1:29:43] point that out. That that that the time
[1:29:46] is
[1:29:47] I think the time's come where we'll be
[1:29:49] fast approaching where where we're we're
[1:29:52] going to be involved in a in in some
[1:29:54] pretty tough decisions. And so
[1:29:57] anyway, I just wanted to make
[1:29:59] everybody's day brighter that way.
[1:30:02] >> So oh go ahead.
[1:30:03] >> Well, I can also just to me the big
[1:30:06] takeaway is
[1:30:07] um
[1:30:11] This is This is a dynamic model. We are
[1:30:13] trying to like look into the future. I
[1:30:15] get that we don't have a perfect crystal
[1:30:16] ball. But, what I am seeing is in order
[1:30:19] to be sustainable over time, we need a
[1:30:23] multi-pronged approach, not only in any
[1:30:26] given year to multiple uh
[1:30:29] sources, but also over time each and
[1:30:32] every year should look at this.
[1:30:35] Uh
[1:30:36] so, I think that the solution is
[1:30:41] multiyear and
[1:30:44] revenue, and you shouldn't turn a blind
[1:30:46] eye to any one revenue source or any one
[1:30:50] year.
[1:30:52] >> Yeah, I was in a discussion with uh
[1:30:54] water entity in Oregon.
[1:30:57] We're discussing efficiency and
[1:31:01] rates, and uh the the challenges
[1:31:04] associated with that. And
[1:31:05] the element that we discussed and and
[1:31:08] tried to bring home is municipalities
[1:31:10] are not like private entities where if
[1:31:12] we
[1:31:13] uh increase efficiency by reducing
[1:31:15] internal cost, that we increase
[1:31:18] profitability and therefore benefit the
[1:31:19] shareholder. Right? It doesn't work that
[1:31:21] way for a municipality or local
[1:31:23] government. When we talk about
[1:31:25] efficiency or reducing cost, in most
[1:31:28] cases what that means is level of
[1:31:30] service change. And that is our
[1:31:32] business, right? We provide a service to
[1:31:35] uh our residents, which is why I love
[1:31:38] local government. Of all our government
[1:31:39] structures, local government is the best
[1:31:41] to me because that's where the rubber
[1:31:43] hits the road. We provide a service. If
[1:31:45] we reduce cost and that compromises our
[1:31:48] level of service, then that impacts me
[1:31:50] as a resident. I lose something. I don't
[1:31:53] gain something like as if I were a
[1:31:55] shareholder, right? Um
[1:31:57] I know I could perceive it as a gain in
[1:31:59] that I my property tax or my sales tax
[1:32:01] doesn't go up, but I lose that level of
[1:32:04] service. So,
[1:32:05] uh that multi-pronged approach is very
[1:32:07] beneficial because we need to evaluate
[1:32:09] that level of service.
[1:32:11] Uh what are our expenditure growth
[1:32:13] rates? What does that look like? And how
[1:32:15] do we continue to provide that level of
[1:32:17] service
[1:32:18] um while still promoting efficiency and
[1:32:21] managing
[1:32:22] revenue resources and
[1:32:24] uh changing those as necessary, those
[1:32:26] that we can
[1:32:27] control
[1:32:30] >> And that's kind of my question. So,
[1:32:33] um in the private sector
[1:32:35] um and I'll just say from, you know, a
[1:32:37] company that my husband worked for,
[1:32:39] Novell,
[1:32:40] um Ray Noorda always had this formula,
[1:32:43] right? And every so often he had to do a
[1:32:45] RIF, reduction of forces,
[1:32:47] keep the profitability
[1:32:49] rate.
[1:32:51] So, and then we heard Representative
[1:32:53] Peterson talk about the direction from
[1:32:55] the governor to reduce all the budgets
[1:32:57] by 5%. So, help me understand how on a
[1:33:02] municipal level
[1:33:03] um
[1:33:05] you implement both of those in your
[1:33:07] projection
[1:33:08] or a a form of those in your projection
[1:33:11] model.
[1:33:12] >> Yeah, so we we're not addressing that
[1:33:15] necessarily um although we can. So, we
[1:33:17] can say, "Okay, let's look at those
[1:33:19] types of directives and say
[1:33:21] um
[1:33:22] uh on a on a big scale, right? In those
[1:33:25] general assumptions that I looked at,
[1:33:27] instead of 10% growth and or or 3%
[1:33:31] growth in our in our budget, let's put
[1:33:33] in -5% in there and see what happens.
[1:33:36] Does that change anything?
[1:33:38] But it I I think the important question
[1:33:41] is that that's easy to do in an Excel
[1:33:43] model, right? I can put a -5 in place of
[1:33:46] a 3% growth and say, "Well, we go. Well,
[1:33:48] look, this is how we do that."
[1:33:50] But the reality is in order to achieve
[1:33:52] that, you as a council actually have to
[1:33:54] say, "Okay, where are we going to cut
[1:33:57] the services so that we can achieve that
[1:34:00] assumption that I just plugged into this
[1:34:02] model?
[1:34:03] And most of the time when we have that
[1:34:05] discussion is when I bring in a model
[1:34:06] like this and say, "Okay, yeah, that's
[1:34:08] easy to plug and play.
[1:34:10] But what expense line items when I if I
[1:34:13] go back to this model
[1:34:15] and I say, "Okay,
[1:34:17] let's look at
[1:34:19] all of these buckets here and now expand
[1:34:22] all of those and say, 'Okay, we've got
[1:34:24] actually a lot of things we're doing in
[1:34:26] here in these in these categories, which
[1:34:29] ones are we going to actually cut
[1:34:32] um services out of? You know, what
[1:34:36] where does that that savings come from?
[1:34:39] So, um
[1:34:40] again, we can we can we can make the
[1:34:42] assumptions change, but it comes back to
[1:34:46] you as a legislative body, what services
[1:34:48] do we
[1:34:49] from the equation to to achieve that
[1:34:51] objective?
[1:34:52] >> And and okay, just to kind of the the counterpoint. That's cool. There's
[1:34:57] services and there's also benefits.
[1:35:00] So, and I'm just going to say something
[1:35:02] that's um kind of unique to municipal as
[1:35:06] um
[1:35:07] the
[1:35:09] 980 work.
[1:35:10] >> Okay.
[1:35:11] >> So,
[1:35:12] day off every couple weeks. So, when in
[1:35:15] 2009
[1:35:17] >> 2008
[1:35:18] >> I remember there was this
[1:35:20] we are in a recession, a deep recession
[1:35:22] that the city was experiencing. We don't
[1:35:24] want to lay people off, so we're going
[1:35:26] to roll off some of these other
[1:35:30] benefits and not replace them with
[1:35:32] people after through attrition to kind
[1:35:34] of bring our salaries back into our new
[1:35:37] budget that we have because of the
[1:35:38] recession. So, I guess my my question
[1:35:42] is, how often or how should we
[1:35:46] anticipate that type of decision also or
[1:35:50] can we? How does that work with this
[1:35:52] model that you've talked about? Can we
[1:35:54] preemptively look at something like that
[1:35:56] if we're
[1:35:57] um concerned? Cuz frankly, I'm
[1:35:59] concerned. Affordability for our
[1:36:01] residents is very difficult right now.
[1:36:04] So, this uh you know, you're you're
[1:36:06] saying, "Oh, it's 3%." But for seniors
[1:36:09] who call me,
[1:36:11] that's
[1:36:11] >> Enough.
[1:36:11] >> You know.
[1:36:12] >> Yeah.
[1:36:13] >> So, help me have that discussion.
[1:36:14] >> Yes. That's a great uh comment and the
[1:36:17] benefit of the model. To say, as the
[1:36:20] council looks at some of those
[1:36:22] initiatives, we can evaluate the impact.
[1:36:25] Say,
[1:36:26] what happens if we assume that we were
[1:36:28] uh not necessarily remove a level of
[1:36:30] service, but
[1:36:31] uh let it expire. Let you know, a
[1:36:34] benefit potentially. And so, we can
[1:36:36] measure the magnitude of that and then
[1:36:39] uh evaluate the impacts on that that
[1:36:42] graph that we were just looking at. And
[1:36:43] say, "Okay, how does that help us? Does
[1:36:45] it um change our uh perspective at all?"
[1:36:49] Uh again, it goes back to what Brent
[1:36:51] said is that will likely be needed as
[1:36:53] well. So, efficiency is not removed from
[1:36:56] this discussion that the city will
[1:36:57] continue to have to do that because
[1:37:00] again, the the magnitude here
[1:37:03] cannot be sustained without addressing
[1:37:06] all of that. Efficiency, revenue,
[1:37:09] uh economic development, all of that has
[1:37:11] to
[1:37:12] >> to say, I mean, I went through this. I
[1:37:13] worked for a company and we had this
[1:37:15] great big meeting. Basically, in this
[1:37:17] meeting, it was just this raw raw
[1:37:19] cheerleader kind of meeting. And in the
[1:37:21] meeting, they said, "We're taking away
[1:37:23] your automatic cola." We used to get a
[1:37:24] bump in our check every time a CPI went
[1:37:26] up, right? But, you still have a job.
[1:37:30] So, this is good.
[1:37:31] >> Yeah.
[1:37:31] >> You know? And I remember sitting there
[1:37:33] going, "Did they really just say that to
[1:37:34] me?" And I'm supposed to be happy right
[1:37:36] now cuz they've taken away my cola. So,
[1:37:39] I guess that's the question. How When at
[1:37:42] what point do you decide to add that
[1:37:44] type of
[1:37:46] hard discussion to models like
[1:37:49] >> I think as as Bren indicated, it will be
[1:37:51] on an annual basis that you'll be
[1:37:53] looking at this
[1:37:54] uh in order to address these types of
[1:37:56] issues, it's it's a multi-year
[1:37:59] multi-pronged approach. Uh and all of
[1:38:02] that is on the table to ensure that uh
[1:38:04] you can continue to provide service.
[1:38:06] Because uh you know
[1:38:08] municipalities are not in the business
[1:38:10] of going out of business, right? So, the
[1:38:12] service that you provide has to
[1:38:15] continue. And there are other factors
[1:38:17] that influence that, um you know, market
[1:38:20] factors relative to
[1:38:22] um retaining employees.
[1:38:24] Um in some years it's easy to make those
[1:38:26] types of decision to say, "Hey, we're
[1:38:28] not going to provide these benefits that
[1:38:30] you've become accustomed to because
[1:38:33] everybody's losing those benefits."
[1:38:35] Whereas in a year where uh the market uh
[1:38:38] supports those types of benefits and you
[1:38:40] say, "Hey, we're going to remove that."
[1:38:41] You're going to lose employees and you
[1:38:43] will not be able to provide the service.
[1:38:45] So, it's not an easy answer, I guess,
[1:38:48] what I'm giving. It's just we have to
[1:38:49] continue to watch that and all of those
[1:38:51] solutions that you bring up need to be
[1:38:53] on the table in this model.
[1:38:56] >> And I guess that's what I'm trying to do
[1:38:57] is publicly say, "These are some of the
[1:38:59] options." And
[1:39:01] there some of the decisions are super
[1:39:02] hard. Well, they all are, right?
[1:39:04] >> But we have a responsibility to examine
[1:39:06] the all the options.
[1:39:07] >> Yes.
[1:39:08] >> I think we went through that a few years
[1:39:10] ago
[1:39:12] where
[1:39:13] economy was tough.
[1:39:14] And some of those
[1:39:16] benefits
[1:39:18] raises, those kind of things had to be
[1:39:20] held back and that those aren't that was
[1:39:22] before my time, but I heard about it.
[1:39:24] Um and those were hard decisions to
[1:39:27] make.
[1:39:28] I feel like that
[1:39:32] that's part of our annual budgeting
[1:39:33] process. Though, I feel like exec staff
[1:39:36] looks really hard at those those
[1:39:38] elements, those things.
[1:39:40] And um
[1:39:42] you know, it can you know, continual
[1:39:43] will continue to do that
[1:39:45] forward. But, yeah, I think that's a
[1:39:48] >> Cuz we know they're doing
[1:39:49] >> a part of our responsibility.
[1:39:51] >> It's Chris. And I just appreciate the
[1:39:53] opportunity that there is a tool.
[1:39:55] There's a way to analyze each of these
[1:39:57] mechanisms uh, in the theoretical Excel
[1:40:01] rather than have to in the economic of
[1:40:04] oh, we're not sure, so let's
[1:40:06] make it a you know, some challenge with
[1:40:09] employees or services or or, uh,
[1:40:12] you know, citizens in their in their
[1:40:14] monthly utility bill, whatever it is.
[1:40:17] So, this this tool is going to be very
[1:40:19] helpful as we move forward in analyzing
[1:40:22] what we can and need to do to
[1:40:25] effectively help our city be the best it
[1:40:28] can be with the most efficient use of
[1:40:31] the tax funds that are sacred funds that
[1:40:34] we have we have a, you know, fiduciary
[1:40:36] responsibility to maintain.
[1:40:38] >> Yes, and and I think that's a great
[1:40:40] point is that is the objective of the
[1:40:42] model is to be proactive. But, as you,
[1:40:45] um, as legislators look at how to be
[1:40:47] efficient, we can then model that and
[1:40:49] help you with data. So, here's what
[1:40:51] happens if we do that. And, uh, that
[1:40:54] should help inform that that policy
[1:40:56] decision.
[1:40:57] Uh, the entities that I do this this
[1:40:59] work with, um, we are often updating
[1:41:02] them on an annual basis.
[1:41:04] Uh, it's very efficient, uh, low-cost
[1:41:06] way to, uh, provide data.
[1:41:10] Um, and then we'll come back in and say,
[1:41:12] "Okay, here's what we have. Here's what
[1:41:14] the model looks like based on these
[1:41:15] assumptions." And,
[1:41:16] uh, it creates informed decision making.
[1:41:20] >> And now that we have now that we have
[1:41:22] this, um, sort of started, and uh, we
[1:41:26] can bring this back to you earlier in
[1:41:28] our budget process like
[1:41:29] our next retreat and so that you so that
[1:41:32] we can use this as a tool for you to
[1:41:35] help us set the the the goals, the the
[1:41:39] stage, the guardrails for future budget
[1:41:44] processes.
[1:41:46] >> Fred, can I say a few things?
[1:41:50] >> Please.
[1:41:52] >> Um
[1:41:53] so it again, as as Fred has stated, it's
[1:41:57] easy for us to clickety-click in the
[1:41:58] model and say, "Oh, reduce expenses by
[1:42:00] 5%." And yes, that needs to be explored,
[1:42:03] but um
[1:42:05] I remember
[1:42:06] several years ago,
[1:42:08] uh with other council members seated, I
[1:42:11] can't remember Karen whether you were on
[1:42:12] the council then or not, but
[1:42:14] um you know, they they did start tossing
[1:42:17] out, "Well, what if we close the library
[1:42:18] one day a week?" Or what if we, right?
[1:42:20] And um just by way of reminder, I
[1:42:23] mentioned this um when we met, I think
[1:42:25] in January, that probably something on
[1:42:27] the order of magnitude of 65 to 75% of
[1:42:31] your costs are um personnel.
[1:42:33] And I don't know the percentage of that.
[1:42:36] I don't I'm I'm glad the fire chief and
[1:42:37] police chief can't kick me under the
[1:42:39] table, but my guess is a meaningful
[1:42:43] uh amount of that personnel is police
[1:42:45] and fire.
[1:42:46] So, I don't want anyone to, you know,
[1:42:48] "Oh, we'll we'll just be efficient."
[1:42:50] Well, efficient means less people.
[1:42:54] I mean, if you really want to impact
[1:42:56] your budget, efficient means less
[1:42:58] people.
[1:42:59] And there, you know, I mean, you can do
[1:43:01] salary surveys, and there's a point at
[1:43:03] which um if you seek to try to keep salaries
[1:43:07] low enough, I mean, we we saw it, right?
[1:43:10] I mean, I I saw police officers fleeing
[1:43:12] from city to city as cities were trying
[1:43:14] to, you know, ramp up their um you know, what they could pay their
[1:43:18] police officers, because you have to be
[1:43:20] competitive. So, I just want there to be
[1:43:23] some reality around those discussions of
[1:43:25] what it means and looks like to be
[1:43:28] efficient. So, if you have, you know, I
[1:43:31] am just
[1:43:32] wildly making up numbers. You may have
[1:43:34] 10 times as many as you have 100 police
[1:43:36] officers a day and you find we have to
[1:43:39] cut that by five, well, cases aren't
[1:43:41] going to get done as quickly, responses
[1:43:44] aren't going to be done as quickly. So,
[1:43:47] there are real-life consequences to what
[1:43:50] those efficiencies mean.
[1:43:52] You know, fewer people aren't going to
[1:43:54] be able to do the same work. And I'm not
[1:43:57] saying it doesn't mean you shouldn't
[1:43:58] tighten your belt. I feel I feel like
[1:44:00] the city has been
[1:44:02] very good about that historically. I
[1:44:04] mean, when you think back
[1:44:06] at that graph that
[1:44:08] picture that Fred showed us with the
[1:44:09] graphic of your sale Excuse me, your
[1:44:12] property taxes used to be 17%
[1:44:16] of your constituents' tax payment. It's
[1:44:19] now was it nine, Fred, or seven?
[1:44:21] Something low.
[1:44:23] So, I look at that and say, "Okay,
[1:44:25] Orem's one that keeps giving and
[1:44:27] tightening and giving and giving and
[1:44:29] tightening different one else. So, your
[1:44:32] residents aren't seeing any
[1:44:35] benefit from you know, tax savings
[1:44:38] because others are raising theirs. It
[1:44:39] doesn't mean that's why you should raise
[1:44:41] yours. I just want you to be aware that
[1:44:44] others have noticed the need to do that
[1:44:46] so that they can keep providing that
[1:44:48] level of service. It does need to be a
[1:44:50] comprehensive
[1:44:52] view, but that you know, that efficiency
[1:44:56] and working with less people does come
[1:44:59] with some
[1:45:02] service-oriented costs.
[1:45:06] Oh, one other thing. In addition to West
[1:45:08] Valley, I know another city that I
[1:45:11] contacted just this morning as I was
[1:45:12] thinking about Ogden has um
[1:45:14] They don't have it done as an ordinance.
[1:45:16] Their council and mayor have official
[1:45:20] financial policies that they adopt. And
[1:45:23] in their policies, I can get a
[1:45:25] I was trying to look at on my phone when
[1:45:27] they just sent me a picture and then I
[1:45:28] looked at it and it was so teeny I
[1:45:29] couldn't see it. But I can get a copy of
[1:45:31] that so you can see what they do, but
[1:45:32] they seek to to do the same thing.
[1:45:34] Address
[1:45:36] you know, the the need to raise taxes.
[1:45:39] You know, they discuss it I think every
[1:45:40] year and you know, determine whether
[1:45:43] they need to do that but they try to tie
[1:45:45] it to you know, sort of keeping up with
[1:45:48] inflation cuz their costs are going up.
[1:45:54] » All right. Thank you Council. Any other
[1:45:56] questions, thoughts
[1:45:58] on this?
[1:46:01] I just really appreciate the work that
[1:46:03] you do at LRB and helping educate us and
[1:46:05] helping us look and explore ways that we
[1:46:06] can do this in the most fair and
[1:46:08] efficient way possible while still
[1:46:09] maintaining our service. So thank you
[1:46:10] for that.
[1:46:11] >> Thank you.
[1:46:14] » All right.
[1:46:16] Thank you Laura. It's good to see you.
[1:46:18] Thanks Fred. It's good to see you as
[1:46:19] well.
[1:46:20] Appreciate your presentation.
[1:46:23] All right, next item on our agenda is
[1:46:26] heart of downtown. I'll turn the time
[1:46:28] over to Gary McGinn, our community
[1:46:29] development director for 15 minutes.
[1:46:33] >> Hey, I'm so excited to follow Fred and
[1:46:35] Laura.
[1:46:37] And
[1:46:38] here to ask for about 50 million
[1:46:40] dollars.
[1:46:42] And in the spirit of what they've done,
[1:46:44] I'll try to put all of these projects
[1:46:46] in terms of squad cars and fire trucks.
[1:46:51] This project is five fire trucks. This
[1:46:53] project's
[1:46:54] >> Can I go now?
[1:46:56] >> one fire truck and a squad car. So
[1:47:00] I'll help us keep it in
[1:47:02] So the heart of downtown
[1:47:05] was an idea that the council had a
[1:47:08] couple of years ago
[1:47:10] to where in our community can we do
[1:47:14] something and look at and create a
[1:47:16] district and create an arts and
[1:47:20] entertainment district that had
[1:47:21] recreation, things for families of all
[1:47:24] sizes and types and things that could
[1:47:27] bring people into the community to look
[1:47:30] at. And so, uh
[1:47:32] we
[1:47:34] worked with a consultant for the heart
[1:47:36] of downtown project and it is centered
[1:47:38] around
[1:47:39] uh the Sierra Park and the uh Sierra
[1:47:45] Theater and that area.
[1:47:48] Uh even though we did look at across
[1:47:51] State Street to the west over to Orin
[1:47:54] Boulevard and looked at those areas.
[1:47:57] They have now come back and presented uh
[1:48:00] a pretty
[1:48:01] uh detailed
[1:48:04] and a 99%
[1:48:06] draft to you back in January
[1:48:10] uh of this year and then based on the
[1:48:13] feedback that they've gotten
[1:48:15] uh have come back with this. And just a
[1:48:17] reminder
[1:48:19] uh when they started the program, they uh met with council members, they
[1:48:24] had a steering committee, they met with
[1:48:27] uh
[1:48:27] numerous people in the community,
[1:48:29] business owners, residents,
[1:48:31] uh members of our boards and commissions
[1:48:34] and went through this process. And so,
[1:48:38] this is the primary study area that we
[1:48:40] really ended up in and this is a graphic
[1:48:43] showing
[1:48:45] uh the area uh
[1:48:47] around Sierra where the majority of
[1:48:51] things
[1:48:52] that they envision we could do to create
[1:48:55] this arts and entertainment district.
[1:48:58] And they have put it into phases and
[1:49:02] we'll go look at the phases. Now, the
[1:49:04] phases don't mean, "Oh, we need to do
[1:49:07] this
[1:49:08] phase one and do everything and then go
[1:49:10] to phase two and do everything." What
[1:49:14] they've done is by phases it's more of
[1:49:17] uh in their estimation logical groupings
[1:49:20] of projects that might make sense
[1:49:23] uh to be done together or or might have
[1:49:27] some sort of synergy
[1:49:29] uh as a part of them. And so,
[1:49:33] with that, I'll go through the different
[1:49:35] phases that they have listed. And the
[1:49:38] document has, as we saw before,
[1:49:41] uh artistic uh I mean uh design
[1:49:44] guidelines.
[1:49:45] It has uh
[1:49:48] treatments for streets in the area and
[1:49:50] different things like that.
[1:49:52] So, the first area is they call it the
[1:49:55] festival street enhancements. That's
[1:49:57] that 720 South in between the park on
[1:50:01] the north and the SCERA uh theater to
[1:50:04] the south. And here's a kind of a more
[1:50:09] uh detailed graphic of what that could
[1:50:12] possibly be.
[1:50:13] Or that street could be turned into a
[1:50:17] festival street where you can have
[1:50:19] people come. It shows you a food trucks,
[1:50:21] activities, kind of a farmers market
[1:50:25] uh thing going on there. And that's
[1:50:28] something that could be done for 0.75
[1:50:31] fire trucks.
[1:50:34] Hold.
[1:50:37] And and and the idea is to more
[1:50:41] routinely being being able to bring
[1:50:43] people into that area.
[1:50:47] Uh
[1:50:47] it's and the idea behind this study
[1:50:49] wasn't that SCERA Park's deficient in
[1:50:52] any way. By no means is that the
[1:50:55] message. It's a great park or does it
[1:50:57] mean what's happening at the SCERA is
[1:51:00] deficient. It's how can we leverage what
[1:51:03] they're already doing to enhance
[1:51:06] uh things in the community. So, that was
[1:51:09] uh their phase one
[1:51:11] uh
[1:51:12] talking about that Festival Street, then
[1:51:15] you have this area and you can see the
[1:51:17] pool that that's existing there and they
[1:51:20] call this the core experience area. And
[1:51:23] so in the core experience area
[1:51:25] uh probably the premier thing in that is
[1:51:29] you can see the ice ribbon.
[1:51:32] And when we went on our summer tour, we
[1:51:34] went and looked at the ice ribbon in
[1:51:37] Airman.
[1:51:38] And looked at that and what that could
[1:51:42] possibly do. So it's something that can
[1:51:45] work in the wintertime. You see some of
[1:51:49] the cabanas there bringing people in,
[1:51:53] families
[1:51:54] participating,
[1:51:56] parents, grandparents sitting in the
[1:51:58] cabana, that's where I will be
[1:52:00] while people are out ice skating. In the
[1:52:03] summer, it can be
[1:52:06] roller skating,
[1:52:07] rollerblading,
[1:52:09] that type of thing. So that's one of the
[1:52:11] enhancements in there that can begin to
[1:52:14] make this area a four-season area. The
[1:52:17] pool closes in the fall, opens up in the
[1:52:21] spring. This can bring more activity to
[1:52:24] that whole area year-round. Uh
[1:52:28] now
[1:52:30] they talk about everyday activation.
[1:52:33] And in the everyday activate Oops,
[1:52:36] sorry.
[1:52:37] Every everyday activation, what they're
[1:52:39] talking about is if you look
[1:52:42] uh
[1:52:43] Oh, that doesn't show up. Mine is green,
[1:52:46] this one's red. Green shows up well
[1:52:48] everywhere. Uh
[1:52:50] you can see what they have here is a
[1:52:54] potentially someday a parking structure
[1:52:57] that would feed and support things that
[1:52:59] are going on here.
[1:53:01] One of the uh
[1:53:03] and support what's happening at Sarah.
[1:53:05] This is a private property here, you can
[1:53:07] see our property line. One of the things
[1:53:10] that they've talked about in this plan
[1:53:11] that's a need in our community is a
[1:53:16] boutique hotel.
[1:53:18] Or
[1:53:20] more hotel
[1:53:22] space
[1:53:23] that's unique that can bring people in
[1:53:26] to the center of the city
[1:53:28] to come and participate. So, in
[1:53:32] these phase what this is about is
[1:53:34] bringing more people year-round
[1:53:37] to this area.
[1:53:40] >> So, my question is, they're saying that
[1:53:41] we need that.
[1:53:43] Are they Is that based on the the
[1:53:46] plan? Like this type of plan has that
[1:53:49] >> Yes.
[1:53:50] >> amenity or and or based on Orem needing
[1:53:55] more hotels?
[1:53:56] >> Orem needing some more
[1:53:59] hotel space. They think we need it. We
[1:54:02] have a need for that. And more boutique,
[1:54:05] not necessarily
[1:54:08] you know,
[1:54:09] a
[1:54:10] entry-level
[1:54:12] motel, things like that, but something
[1:54:14] that people would come in and maybe
[1:54:17] they're staying
[1:54:19] here because they come in six times a
[1:54:21] year for a BYU football game. And it's a
[1:54:24] little nicer. Maybe there's
[1:54:28] a large activity going on in the park.
[1:54:32] The concert series. People come in and
[1:54:35] stay for that.
[1:54:37] Those types of things. They see it being
[1:54:40] here.
[1:54:41] Not only do we have a need, but they see
[1:54:44] it here as
[1:54:46] a plan like this would really drive this
[1:54:48] and make this successful in in this
[1:54:51] location.
[1:54:53] >> And every every day you have new
[1:54:55] customers coming to town.
[1:54:57] >> Yeah.
[1:54:57] >> So, it helps the activation part of
[1:54:59] that.
[1:54:59] >> And you have new people coming into
[1:55:01] town, uh experiences, a lot of the
[1:55:03] exciting things uh Bryce is doing
[1:55:07] uh out there with parks and recreation
[1:55:09] trying to get uh
[1:55:12] what do we call it?
[1:55:14] You got a term?
[1:55:15] >> DMO.
[1:55:16] >> Uh DMO, destination market.
[1:55:18] >> Yeah, that activities, yeah.
[1:55:19] >> Yeah.
[1:55:20] Where people would come in, whether
[1:55:22] that's a large race or something like
[1:55:24] that that's happening here. That with
[1:55:27] our Festival Street, other things we
[1:55:29] have going on in the park, maybe the
[1:55:31] finish line is there.
[1:55:33] And that's a big draw. And the bigger
[1:55:35] they are, they tend to bring uh family,
[1:55:38] they tend to stay uh several days. So,
[1:55:42] it's this type of thing that comes in.
[1:55:44] Now, phase three
[1:55:46] uh again, talking about this, a lot of
[1:55:50] this would would require us to work with
[1:55:52] uh adjoining owners that own property
[1:55:56] and helping them see the vision of what
[1:55:59] could be possible here. And so, it's not
[1:56:01] that since we don't own the property, we
[1:56:03] just couldn't go out and and build a
[1:56:05] hotel for only five fire trucks. But
[1:56:11] >> The building on station one rebuilt
[1:56:12] right now.
[1:56:14] >> It would So, the next phase they talked
[1:56:17] about is uh creative capacity. One of
[1:56:20] the big ideas that they had here is in
[1:56:23] this area would be the ideas uh
[1:56:31] artists artisans and shops and a
[1:56:35] commercial aspect to it, but not only
[1:56:39] that, uh bringing people in where they
[1:56:42] could come to a market. And you know,
[1:56:44] we've heard ideas ranging from
[1:56:47] uh
[1:56:50] working with UVU and some sort of uh
[1:56:52] culinary uh test kitchen here where people come
[1:56:57] in and learn and oh, I've always wanted
[1:57:00] to try a restaurant. Let's see if it can
[1:57:02] work and they have a little space that
[1:57:03] they can do things. Two artists that
[1:57:06] come in and uh have a little shop. One
[1:57:09] of my favorite places that I've been to
[1:57:11] in a long time ever out in DC and I knew
[1:57:15] you were just there and I forgot to tell
[1:57:16] you about it, Brent. It's go to Old Town
[1:57:19] uh uh
[1:57:21] Alexandria Alexandria and the old uh
[1:57:25] Torpedo Factory and they've turned this
[1:57:28] into
[1:57:29] uh little shops where people are there
[1:57:32] with the market doing things. It's
[1:57:35] really a cool innovative things. Brings
[1:57:38] in lots of people. It fosters the arts.
[1:57:42] It fosters that type of vibe and
[1:57:45] creativity
[1:57:46] that is part of an arts and
[1:57:48] entertainment
[1:57:50] uh district with recreation fit in great
[1:57:54] in that creative capacity area. And this
[1:57:57] is kind of a vision of what that type of
[1:58:00] area could be.
[1:58:01] Uh there on the right, you could have uh
[1:58:05] some different shops and things going on
[1:58:09] with it. Uh
[1:58:11] so that this would fit in with kind of
[1:58:13] the design guidelines and things that
[1:58:15] they're telling us about. I got to
[1:58:17] hurry. Say phase five is the circulation
[1:58:20] and event capacity. Taking what we've
[1:58:23] already got here, things that are uh
[1:58:25] really good and adding to it. You see on
[1:58:28] the south there the uh
[1:58:31] rink or maybe the ice ribbon, but uh has
[1:58:35] that big field where we do the art show
[1:58:38] last year.
[1:58:40] Uh you can bring in food trucks.
[1:58:42] Designing this so it works better for
[1:58:44] those types of things. And probably my
[1:58:47] favorite, they have put in a carousel. I
[1:58:50] was in St. George's last weekend looked
[1:58:53] to their carousel. Unfortunately, it
[1:58:55] wasn't in operation. And if you look at
[1:58:57] the carousel,
[1:58:58] we better have a mammoth
[1:59:00] >> A woolly mammoth.
[1:59:00] >> in there.
[1:59:01] >> There's something
[1:59:02] >> And and I was telling people now we have
[1:59:04] success if 2-year-olds are getting in
[1:59:06] fights over who gets to be on the
[1:59:08] mammoth at the carousel. That's how
[1:59:10] we'll gauge success on this one.
[1:59:12] >> We even have a sports team to pay for
[1:59:14] it.
[1:59:15] >> Sponsor it.
[1:59:16] >> And officer there to keep the peace.
[1:59:19] >> We got the mammoth first.
[1:59:21] >> I have you saying wait, they can now pay
[1:59:24] for it.
[1:59:25] >> The carousel.
[1:59:26] >> We need sponsors. I'm talking
[1:59:28] >> The little mammoth.
[1:59:29] >> Of course.
[1:59:31] >> Yeah.
[1:59:31] >> Let's go.
[1:59:32] >> And then phase six is
[1:59:35] enhancing event capacity and flexibility
[1:59:38] out in this area. There are some things
[1:59:40] that we could do to
[1:59:43] enhance the area that allows
[1:59:47] the events to be more successful and
[1:59:50] smooth. As you can see in the top there,
[1:59:52] they they talk about relocating some
[1:59:54] parking there.
[1:59:56] That was
[1:59:57] kind of a big discussion that we had
[1:59:58] with them
[1:59:59] last time they were in.
[2:00:01] And
[2:00:02] >> Is that the existing parking lot that's
[2:00:04] there now? The one on the far top right?
[2:00:06] >> No, that's a new one.
[2:00:08] >> That's a new one.
[2:00:09] They
[2:00:10] >> The school still or is that somewhere
[2:00:12] else?
[2:00:12] >> And the school's just to the north.
[2:00:13] >> Yeah, okay, that helps.
[2:00:14] >> School's just to the north. And what
[2:00:16] this does if I go back here in this area
[2:00:22] right here
[2:00:23] used to be a big is a big parking lot
[2:00:27] and they've taken that out and relocated
[2:00:29] it up over here.
[2:00:30] >> That makes sense.
[2:00:31] >> And then this area becomes much more
[2:00:33] usable with the carousel and a mammoth.
[2:00:36] >> Oh.
[2:00:36] >> All by the way, for for half a fire
[2:00:39] truck.
[2:00:39] >> Perfect.
[2:00:41] >> Uh
[2:00:44] And then the last one is just
[2:00:47] connectivity.
[2:00:48] Uh connecting roads and like
[2:00:53] Tiger Tiger Way over here
[2:00:56] and putting in a divided road that people could go
[2:01:01] through or
[2:01:03] multi-use
[2:01:04] sidewalk. Getting working with UTA and
[2:01:08] others, making accessibility
[2:01:11] uh for the community into this place. Is
[2:01:14] that
[2:01:14] >> road? Is that the uh
[2:01:17] Orchard Drive in their apartment
[2:01:18] complex? The top where the parking lot
[2:01:21] goes all the way to State Street?
[2:01:22] >> Yeah.
[2:01:23] >> Is that where it is?
[2:01:24] Like Orchard Drive?
[2:01:26] >> Yeah. And then the road I was talking
[2:01:28] about is over here on Tiger Way. This
[2:01:30] I don't know enhancing that.
[2:01:33] So,
[2:01:35] keep us on schedule. Any questions? Yes.
[2:01:39] >> You know we joke about it, but this is a
[2:01:40] very difficult presentation to follow
[2:01:42] the last presentation.
[2:01:43] >> Yes.
[2:01:43] >> Maybe can you help put Put um and maybe
[2:01:46] relating to Laura Lewis's comments about
[2:01:47] the percent of our budget and all that
[2:01:48] stuff, but how does how can we help our
[2:01:51] residents see this in a way that they
[2:01:52] don't say, "Well, we're raising taxes.
[2:01:54] Maybe we don't need to."
[2:01:55] >> This is not what we're raising taxes
[2:01:56] for.
[2:01:56] >> Yes.
[2:01:57] >> You know, that's a great question.
[2:01:59] And one of the So, the entire document
[2:02:03] is you know 123 pages. One One of the
[2:02:07] chapters that they have is how do you
[2:02:09] fund this? And so they come in and they
[2:02:11] talk about different things. There are
[2:02:13] things such as
[2:02:16] there is general fund. So, how do we
[2:02:18] stack the capital to be able to do some
[2:02:20] of these projects? So, some may be
[2:02:22] general fund dollars that we would have.
[2:02:24] Some could be care dollars.
[2:02:27] That could work here. Some could be if
[2:02:30] we're doing say the festival street,
[2:02:33] some of that may come from
[2:02:37] enterprise funds dealing with utilities
[2:02:39] and things like that. Or if we're
[2:02:42] enhancing streets around it, could come from a tough fund.
[2:02:47] Also, they talk in here about a robust
[2:02:50] approach to going out and we joke about
[2:02:56] giving somebody as a sponsor a carousel
[2:02:58] with mammoth.
[2:03:00] That's one of the first phone calls I
[2:03:01] think we make is is leveraging those
[2:03:04] types of things and working with Sarah
[2:03:07] as a part of them and leveraging
[2:03:10] their board, their connections to help
[2:03:14] them see the vision of what we're trying
[2:03:16] to do. Now,
[2:03:18] >> In your fundraising efforts.
[2:03:19] >> Yeah, fundraising efforts. One of the
[2:03:22] things that I think I mean
[2:03:25] >> Go to the Utah County transient room
[2:03:28] tax.
[2:03:29] >> Exactly.
[2:03:30] >> Yeah, exactly.
[2:03:32] >> Which we pay a lot into and don't always
[2:03:34] get back.
[2:03:34] >> Right.
[2:03:35] >> Yeah. So, it's it's all of those things
[2:03:37] that we can layer all of those capital
[2:03:39] sources to do a project. What you'll see
[2:03:42] on the agenda tonight is hopefully on
[2:03:45] the consent agenda is a resolution that
[2:03:48] you would by resolution adopt this
[2:03:51] plan.
[2:03:52] It doesn't mean we are going to tomorrow
[2:03:56] build any one of these projects. We
[2:03:59] would still need to work with the
[2:04:01] council, work with the community, help
[2:04:03] them understand what it is that we want
[2:04:06] to do, how do we have the capital to pay
[2:04:08] for it? How do we
[2:04:11] stack all of those capital sources
[2:04:13] together to have a project? So, by
[2:04:17] voting for this plan doesn't commit you
[2:04:20] to anything.
[2:04:21] What it does is tells us
[2:04:25] staff, yeah, we like the ideas in this.
[2:04:28] Now go and come back with a project that
[2:04:32] you think we can do.
[2:04:34] And how and explain to us how we can do
[2:04:36] it. And one of the questions should be,
[2:04:39] where's the money coming from? And even
[2:04:41] though I've been joking about, you know,
[2:04:43] the fire trucks and squad cars, you
[2:04:47] know, we don't want to sell a fire truck
[2:04:50] to pay for this.
[2:04:52] So, how are we going to do it and still
[2:04:54] stay within our
[2:04:55] >> Chief.
[2:04:58] » It'll just cost you $3 million in a few
[2:05:00] more years.
[2:05:02] No, but that's something completely
[2:05:03] >> But I think it's a good a good um if I
[2:05:05] can to Jim's point, I think if people
[2:05:08] are listening in, I really want to
[2:05:09] emphasize that we had some of these same
[2:05:13] presentations with our um
[2:05:16] ball fields down at Lakeside. So, what
[2:05:19] did we do? We went out and we found
[2:05:21] grants from the county. We found funding
[2:05:24] for our water reuse facility. How did we
[2:05:27] build that? Um you know, how did we find
[2:05:29] that those millions? We went out and
[2:05:32] found the money. So, if this is I just
[2:05:35] really want I appreciate Jim saying
[2:05:37] that. Very important that we
[2:05:39] emphasize to your point, this is a great thing that we need to
[2:05:45] find outside sources.
[2:05:47] It is not connected to our
[2:05:49] tax increase decisions.
[2:05:52] >> Right. And just to clarify, this is not
[2:05:54] we would not raise taxes to do this.
[2:05:55] That's I think my point. We're not
[2:05:57] >> We would not raise taxes to do this.
[2:06:00] >> Schedule 2L.
[2:06:01] >> So, Gary, um
[2:06:02] the resolution to adopt the Heart of
[2:06:03] Downtown Master Plan
[2:06:05] >> Show us.
[2:06:05] >> The resolution that does what?
[2:06:08] >> As a resolution, what it does is say we
[2:06:10] adopt this as our master plan.
[2:06:13] >> So, now we're we adopted
[2:06:14] >> What this It it the Heart of the Orem
[2:06:17] Heart of Downtown Master Plan is the
[2:06:20] title of the document.
[2:06:20] >> design
[2:06:21] >> So, the the stuff that you presented
[2:06:23] >> The the stuff that I presented.
[2:06:24] >> Okay, so we're not
[2:06:26] adopting any resolution to say
[2:06:29] this is what we're committed to doing.
[2:06:31] No. And what we're going to build. We're
[2:06:33] just saying we like this idea.
[2:06:36] >> We like this idea and it may not say it
[2:06:39] directly in the resolution, but what it
[2:06:41] does is say
[2:06:42] Gary,
[2:06:44] Ryan, Bren, Chris,
[2:06:46] you know, Bryce,
[2:06:48] as an executive staff, we like this.
[2:06:51] Come back and show us how we can start
[2:06:54] chipping away and and doing some of
[2:06:56] these projects and how it will work and why it's a benefit of the community.
[2:07:02] So, it's kind of a visionary goal for us
[2:07:06] and it has a whole lot of components to
[2:07:08] it.
[2:07:09] What we can do now is begin working on
[2:07:11] it. If if you don't want us to work on
[2:07:14] this, then don't vote
[2:07:18] for it and and adopt it as master plan.
[2:07:25] » All right. I just want to express my
[2:07:27] appreciation to you and the then the
[2:07:29] consultants and to the prior
[2:07:31] administration. Um
[2:07:33] bulk of the heavy lifting was done
[2:07:35] before I came on board in January and
[2:07:38] I'm excited about what the possibilities
[2:07:41] here
[2:07:42] and appreciate the comments that have
[2:07:43] been made have been made about how our tent is to look out side the box for
[2:07:49] further funding sources so we're not
[2:07:51] paying we we will not pay in fire trucks
[2:07:53] or squad cars or whatever.
[2:07:56] Uh
[2:07:57] anyway, thank you. Appreciate you.
[2:08:00] Let's take like 3 minutes
[2:08:03] to get our food. I've asked
[2:08:05] if if she would Here's You're good. I'm
[2:08:08] so sorry. If she would offer a prayer a
[2:08:10] blessing on the food.
[2:08:13] >> Our beloved father in heaven, we're so
[2:08:15] grateful for this opportunity we have to
[2:08:16] gather together today and discuss these
[2:08:18] issues that are important for our
[2:08:20] residents in Orem
[2:08:22] and in our county. We are grateful unto
[2:08:24] thee for the work of those
[2:08:27] staff members and um community members,
[2:08:29] council members that has got has gone
[2:08:31] into this. Um
[2:08:33] things that we've discussed today. And
[2:08:36] this time we pray for special blessing
[2:08:38] upon the food that we're about to
[2:08:39] partake of, that it may give us
[2:08:41] nourishment and strength and we can use
[2:08:43] that strength in serving thee and those
[2:08:44] around us and
[2:08:46] pray for thy blessings upon us
[2:08:47] constantly and say these things in the
[2:08:49] name of thy son, Jesus Christ. Amen.
[2:08:51] >> Amen.
[2:12:19] » Mhm.
[2:14:05] » Like you had enough time to cover what
[2:14:08] needs to be covered.
[2:14:09] >> Okay.
[2:14:11] >> We I'm going to for running behind a
[2:14:12] little bit. So,
[2:14:14] we'll go ahead and turn the time over to
[2:14:15] you.
[2:14:16] >> Thanks.
[2:14:17] Um so, this presentation is on the
[2:14:20] neighborhood improvement came in parking
[2:14:22] enforcement. This is a project we've
[2:14:24] been working on for a while.
[2:14:26] Um
[2:14:26] and the goal of it essentially is to to
[2:14:31] create efficient code and parking
[2:14:34] enforcement, but also being fair and
[2:14:37] helping as much as we can
[2:14:39] while enforcing the educate citizens. Um
[2:14:42] of course, that requires some balancing
[2:14:44] in terms of um you know, educating and
[2:14:47] being lenient versus enforcing. Um you
[2:14:50] know, you have you have neighbors who want enforcement to be drastic
[2:14:55] harsh and effective and then we have we
[2:14:58] also want to be able to
[2:15:00] um provide leniency where it's
[2:15:02] appropriate and
[2:15:04] um and work in a way that isn't um
[2:15:07] overburdensome on on someone who's maybe
[2:15:09] not maintaining their property or
[2:15:12] uh correctly. Um
[2:15:16] I anticipate that there may be a high
[2:15:19] level of consensus to a lot of the
[2:15:21] things that are being proposed here. So,
[2:15:23] I'm going to go through it and I'm going
[2:15:25] to ask you to please chime in if you
[2:15:27] have an issue with something or if
[2:15:29] there's a question that you have
[2:15:31] something uh
[2:15:34] something that you want to talk about
[2:15:35] and get clarification on.
[2:15:37] Uh
[2:15:44] Just as a general overview, um
[2:15:47] there there are a number of things that
[2:15:48] are being proposed in this uh
[2:15:51] presentation. Uh one is what we're
[2:15:53] referring to as the matrices, which um
[2:15:57] basically
[2:15:59] uh
[2:16:00] guidelines that we're creating for our
[2:16:02] code enforcement and parking enforcement
[2:16:04] teams. Um so, that we we
[2:16:08] like situations similar.
[2:16:11] Uh, we feel like that's uh, an important
[2:16:13] and fundamental element of fairness.
[2:16:16] And we're we're citizens who are
[2:16:19] receiving tickets or warnings or
[2:16:21] whatever are doing so in an even way and
[2:16:24] they're not being treated differently
[2:16:25] because, you know, maybe the code
[2:16:27] enforcement officer's having a bad day
[2:16:28] or whatever. So, these guidelines will
[2:16:30] help them
[2:16:31] um,
[2:16:32] keep things consistent and fairness to
[2:16:34] this.
[2:16:36] And the other thing um, that I want to
[2:16:37] talk about is our code changes that are
[2:16:40] being proposed. Um,
[2:16:43] both to help
[2:16:45] more effective code enforcement, but
[2:16:46] also in some cases to to create some
[2:16:49] more leniency
[2:16:51] um, where where we feel like it's
[2:16:52] appropriate. So, uh, just as an
[2:16:56] overview,
[2:16:57] I we refer to code enforcement and
[2:16:59] parking as two different things. Often
[2:17:01] the public views them as the same, um,
[2:17:04] but at the city we have a code
[2:17:06] enforcement team and a parking
[2:17:07] enforcement team. They're both under the
[2:17:10] police department. Um, but the
[2:17:13] enforcement mechanisms are ruled by two
[2:17:15] different codes in our city code. And
[2:17:17] so, the processes are different and
[2:17:18] that's why we treat them differently.
[2:17:20] Um,
[2:17:22] as a general rule our code enforcement
[2:17:24] is going to be handling
[2:17:25] city code violations that occur on a on
[2:17:28] a person's property.
[2:17:30] Whereas a
[2:17:32] um, a parking enforcement team is going
[2:17:34] to be focused only on uh,
[2:17:37] again, generally speaking, on um,
[2:17:40] parking violations that occur on public
[2:17:42] streets. So, that's kind of the division
[2:17:43] of the jurisdiction of those two
[2:17:45] different teams. Private property,
[2:17:47] public streets.
[2:17:48] Um,
[2:17:53] I'm going to go over our code
[2:17:55] enforcement process really quick just so
[2:17:57] everybody understands.
[2:17:59] Um, if if a neighbor
[2:18:01] uh
[2:18:03] Well, if a person has a bunch of junk
[2:18:06] all over their yard and a neighbor is
[2:18:08] concerned about it, they'll contact our
[2:18:10] code enforcement team
[2:18:12] and say, "Hey, I need I want you to go
[2:18:14] look at this." or whatever. Or if
[2:18:15] there's any other code violation, the
[2:18:17] code enforcement team will then receive
[2:18:19] that complaint and and they'll
[2:18:22] investigate. They'll do their initial
[2:18:23] investigation within one business day.
[2:18:26] Um they're they're pretty good about
[2:18:27] doing that. Um
[2:18:29] Some investigations take more time than
[2:18:33] others. So, for example, if the
[2:18:35] complaint is junk, it's easy to go, take
[2:18:38] a photo of all the junk in the yard, and you're done. You know that you've
[2:18:42] got a violation.
[2:18:44] Um something that's more difficult often
[2:18:46] and and often takes a little bit more
[2:18:47] time to complete a an investigation on
[2:18:49] would be something like
[2:18:50] occupancy in a house. Too many unrelated
[2:18:53] people living in a home. Um it takes
[2:18:56] some more time.
[2:18:57] Uh so Uh just depending on the level of
[2:19:00] complexity of the complaint, but within
[2:19:03] one business day, they're
[2:19:06] making their first contact at the
[2:19:08] property and attempting to to
[2:19:10] investigate that.
[2:19:11] Um
[2:19:12] If our code enforcement team determines
[2:19:14] that there is a violation, they will
[2:19:16] send a warning letter to the property
[2:19:18] owner and they will say,
[2:19:20] "Um Here is the code violation. This is
[2:19:22] what you need to do to come into
[2:19:24] compliance with the code, and you have X
[2:19:26] number of days to come into compliance."
[2:19:30] Uh we find that about 70% of
[2:19:34] issues get
[2:19:36] resolved with the warning letter.
[2:19:38] Um so, that's that's a relatively high
[2:19:41] compliance rate.
[2:19:42] Um If after that X number of days,
[2:19:46] the property doesn't come into
[2:19:48] compliance, usually then the code
[2:19:50] enforcement officer will will send a
[2:19:52] citation to the property owner and will
[2:19:54] say, uh
[2:19:55] "Here Here's a fine, $50 for each one of
[2:19:58] the code violations that still exists.
[2:20:00] Um
[2:20:02] Please fix them.
[2:20:04] You have X number of days to fix it. So,
[2:20:07] almost like a warning again, only this time it comes with a fine.
[2:20:11] We find that after receiving a citation,
[2:20:13] about 90% of properties come into
[2:20:15] compliance.
[2:20:16] Uh, we then, if the property still is
[2:20:18] out of compliance, issue what is called
[2:20:20] a summons. Uh, or an administrative
[2:20:22] summons, where
[2:20:24] we
[2:20:26] It is what a legal summons is. We say,
[2:20:28] "Hey, you're you're being summoned in to
[2:20:30] our administrative court.
[2:20:32] And, um, we're going to hold a hearing
[2:20:35] to address your case in front of a
[2:20:36] judge.
[2:20:37] Uh, and it's going to be held on this
[2:20:39] day."
[2:20:40] And, um
[2:20:42] 95% of people after receiving the
[2:20:43] summons
[2:20:45] come into compliance prior to their
[2:20:46] court date.
[2:20:49] Uh, then, you have that small number who
[2:20:51] actually come into court, where we'll hold a hearing. And, um
[2:20:56] if if the judge determines that there is
[2:20:58] a code violation, you will start
[2:21:00] imposing fines at a rate of $50 a day.
[2:21:03] So, they start racking up fairly
[2:21:05] quickly.
[2:21:06] Um, and then,
[2:21:08] uh
[2:21:11] once once he's made a finding like that
[2:21:13] and started, uh, threatening
[2:21:16] those recurring fines, we find that the
[2:21:18] vast vast majority of our problems get
[2:21:21] uh
[2:21:22] get resolved fairly quickly after that
[2:21:25] point. Some of those cases can drag out,
[2:21:27] unfortunately. Um, but but generally
[2:21:29] speaking,
[2:21:31] uh, most of them
[2:21:32] once they've appeared in front of a
[2:21:33] judge, are are more willing to to
[2:21:35] comply.
[2:21:37] So, so that's kind of the process.
[2:21:39] Um, this here is the matrix
[2:21:42] for Well, half of it I
[2:21:44] It's too big to fit on one page, so I
[2:21:46] split it up. So, this is the matrix for
[2:21:49] the code enforcement. And and like I
[2:21:52] said, what this is is it
[2:21:54] provides the guidelines for the code
[2:21:56] enforcement so that that team is
[2:21:58] consistently applying um
[2:22:02] the law
[2:22:04] independent of whether or not the
[2:22:06] property or
[2:22:07] independent of which code enforcement
[2:22:09] officer is doing it, right? It works to
[2:22:12] bring standard standardize things.
[2:22:14] Um and so what we did is we chose
[2:22:16] uh the highest number of our complaints.
[2:22:20] I think it was the top like 95% of our
[2:22:22] complaints are found in this matrix.
[2:22:26] And and what we have here
[2:22:29] where uh
[2:22:30] No.
[2:22:31] In the first column, we have the
[2:22:34] violation with the code section. In the
[2:22:36] second column, we have in bold uh the
[2:22:40] actual language from the ordinance.
[2:22:42] Um
[2:22:43] and then underneath it, we have kind of
[2:22:46] the remedy or what the person needs to
[2:22:48] do to come into compliance if they
[2:22:49] violate that code.
[2:22:51] In the third column, you'll see a number
[2:22:52] of days. And And that is what I referred
[2:22:55] That's the number of days that they will
[2:22:57] put on the warning. So
[2:22:59] uh for example, on the top there, if
[2:23:00] they have uh unregistered vehicles on
[2:23:03] the property, they have 14 They'll
[2:23:05] receive a warning letter that says you
[2:23:06] have 14 days to remove these
[2:23:08] unregistered cars or to get them
[2:23:10] registered.
[2:23:12] Okay.
[2:23:13] Um and after the 14 days, if they
[2:23:14] haven't done that, then they'll receive
[2:23:16] a citation saying you have 14 more days
[2:23:18] to do this or you'll receive a summons.
[2:23:21] Um and so that That's what the number of
[2:23:23] days is for.
[2:23:25] The last column is
[2:23:28] uh
[2:23:29] common exceptions to the first to the
[2:23:32] first rule in terms of the number of
[2:23:34] days. So for example,
[2:23:36] uh with the registered vehicle,
[2:23:38] you have 14 days to register your
[2:23:40] vehicle after you receive your warning
[2:23:42] unless you contact
[2:23:44] code enforcement team in them, "Hey, the
[2:23:46] reason it's not registered is because
[2:23:48] I'm missing the vehicle title, which is
[2:23:49] a common issue, right? People can't
[2:23:52] register your vehicle until you've
[2:23:54] received title on it. Um and there are
[2:23:57] all sorts of reasons why a person might
[2:23:59] not have a title for their vehicle. Um
[2:24:01] but if if they certify to us
[2:24:04] Yeah.
[2:24:05] If they certify to us that that is the
[2:24:07] issue, we'll give them an additional 60
[2:24:09] days cuz we know that it takes time to
[2:24:10] work that out with the DMV. And again,
[2:24:13] what we're looking to do here is enforce
[2:24:16] in a reasonable manner.
[2:24:18] And so where where there's a reasonable
[2:24:20] reason for it to take more time
[2:24:22] or we're offering additional time and
[2:24:24] we're working.
[2:24:26] Um
[2:24:28] Outside of these days, what we expect uh
[2:24:31] our code enforcement team to do and I'm
[2:24:34] um
[2:24:35] well,
[2:24:36] is
[2:24:37] uh if if they give a time table that is
[2:24:40] different than this, they need to
[2:24:41] document the reason why.
[2:24:44] Um and and has to be a well,
[2:24:46] a logical, valid, fair reason for why
[2:24:48] we're deviating for this from this.
[2:24:51] Excuse me. Um
[2:24:54] I guess
[2:24:57] I I believe everyone on the council has
[2:24:59] seen this this uh
[2:25:01] table here and this one. Are there Would
[2:25:05] you like me to go through each one or
[2:25:07] are there specific ones you want to talk
[2:25:09] about?
[2:25:12] That's what I mean by
[2:25:13] >> maybe to start.
[2:25:15] Aaron, this is really helpful. I I'm
[2:25:18] thrilled that we're trying to
[2:25:19] standardize it
[2:25:20] and make it as fair as possible.
[2:25:23] What do you anticipate will be different
[2:25:25] and maybe this is for you, Jonathan, as
[2:25:27] well. What will be different after
[2:25:29] adopting this than what we had?
[2:25:33] Well, um
[2:25:36] So,
[2:25:37] part of the reason we're adopting this is because we'll get
[2:25:43] a neighbor who calls in a complaint.
[2:25:46] And then
[2:25:48] they won't see immediate correction.
[2:25:50] And they'll call in and say, "Hey,
[2:25:52] what's going on? Why isn't this fixed
[2:25:53] yet?"
[2:25:54] And the fact is is that um
[2:25:58] some of these issues take a while to
[2:26:00] resolve.
[2:26:01] And so we we're adopting this both
[2:26:06] to create fairness and standardization
[2:26:08] so that everybody's treated the same,
[2:26:09] but also so that we can help
[2:26:12] the public understand that hey, we're
[2:26:13] following our our standard guidelines.
[2:26:16] And and these are these are kind of the
[2:26:18] guidelines that you can expect to see
[2:26:20] this these different actions taken.
[2:26:24] To help neighbors understand um this is
[2:26:27] why it's not resolved yet or this is the
[2:26:29] stage that we're at in the process. Does
[2:26:32] that make sense?
[2:26:32] >> So a lot of it communication. I think
[2:26:35] that's great.
[2:26:37] Um is there anything here that we have
[2:26:40] chosen to do differently
[2:26:42] than we were doing last year?
[2:26:44] Um and if so, how did we come to that
[2:26:46] conclusion?
[2:26:47] >> Um so
[2:26:51] Yeah,
[2:26:52] prior to this our code enforcement
[2:26:55] officers would use kind of their best
[2:26:57] judgment in terms of this is how long I
[2:26:59] think they should take to get done.
[2:27:01] Um and there's an advantage to that in
[2:27:03] the sense that not every situation is
[2:27:05] exactly the same, right?
[2:27:07] Um every every messy junk in yard has a
[2:27:10] different level of junk.
[2:27:13] Uh and and and the reason why it's there
[2:27:17] and why it's difficult to remove. Um
[2:27:22] but different code enforcement officers
[2:27:25] also have different judgment on that.
[2:27:28] And and so this helps standardize it. So
[2:27:31] that
[2:27:32] um
[2:27:35] if you're a property owner and you're
[2:27:36] getting one of these warnings, you don't
[2:27:38] get
[2:27:40] 5 days or 30 days just based on the luck
[2:27:43] of which code enforcement officer was
[2:27:45] assigned to.
[2:27:46] >> The reality is people are getting
[2:27:47] different treatment.
[2:27:49] >> Yes. Yes, that that that that was a
[2:27:50] potential problem.
[2:27:52] >> Some of this is the ability of the
[2:27:53] homeowner to, you know, their resources,
[2:27:56] their who they know,
[2:27:58] what
[2:27:59] facilities or equipment they have to get
[2:28:01] rid of them.
[2:28:02] So,
[2:28:04] this just gives us guidelines
[2:28:06] to say so many days you have and we
[2:28:10] won't let them at nauseam to bring them
[2:28:13] into compliance.
[2:28:14] Um the problem is you guys get the phone
[2:28:17] calls as to we are doing nothing
[2:28:19] when in fact we are following
[2:28:23] and that gives you the
[2:28:26] turn to the constituents to say we're
[2:28:28] following the guidelines and we are
[2:28:31] getting it done.
[2:28:32] So,
[2:28:33] last I'll say in the last 2 years I've
[2:28:36] received probably
[2:28:38] 18, 20 phone phone calls regarding NIT
[2:28:42] stuff.
[2:28:43] I have yet to have one where we have
[2:28:45] dropped the ball and we are just doing
[2:28:47] nothing.
[2:28:48] It's got lost in the weeds, so to speak.
[2:28:53] extension
[2:28:54] No.
[2:28:55] And then what we're doing now is we're helping them to get into
[2:29:00] extensions or days off or helping them
[2:29:02] to get a trailer. So, to me this gives
[2:29:05] our NIT guys
[2:29:07] the ability to enforce equally. It gives
[2:29:09] you guys the ability to have expectation
[2:29:12] as to what's reasonable
[2:29:14] and to talk to your constituents when
[2:29:16] they call
[2:29:18] say
[2:29:19] what's up.
[2:29:20] >> And then and then I would say looking
[2:29:22] forward
[2:29:24] you may help us to to be more efficient,
[2:29:27] effective like and and report back uh
[2:29:31] through Connect Orlando or
[2:29:33] you know, there may be ways to sort of
[2:29:35] automate communication or automate
[2:29:40] status updates.
[2:29:42] Possibly
[2:29:44] if our our code enforcement
[2:29:46] people know that
[2:29:48] this is the matrix, these are the the
[2:29:51] framework then they can go with
[2:29:53] confidence to to to enforce it and gauge
[2:29:56] and then
[2:29:57] hopefully that allows us to be able to
[2:29:59] communicate these here.
[2:30:01] level of software in the future.
[2:30:03] >> But I guess that's kind of my question
[2:30:05] is you know, I've always is the
[2:30:06] transparency. At what point is it a
[2:30:09] protected process, protected record
[2:30:11] process? to to enforce the point of
[2:30:16] Basically they tell the neighbor that
[2:30:18] it's my
[2:30:19] you know, how much is public, how much
[2:30:22] is not. I would like to have that
[2:30:24] defined so we can say
[2:30:27] with an extension or
[2:30:30] this organization should be here's the
[2:30:31] court date. You you know,
[2:30:33] if we could I don't know that we have to
[2:30:35] tell them everything but if we could
[2:30:36] figure out what the balance is there
[2:30:39] that would be helpful.
[2:30:40] >> This I think this matrix will better help our NIT to
[2:30:44] better thread the needle of what we're
[2:30:46] trying to do
[2:30:47] and without
[2:30:50] fines or enforcement.
[2:30:52] Flip side if you're the one living next
[2:30:53] to it and you're the one saying why is
[2:30:55] this not
[2:30:57] fixed. That's what that's what we're
[2:30:58] trying to thread is that needle and I
[2:31:00] think this helps us out.
[2:31:01] >> I I can I clarify that one more thing? I
[2:31:04] would not want to
[2:31:06] encumber these complaints with the
[2:31:08] grammar request requirement. If we can
[2:31:10] somehow
[2:31:12] give them updates without having to go
[2:31:14] through the grammar process
[2:31:16] that
[2:31:17] >> Um so so I'm uncomfortable with giving
[2:31:20] them documents outside of the grammar
[2:31:23] process. I think we could work out as a
[2:31:26] way where
[2:31:28] they could, you know, contact
[2:31:30] uh a code enforcement officer and say
[2:31:32] what's the status and the the code
[2:31:34] enforcement officer could reply back
[2:31:36] saying this is the status or this is
[2:31:37] where it's at.
[2:31:38] >> Okay. And I don't have a problem with
[2:31:39] there if you have standard replies.
[2:31:41] Okay. So, it's not have to be the same
[2:31:43] thing with our code enforcement
[2:31:44] officers. If there's a
[2:31:46] admin or something that helps them, they
[2:31:47] could say,
[2:31:49] you know, well, I look on the calendar,
[2:31:50] it's this is where it's sitting.
[2:31:53] I don't You know what I mean? I'm okay
[2:31:55] with that, too.
[2:31:57] >> Okay.
[2:31:58] >> At one point, we were talking about
[2:32:00] changing the name
[2:32:02] of NIT to code enforcement.
[2:32:05] Is that part of this process or
[2:32:06] >> It is. Yep.
[2:32:07] >> That
[2:32:08] um
[2:32:10] >> That's another part of it.
[2:32:12] We'll get there.
[2:32:13] >> Okay.
[2:32:14] >> Um so so this is the NIT matrix.
[2:32:18] Uh oh, and there you go.
[2:32:21] So, there's there's just some some
[2:32:23] changes that we are proposing uh for
[2:32:25] city
[2:32:26] enforcement. Um and basically, we're
[2:32:29] looking for the council's blessing on
[2:32:31] this. One is to change the name from
[2:32:32] neighborhood improvement team to code
[2:32:34] enforcement team. There's the
[2:32:39] There can be some confusion um among
[2:32:42] residents by the by the name
[2:32:44] neighborhood improvement team cuz it
[2:32:46] sounds like it's a
[2:32:48] more of a voluntary thing, that's
[2:32:51] a neighborhood organization as opposed
[2:32:53] to a city
[2:32:55] um enforcement entity.
[2:32:58] Um uh whereas code enforcement team, I
[2:33:00] think is very clear. If you get a letter
[2:33:03] from the neighborhood improvement team,
[2:33:04] you're like, are these like the HOA
[2:33:07] Nazis coming after me, you know? We
[2:33:10] don't even have an HOA. What is this?
[2:33:12] Where Whereas, if it says the Orem City
[2:33:14] Code Enforcement Team, we're going to
[2:33:15] understand, okay, this is uh
[2:33:18] this is serious business. I need to know
[2:33:19] this. Which which goes to the next uh
[2:33:22] bullet point, which is we want to adjust
[2:33:24] our warning letter to make it clear that
[2:33:26] the remedial action is requested as
[2:33:28] mandatory as opposed to recommended. Um
[2:33:31] when when it was initially written, the
[2:33:32] city council
[2:33:34] uh wanted to be soft in our approach. We
[2:33:37] don't We didn't want to come off as too
[2:33:39] aggressive and mean. We don't want to be
[2:33:41] mean.
[2:33:42] But we do want to be clear that the
[2:33:45] action is required, not recommended.
[2:33:49] And and and the current language refers
[2:33:51] to recommended action.
[2:33:53] So we would like to take a look at that
[2:33:56] and and re-
[2:33:57] and change it up.
[2:33:59] Um
[2:34:00] Currently, when we send out a citation
[2:34:02] or summons, we don't always include the
[2:34:04] warning, and that's something that we
[2:34:05] need to change to help the property
[2:34:08] owners
[2:34:09] better understand, okay, there's there's
[2:34:11] a history here, and
[2:34:13] this is where it started, and this is
[2:34:14] kind of where we're going. Um
[2:34:17] And then another thing uh that we
[2:34:19] discovered we can do better as a code
[2:34:21] enforcement team is include better
[2:34:23] contact information on the warnings, so
[2:34:26] that when a homeowner receives it, they
[2:34:28] can If they have questions, they can
[2:34:31] call
[2:34:32] uh or email our code enforcement team
[2:34:34] and say, "Okay, I'm I'm confused about
[2:34:36] what action I need to do to come into
[2:34:37] compliance."
[2:34:38] So So those are some things that we
[2:34:40] discovered we needed to do.
[2:34:44] Questions there?
[2:34:45] Any of that?
[2:34:47] Yes.
[2:34:49] This is uh
[2:34:51] the parking uh
[2:34:52] matrix, which again is on two slides
[2:34:54] because
[2:34:56] uh it was too big on the one.
[2:34:58] Big on one. Um
[2:35:01] On this one, we have violations that our our parking enforcement team
[2:35:06] have identified as safety violations,
[2:35:08] and then on the other one are non-safety
[2:35:10] violations. Um
[2:35:13] Uh part of the impetus for this similar
[2:35:16] to the DNI team matrix in the sense that
[2:35:19] um some parking enforcement officials
[2:35:20] were giving warnings for some things,
[2:35:22] others weren't. We wanted to standardize
[2:35:23] that. We also wanted um our policies
[2:35:27] regarding warnings to come more in due
[2:35:30] compliance with what the council felt
[2:35:32] was important in terms of educating the
[2:35:35] public for maybe some of the non-safety
[2:35:37] issues.
[2:35:39] Giving out more warnings for those in an
[2:35:41] effort to educate
[2:35:43] uh prior to being punitive in giving out
[2:35:46] citations and bonds.
[2:35:49] Um
[2:35:51] And so
[2:35:53] uh are there any questions about the
[2:35:56] parking matrices? This again is
[2:35:58] something that I believe you've all
[2:35:59] seen.
[2:36:00] Um
[2:36:03] Are there specific violations you want
[2:36:05] to discuss or more general
[2:36:07] policy issues?
[2:36:08] >> a just a quick question or Thank you for
[2:36:11] this for the clarification.
[2:36:13] I noticed one of them
[2:36:15] that said something about junk cars in
[2:36:17] the backyard
[2:36:19] without a little pink fence.
[2:36:21] >> Yes.
[2:36:22] >> Yeah, I always thought that if it was in
[2:36:24] the backyard I I the reason I I
[2:36:26] mentioned this is I just got an email
[2:36:27] the other day from a lady whose
[2:36:29] backyard neighbor has a bunch of
[2:36:32] vehicles in the backyard
[2:36:34] and they have a chain link fence and
[2:36:36] she's like tired of looking at this
[2:36:37] junk.
[2:36:39] We do.
[2:36:40] So.
[2:36:41] >> Yes, so so our ordinance does currently
[2:36:43] allow you to have two junk cars in the
[2:36:45] backyard
[2:36:47] but it has to be behind a little pink
[2:36:48] fence.
[2:36:49] So so that that would be a violation
[2:36:51] that they could contact and give out.
[2:36:52] >> There's a redneck joke somewhere I'm
[2:36:54] sure.
[2:36:57] » We had more than
[2:36:58] >> Yes.
[2:37:01] I don't think we uh sorry.
[2:37:02] >> Okay. Any other questions or concerns
[2:37:04] about these?
[2:37:06] >> Okay.
[2:37:07] >> Um
[2:37:09] changes to parking enforcement policy.
[2:37:11] In the past warnings have been vehicle
[2:37:13] specific, but not violation specific. Um
[2:37:16] in an effort
[2:37:18] again to to make our warnings more
[2:37:20] effective as educational tools and not
[2:37:23] punitive tools,
[2:37:25] uh we're we're we want to expand
[2:37:27] how warnings are given so that they're
[2:37:28] violation specific instead of vehicle
[2:37:30] specific, meaning
[2:37:34] uh you know, if I angle park in a place
[2:37:36] where I'm not allowed to, I'll get a
[2:37:38] warning for the first time for that. And
[2:37:41] then if I'm
[2:37:43] uh I'm trying to remember what we get
[2:37:44] warnings for.
[2:37:46] If I'm
[2:37:47] uh
[2:37:48] parking in a neighborhood uh without a
[2:37:50] permit,
[2:37:52] um
[2:37:54] then I will also get a warning for that.
[2:37:55] Whereas in the past, I would have gotten
[2:37:57] a warning only for the first violation
[2:37:58] and not for the second one. Um
[2:38:01] that just seems kind of intuitive in
[2:38:02] terms of education because I hadn't yet
[2:38:04] been educated on uh
[2:38:06] on the
[2:38:07] uh
[2:38:09] specific need for the need for the
[2:38:10] permit in the the neighborhood permit.
[2:38:12] Um
[2:38:15] Uh we also uh would like to include a
[2:38:18] bit more of an explanation about the
[2:38:20] parking violation with the warning again
[2:38:23] uh
[2:38:23] in an effort to help educate uh as
[2:38:26] opposed to just citing a code saying,
[2:38:28] "Hey, this is the code and this is the way that the parking was
[2:38:32] done illegally." And then um
[2:38:36] you'll see on our matrix
[2:38:37] if someone gets a ticket for parking
[2:38:39] with expired registration, our policy
[2:38:41] has always been if you get it
[2:38:44] if you get your car registered in with
[2:38:46] four within 14 days, we'll just dismiss
[2:38:47] the ticket entirely. Um however, that is
[2:38:51] never really been communicated to them
[2:38:53] on the warning ticket. So, it was just
[2:38:54] kind of
[2:38:56] policy is we'd do it, but you as the
[2:38:58] person on the receiving end didn't know
[2:38:59] about the policy. So, that needs to be
[2:39:01] included there.
[2:39:04] Um Okay.
[2:39:10] Wait.
[2:39:12] Like I said, the last element are just
[2:39:14] some code changes we want to
[2:39:17] suggest. Um
[2:39:19] but I'm out of time, so maybe I'll come
[2:39:21] back to do that another time.
[2:39:22] >> You're okay, Council.
[2:39:24] So, I apologize that we ran out of time.
[2:39:27] If I can
[2:39:28] >> I apologize.
[2:39:28] >> It's, you know, my fault that didn't uh
[2:39:31] correctly anticipate the discussion and
[2:39:34] presentation amounts. Uh so, like with
[2:39:37] some of these, we'll come back with a
[2:39:39] follow-up on this
[2:39:41] presentation and make sure that
[2:39:43] have opportunity to ask
[2:39:45] questions and and give direction. All
[2:39:48] right. We'll fight on that.
[2:39:51] Probably in our next work session
[2:39:53] prior to
[2:39:55] uh an adoption of
[2:39:57] changes that then have the adoption.
[2:39:59] Thank you.
[2:40:01] All right.
[2:40:03] Next item on our agenda
[2:40:06] is an opportunity for Council members
[2:40:08] Meekam and Millett to give City Council
[2:40:11] reports. So, we'll just go in that
[2:40:12] order. Council member Meekam, what you
[2:40:14] got?
[2:40:15] >> Commission reports for me.
[2:40:17] Uh
[2:40:18] I can talk briefly about uh
[2:40:21] the Arts Commission and Arts Commission.
[2:40:23] Uh I'm also over the Care Tax Advisory
[2:40:25] Commission and the Library Commission.
[2:40:28] Um
[2:40:29] and uh we had we had a very successful
[2:40:32] Care Tax Advisory um
[2:40:35] season. Uh Jen Gale, of course, was with
[2:40:38] me on that one.
[2:40:39] Um but a couple of good things are
[2:40:41] happening. I I feel like uh
[2:40:44] you know, this we had
[2:40:47] five of our seven
[2:40:49] commissioners
[2:40:50] uh start
[2:40:52] this year. Um
[2:40:54] and I've been I'm really impressed with
[2:40:56] the way that they've jumped in and
[2:40:59] learned so quickly and uh I feel like
[2:41:01] the discussion is really uh good. Um
[2:41:07] Uh there's enough diversity on that
[2:41:09] planning commission that we'll sometimes
[2:41:11] have different perspectives on
[2:41:13] individual issues and they're asking the
[2:41:14] right kinds of questions and engaging
[2:41:15] with each other really respectful.
[2:41:18] I'm I'm feeling really good about the
[2:41:20] way
[2:41:21] vision is getting its feet under it.
[2:41:23] Things are um
[2:41:25] Arts Commission, one of the kind of
[2:41:27] exciting things that
[2:41:29] the Arts Commission uh has done in the
[2:41:31] last couple of months is
[2:41:33] that we have a lot of members of the
[2:41:35] community uh that would like to
[2:41:37] participate in some of our arts related
[2:41:39] things, but maybe there isn't a spot on
[2:41:41] a commission for them.
[2:41:43] So, when we interviewed commission
[2:41:45] members,
[2:41:46] uh
[2:41:47] he and I did that uh earlier in the
[2:41:49] year. We discovered a lot of people that
[2:41:50] we thought would be great commission
[2:41:51] members, but we just didn't have a spot
[2:41:53] for them.
[2:41:54] So, uh
[2:41:55] had a number of volunteers who have
[2:41:57] wanted to get involved in the
[2:41:58] subcommittees.
[2:41:59] We created four subcommittees with the
[2:42:01] Arts Commission chaired by members of
[2:42:02] the Arts Commission.
[2:42:04] And if it works then uh
[2:42:06] um in between um meetings and then are
[2:42:09] supervised by the Arts Commission
[2:42:10] themselves. So,
[2:42:12] uh
[2:42:13] I I think we're in a position where
[2:42:14] we're going to get a lot done this year.
[2:42:15] Excited about that.
[2:42:16] >> Good.
[2:42:18] >> That That's awesome.
[2:42:20] >> Thank you. Council member Miller.
[2:42:22] >> Yes, so
[2:42:23] I'm um the Transportation Advisor
[2:42:26] Commission is one of my assignments. The
[2:42:28] UTA presentation was perfect with that.
[2:42:30] We've had a presentation from UTA to
[2:42:34] UDot to our back and
[2:42:36] one of our big goals we're going to be
[2:42:38] tackling this year is the UAR
[2:42:40] transportation
[2:42:41] right? Our ice and transportation plan.
[2:42:45] It's finished mostly, already. Um
[2:42:47] So, that um
[2:42:49] is going great. Great people on there.
[2:42:51] The I'm not sure how to say this, but it
[2:42:53] used to be the rack, but now is Is
[2:42:55] Bryce? Are we the P-rack or the Prac?
[2:42:57] >> Cool.
[2:43:00] >> And I like red.
[2:43:02] >> That we're adding parks to the prac. The
[2:43:04] rec.
[2:43:06] So, that has been uh
[2:43:08] super fun to be able to talk about
[2:43:10] little things, great things happening.
[2:43:11] I've just been in awe at how how well
[2:43:14] our
[2:43:15] parks and our recreation facilities are
[2:43:18] run. So, big hats off and thank you to
[2:43:20] that.
[2:43:21] >> The park. Parks and recreation
[2:43:23] commission.
[2:43:24] >> Parks and rec.
[2:43:25] >> Park.
[2:43:27] >> Hey.
[2:43:28] >> That'll be noted. Yeah.
[2:43:29] >> Let's Maybe we'll talk about that. But,
[2:43:31] um
[2:43:32] so, just a couple wins, of course, the
[2:43:34] dirt I'm going to talk about the dirt in
[2:43:36] the ball fields, cuz who thinks about
[2:43:37] dirt in the ball fields, right? But, it
[2:43:39] was damaged and it was injuring little
[2:43:41] kids, cuz there were little stones and
[2:43:43] things. So,
[2:43:44] >> Don't mention it.
[2:43:44] >> huge win.
[2:43:46] >> So, we fixed that.
[2:43:47] >> Of course, we use that dirt elsewhere.
[2:43:49] So, very thrifty of you. Um
[2:43:53] We're also going to be working on our
[2:43:55] active transportation and our trails
[2:43:56] master plans, and then the trees
[2:43:58] initiative in our parks.
[2:44:00] Be a huge thing. Um yesterday, Jen and I
[2:44:03] went to the America 250, which will be
[2:44:05] wrapping up July 4th. We'll know all of
[2:44:07] the math committee work. But, this this
[2:44:09] is the challenge. We uh Connie just
[2:44:12] printed these out. If you haven't yet
[2:44:13] signed up for the challenge, and you
[2:44:15] want to be considered for the super
[2:44:17] grand prize, which will be given away
[2:44:19] Memorial Day, is that Are you familiar
[2:44:21] with this at all?
[2:44:22] >> I'm not sure the date on it, no.
[2:44:24] >> So, sometime around there. You know,
[2:44:26] hurry and get your stuff done. But,
[2:44:27] otherwise, you still have till July 4th
[2:44:29] to still get all of
[2:44:31] these through
[2:44:32] for that. And just some exciting things.
[2:44:35] Have some successful um concerts and and
[2:44:38] some art show.
[2:44:40] A spark. Um let's see. I don't have the
[2:44:42] ULCT chart anymore. That was dis- That
[2:44:45] was discontinued new organization by the
[2:44:48] governor.
[2:44:49] And then, um I'm like position two for
[2:44:52] UVU. So, I can't go there. So.
[2:44:56] » All right.
[2:44:57] >> Thank you to both.
[2:44:59] >> Can I just mention one more thing? I
[2:45:00] would associate with the library
[2:45:02] advisory commission that
[2:45:03] we have begun interviews for the library
[2:45:05] director.
[2:45:06] And
[2:45:09] in-person interviews started today.
[2:45:11] So, we anticipate that have news about
[2:45:14] potential new library director in the
[2:45:16] future.
[2:45:17] >> Thank you for the library.
[2:45:19] >> I was curious about that.
[2:45:22] >> All right, quickly going over some items
[2:45:23] on the agenda.
[2:45:26] We have a full list. Goes without saying
[2:45:28] that we have a very full agenda today.
[2:45:31] And
[2:45:33] including if you get to wear a few
[2:45:34] different hats, so you can see all the
[2:45:36] items where we'll be wearing our city
[2:45:38] council hat.
[2:45:40] And to those
[2:45:42] who have never gone through the budget
[2:45:44] this process before, if you turn to
[2:45:47] the item 12,
[2:45:52] what is going to happen
[2:45:54] is
[2:45:55] we're going to need I'm going to need at
[2:45:57] that point a motion
[2:45:59] to adjourn from being a city council and
[2:46:02] convening to be a redevelopment agency.
[2:46:06] And then you'll see we'll have certain
[2:46:08] items that we'll need to approve as the
[2:46:11] redevelopment agency.
[2:46:14] And then on item 15, you'll see we'll
[2:46:17] adjourn from being the redevelopment
[2:46:20] agency and to becoming the Orem special
[2:46:23] service lighting district.
[2:46:26] And it looks like we do not reconvene as
[2:46:29] a city council, so we get to go home as
[2:46:31] a special service lighting district.
[2:46:33] >> And those will still take place in the
[2:46:35] chambers.
[2:46:36] >> It all takes place. Yep, because
[2:46:38] we just
[2:46:39] go through this different order. Like
[2:46:41] through it and and then
[2:46:43] Brandon will give us
[2:46:45] he'll do presentations on all of those
[2:46:46] budgets, but we do have as a council, we
[2:46:49] do have several different other
[2:46:51] responsibilities that we will take care
[2:46:53] of take care of this evening as well.
[2:46:56] So, on the city council agenda, you'll
[2:46:58] see we have a numerous presentations,
[2:47:00] giving machine, building safety
[2:47:01] awareness month, National Police Week,
[2:47:04] National Public Works Week, and then we
[2:47:06] have our youth council report.
[2:47:08] And then some consent items.
[2:47:10] Then we have personal appearances.
[2:47:13] And we have four scheduled public
[2:47:15] hearings.
[2:47:16] Showing up that right. Yep.
[2:47:18] The four public hearings and then a few
[2:47:21] items that don't require public hearing.
[2:47:24] And
[2:47:25] part of that will I think it's some
[2:47:28] those will come the public will have the
[2:47:30] opportunity to to weigh in on those at other opportunities.
[2:47:35] Uh like the care tax, that'll be part of
[2:47:37] the budget. Uh
[2:47:38] as well as the public safety special
[2:47:41] revenue fund and then
[2:47:44] And Brandon, it looks like you get to
[2:47:45] make some sort of statement.
[2:47:48] >> You.
[2:47:49] >> To make a statement of intent.
[2:47:51] We do have we do hold a public hearing
[2:47:53] for the tentative budget. We're not it's
[2:47:55] my understanding we're not required to
[2:47:56] do so, but it is something that we
[2:47:58] traditionally do.
[2:48:00] And then uh the final item will be a
[2:48:06] statement
[2:48:07] >> The
[2:48:07] >> we need to uh make a motion and decide
[2:48:10] whether to approve or reject considering
[2:48:12] levying to levy being a tax rate that
[2:48:15] exceeds certified tax rate and the
[2:48:18] approximate dollar amount. So,
[2:48:21] that is what our agenda looks like this evening.
[2:48:26] >> Mayor, if you'll let me introduce the
[2:48:27] prayer prayer and pledge. They're
[2:48:29] actually a a young boy and a young girl.
[2:48:31] >> Oh, okay. So, thank you. So, they're
[2:48:33] >> Scouting America Troop 776.
[2:48:37] >> Okay.
[2:48:38] So, they're
[2:48:39] >> a boy student and a girl student. So, I can interview.
[2:48:42] >> Okay.
[2:48:43] >> And then I said, "Do you have any other
[2:48:45] votes for me for the council?"
[2:48:46] >> anticipating that we may have a number
[2:48:48] of people signing in for public comment
[2:48:50] who are not appropriate for the public
[2:48:51] hearings.
[2:48:53] >> Just mention. So, so tonight we have
[2:48:55] four public hearings. Just as you as
[2:48:57] you're looking that they might sign up
[2:48:59] for the the purpose for personal
[2:49:01] comments. They're actually here for the
[2:49:03] public hearing.
[2:49:04] >> So, if they signed up
[2:49:05] >> I will I'll I'll make sure that they
[2:49:08] that if they have They they will have the opportunity to speak
[2:49:13] for items that are not on the agenda,
[2:49:16] somewhere else on the agenda.
[2:49:18] >> Thank you.
[2:49:19] >> Okay. And then depending on the number
[2:49:21] of people who signed up, we'll Right
[2:49:23] now, I I feel inclined to, because I
[2:49:26] don't know how many, 3 minutes. But,
[2:49:29] let's we'll take a look and see what we
[2:49:31] got.
[2:49:32] And I would like everybody who comes to
[2:49:34] speak have will have the opportunity to
[2:49:36] speak.
[2:49:37] >> As long as they're on the schedule.
[2:49:39] >> Oh, do we have Do we have a time
[2:49:42] Okay, yes, cuz some some go over.
[2:49:45] >> And and some just ask and then
[2:49:47] >> Yeah.
[2:49:49] >> So, there was a question, uh Mayor. We
[2:49:51] do have um Did you talk to her about
[2:49:53] that?
[2:49:54] What um I had some people on one of the
[2:49:57] items say they couldn't be here. So, we
[2:49:59] chatted a little bit and sent maybe
[2:50:00] >> Oh, yes. Yes.
[2:50:01] >> Yes.
[2:50:02] >> Uh a video statement. So, I I know we
[2:50:04] have at least one of those. Um and then
[2:50:06] there was a a question of they could
[2:50:08] read a proxy. And
[2:50:11] in in the past had let people do up to
[2:50:13] one. But, um
[2:50:14] >> Sure, we'll be here.
[2:50:15] >> Yeah, as long as it's under
[2:50:17] We I like to keep the public public
[2:50:19] hearing comments to under 3 minutes as
[2:50:21] well. I I If they're video feeds or if
[2:50:24] they're reading proxy, I know we've done
[2:50:26] that in the past is that we've had
[2:50:27] others read
[2:50:29] on behalf of I mean, Council, you should
[2:50:31] have received copies of emails from
[2:50:34] Teresa that that that we submitted
[2:50:39] regarding some of the items on our
[2:50:40] agenda today. So,
[2:50:42] Right. So, oh, that's right.
[2:50:45] We have to have a motion to adjourn. Do
[2:50:47] you have to have a motion to adjourn?
[2:50:51] >> Second.
[2:50:52] >> Okay. Bye.
[2:50:56] And
[2:50:57] I didn't see it on the agenda.
[2:51:09] So, is that Jen and Chris?
[2:51:19] Should I be putting the journal on the
[2:51:21] box first?
[2:51:31] » Yeah, it's no big deal.
[2:51:34] » regular meeting to sign
[2:51:42] » Hi.
[2:51:49] » First stop.
[2:51:50] >> I want to make sure that this is put
[2:51:53] and taken out of my
[2:52:13] » And Tony says to me,
[2:52:15] And that was the thing.
[2:52:20] Why are you guys
[2:52:21] You want to open the back door?
[2:52:24] So, so that was it. It smells good.
[2:52:26] And a big issue.
[2:52:28] So, I can maybe make
[2:56:24] » Mhm.
[2:58:04] » microphone to turn on, too. Oh, there we
[2:58:06] go. And the public appearance sheet, so
[2:58:09] I'd like to welcome all of you to our
[2:58:11] City Council meeting this evening. I see
[2:58:13] a lot of familiar faces. See friends out
[2:58:17] there, and grateful to have you all here
[2:58:20] this evening.
[2:58:21] We'll go ahead and
[2:58:24] I'm going to turn the time over to
[2:58:25] Council member Malit to introduce those
[2:58:28] who will be giving our invocation,
[2:58:30] inspirational thought, and pledge of
[2:58:32] allegiance.
[2:58:33] >> Okay, so today we have some special
[2:58:35] guests. We have Grace Webb and Kai
[2:58:38] Harris, and they are both part of
[2:58:41] Scouting America Troop 1776. Grace is
[2:58:44] from the girls unit and Kai is from the
[2:58:46] boys unit. So, we'll start out with
[2:58:48] Grace giving our
[2:58:50] prayer followed by Kai leading us in the
[2:58:53] pledge of allegiance.
[2:59:03] » Dear Heavenly Father, we thank you for
[2:59:05] this day and we thank you for our city
[2:59:07] of Orem.
[2:59:08] We thank you for that we can meet and
[2:59:10] talk about the needs in our community.
[2:59:12] We are thankful for our freedom and
[2:59:13] safety. Please bless our leaders and
[2:59:15] those who serve in our city, state, and
[2:59:17] country. In the name of Jesus Christ,
[2:59:19] amen.
[2:59:29] » Audience, please stand.
[2:59:36] I pledge I pledge allegiance to the flag
[2:59:39] of the United States of America and to
[2:59:42] the republic for which it stands, one
[2:59:45] nation under God, indivisible, with
[2:59:48] liberty and justice for all.
[2:59:51] You may be seated.
[2:59:55] » Thank you, Grace and Kai,
[2:59:58] for being part of our city council
[2:59:59] meeting this this evening.
[3:00:02] All right, the next item on the agenda
[3:00:04] are
[3:00:05] uh mayor's report and items referred by
[3:00:07] council.
[3:00:09] And the first item we have is a
[3:00:11] presentation
[3:00:13] with a giving machine report and this is
[3:00:16] former council member Mark C. Strand who
[3:00:18] is the director
[3:00:20] of Orin giving machines will give us a
[3:00:22] presentation. Welcome.
[3:00:24] >> Thank you.
[3:00:26] It's always pleasure to to be here this
[3:00:27] time of year.
[3:00:29] The giving machines while they focus
[3:00:31] mostly in the Christmas season,
[3:00:34] there's a lot of effort and energy that
[3:00:35] goes on behind it and especially with
[3:00:37] the charities that are involved all year
[3:00:39] long with providing the services to the wonderful people here in the
[3:00:43] community and around the world. So we
[3:00:45] wanted to just kind of wrap up this last
[3:00:47] year's season,
[3:00:49] report to the city on some of the totals
[3:00:51] and the and recognize the charities
[3:00:54] that were involved with this last year
[3:00:56] and give them a little recognition and
[3:00:58] it's always fun to get your picture
[3:00:59] taken with the mayor and city council.
[3:01:01] So if you'll indulge us with that, I
[3:01:04] want to just give you an overview of the
[3:01:06] giving machines worldwide. They started
[3:01:08] back in 2017
[3:01:10] here in Provo. They've been in Orin
[3:01:12] since 2019. So we've we've had them 6
[3:01:15] years. We took a year off during COVID.
[3:01:17] Didn't seem like a good time to get
[3:01:19] together and punch your number on a on a
[3:01:21] vending machine. But this year the
[3:01:24] giving machine worldwide had over 1
[3:01:26] million visitors.
[3:01:28] We were in 126 cities in 21 countries on
[3:01:33] six continents.
[3:01:35] There were 4 million and eight or 4.8
[3:01:38] million items that were purchased. Those
[3:01:40] are those are tiles that were that were
[3:01:42] purchased.
[3:01:44] We worked with 500 plus different
[3:01:46] nonprofits around the world. There were
[3:01:49] 3200 unique items or tiles that were
[3:01:52] offered.
[3:01:53] That included three 3.5 million meals,
[3:01:58] 500,000 vaccinations,
[3:02:00] 109,000
[3:02:02] chickens and or goats and or pigs and or
[3:02:05] sheep.
[3:02:06] Uh, 97,000
[3:02:08] books and school supplies and of course
[3:02:11] 17,000 soccer balls to help the kids in
[3:02:14] the communities.
[3:02:15] For the Orem this last year, it was our
[3:02:17] best year yet. And we had um, over
[3:02:20] 14,700
[3:02:22] credit card transactions that took place
[3:02:25] representing approximately 65,000
[3:02:28] visitors that were part of the Giving
[3:02:30] Machine experience here in Orem. That's
[3:02:33] a lot of traffic and a lot of visitors
[3:02:34] that are taking part in that.
[3:02:36] Uh, the total giving this year in Orem
[3:02:38] was just over 1 and 1/2 million. Um,
[3:02:40] most of the fees were paid for by the
[3:02:42] donors. There was about $37,000 in
[3:02:45] credit card fees
[3:02:46] that were were also part of the
[3:02:48] donations.
[3:02:49] We had 47,000 tiles purchased and
[3:02:53] 847,000
[3:02:54] items donated
[3:02:56] uh, this particular year. So, when
[3:02:59] there's you know, three school lunches
[3:03:01] for the weekend, that counts as three
[3:03:02] items but but one tile.
[3:03:05] And also what's really important is that
[3:03:07] 70% of the funds donated stay here
[3:03:10] locally in Utah County or in this area.
[3:03:13] So, we really are helping
[3:03:15] people in this area that need help and
[3:03:17] that are that are doing it.
[3:03:19] Uh, in addition to the charities that
[3:03:21] are so active and so giving in their
[3:03:24] efforts, we also have a lot of local
[3:03:26] community support. We couldn't do it
[3:03:28] without the help of the Woodbury family
[3:03:30] and the University Place. What a great
[3:03:32] place to host the Giving Machines.
[3:03:35] Special shout out to Cindy and Jared and
[3:03:37] Rob that do so much there with us at the
[3:03:39] University Place. Scenic Solutions is a
[3:03:42] company here in Orem that supplies the
[3:03:44] machines. If you can think about what it
[3:03:46] takes to manage that many vending
[3:03:48] machines and get them to so many
[3:03:50] locations, they're an incredible company
[3:03:52] to work with. And most importantly, we
[3:03:55] had thousands of hours of volunteers for
[3:03:57] people supporting the machines and being
[3:03:59] part of contributing with with this
[3:04:02] program. So, we are honored and thrilled
[3:04:04] that the giving machines are here in
[3:04:06] Orem. We're also excited that they'll be
[3:04:08] here next year, so we can look forward
[3:04:10] to that. And now I'd like to give some
[3:04:12] time to some of our committee to
[3:04:13] recognize the charities that are here.
[3:04:15] So, we'll start with with Wendy.
[3:04:18] Want to go, Wendy?
[3:04:21] » Hello, I'm Wendy Wright. I uh serve on
[3:04:23] the committee with Mark. Um we're
[3:04:27] pleased to introduce the charities that
[3:04:28] participated in the 2025 Giving Machines
[3:04:31] located at University Place here in
[3:04:33] Orem. Once again, Utah County residents
[3:04:35] were extremely generous with their
[3:04:37] contributions, as Mark mentioned. These
[3:04:40] charities provided a variety of service,
[3:04:42] including food for the needy, health
[3:04:44] care, and good drinking water for
[3:04:46] communities that need it, empowerment
[3:04:48] for individuals with disabilities, and a
[3:04:50] variety of services for the segments of
[3:04:52] the communities that need help.
[3:04:54] The first charity that we'd like to
[3:04:56] introduce is Ability First, and Sandra
[3:05:00] Cuscio is here with us. Um Ability First
[3:05:04] recognizes, advocates for, and respects
[3:05:07] each individual's right and ability to
[3:05:09] realize their deserved quality of life.
[3:05:11] That's accomplished by identifying
[3:05:13] needs, providing resources,
[3:05:15] strengthening abilities, and advocating
[3:05:17] social and political change for all
[3:05:19] individuals with disabilities.
[3:05:22] Um in the Giving Machines, Ability First
[3:05:25] offered people the option of purchasing
[3:05:27] a wheelchair, a roll- rollator walker,
[3:05:31] or a support grab bar. And the
[3:05:34] wheelchair, there were 498
[3:05:37] purchased. And the rollator walkers,
[3:05:40] 374.
[3:05:41] And the support grab bar, 440.
[3:05:45] Totaling um $110,000.
[3:05:48] And sorry, 110
[3:05:52] thousand and 10 dollars.
[3:05:57] And they are an amazing resource in Utah
[3:05:59] County and they serve a lot of people
[3:06:01] with a lot of needs. So, we're really
[3:06:03] excited that we could partner with them.
[3:06:06] >> It didn't
[3:06:15] Hello, I'm Tim Wright. Uh Tabitha's Way
[3:06:17] is our next charity.
[3:06:19] Uh they're represented by Wendy Osborne.
[3:06:22] Uh Tabitha's Way has three local
[3:06:25] pantries, one in Spanish Fork,
[3:06:27] Pleasant Grove, and one in Saratoga
[3:06:29] Springs. They provide a robust solution
[3:06:31] for individuals and families facing food
[3:06:34] insecurity in our community.
[3:06:37] They provide temporary food assistance,
[3:06:39] recommended resources for self-reliance,
[3:06:43] and help neighbors help neighbors. So,
[3:06:46] here's some of the tiles that you would
[3:06:47] see in the Giving Machine
[3:06:49] from Tabitha's Way. One tile was labeled
[3:06:52] 150 lunches,
[3:06:55] and they did 4,937.
[3:06:58] Another was a month of food, 1,052.
[3:07:02] A holiday family meal,
[3:07:05] 862.
[3:07:06] School supplies,
[3:07:09] uh
[3:07:09] 3,299
[3:07:11] and a toiletry kit, 1,368
[3:07:15] for a total of
[3:07:18] If you read that for us, that's so
[3:07:19] impressive.
[3:07:20] >> It's a very impressive number. $411,000.
[3:07:24] So, 411,208
[3:07:27] dollars.
[3:07:27] >> Thank you.
[3:07:27] >> Did I say that right?
[3:07:28] >> You did.
[3:07:29] >> You got me nervous.
[3:07:39] » Hi, my name is Tom Walker and I'm
[3:07:40] privileged to announce the success of
[3:07:43] the Giving Machines for the United Way
[3:07:45] organization, and represented by Laura
[3:07:47] Berrigan, if she's here.
[3:07:50] Hello, Laura.
[3:07:52] So,
[3:07:55] let's see. They do a lot of different
[3:07:57] charities in the area. So,
[3:07:59] let's just kind of go through some of
[3:08:00] this a little bit. They provide
[3:08:02] essential support such as early
[3:08:03] education, mental health resources,
[3:08:06] financial security, and opportunities
[3:08:08] for community engagement.
[3:08:10] So, in the giving machines, 2,857
[3:08:14] people donated newborn resources.
[3:08:17] 1,605
[3:08:19] people donated educational products. 152
[3:08:22] people donated computers and courses.
[3:08:26] 278 donations of summer school programs.
[3:08:29] And then with some of the additional
[3:08:30] charities in the area they work with,
[3:08:32] there were 400 donations of rides for
[3:08:34] senior citizens.
[3:08:36] 250 donations for family legal support.
[3:08:39] And 1,219 donations of a hotline call.
[3:08:44] And the total
[3:08:46] donations for United Way
[3:08:48] charities was $200,605.
[3:08:53] Congratulations, Laura.
[3:08:54] >> Thank you. Thank you.
[3:08:57] have three.
[3:09:06] » Good afternoon. I'm Val Hale, also a
[3:09:08] member of the committee, and I'm going
[3:09:10] to introduce Rocky Mountain University
[3:09:12] of Health Professions and the clinics
[3:09:14] that they the pro bono clinics that they
[3:09:16] offer. I'd like to invite Cameron
[3:09:18] Martin,
[3:09:19] the president of Rocky Mountain
[3:09:20] University of Health Professions to come
[3:09:22] up and also acknowledge Jeff Fisher and
[3:09:24] I think Sherry Warnock, who's a member
[3:09:26] of our committee.
[3:09:28] Sherry's also
[3:09:30] here. Appreciate them.
[3:09:33] So, as I mentioned, Rocky Mountain
[3:09:35] University of Health Professions has
[3:09:37] instituted clinics to help the needy in
[3:09:40] our community. They offer pro bono
[3:09:41] services to patients in need. The
[3:09:44] clinics provide opportunities for
[3:09:46] students to get hands-on experience with
[3:09:48] patients who need care and don't have
[3:09:51] the means to pay for that care. So, it's
[3:09:53] a win-win opportunity and a real benefit
[3:09:56] in our community. And is it Was this the
[3:09:58] first year you did that?
[3:09:59] >> Yes.
[3:09:59] >> So, they just started the clinics this
[3:10:01] first year.
[3:10:02] And the tiles that they offered in the
[3:10:05] Giving Machines were eye exams.
[3:10:08] And we They They 529 of those were
[3:10:12] purchased. Physical therapy
[3:10:15] 648 were purchased.
[3:10:18] Counseling sessions 380 were purchased.
[3:10:21] And participation in a speech camp
[3:10:25] 683.
[3:10:27] And a learning device. Do you know what
[3:10:28] kind of learning device that was?
[3:10:30] >> One that helps you learn. I don't know.
[3:10:33] >> A learning learning device. How unique.
[3:10:37] >> SOP language is to to help you to
[3:10:40] help you in the language learning how to
[3:10:42] speak.
[3:10:43] >> Help Okay, I could use that. Anyway, um
[3:10:47] the totals for all of those donations
[3:10:49] were $130,245.
[3:10:54] » Thank you, Cameron.
[3:11:03] Stand up.
[3:11:04] >> Oh, stand up. My tiles are wrong.
[3:11:09] » The next charity is the Food & Care
[3:11:10] Coalition represented by Brent Crane.
[3:11:14] Um the Food & Care Coalition is Utah
[3:11:16] County's most comprehensive resource
[3:11:18] center for individuals experiencing
[3:11:20] homelessness
[3:11:22] as well as providing meals, medical and
[3:11:24] dental care, counseling, job training,
[3:11:26] and permanent housing all under one
[3:11:28] roof.
[3:11:30] Um Donors had options to purchase winter
[3:11:33] care packets 365.
[3:11:37] Warm socks 3,756.
[3:11:41] Hot meals 5,887.
[3:11:45] hydroponic seedling packet 1,240
[3:11:48] and a shelter welcome kit 539 totaling
[3:11:53] 197,356.
[3:12:00] Oh, I didn't see you. Sorry. Christine,
[3:12:03] this is Christine.
[3:12:05] >> I'm waiting to see out of these.
[3:12:10] It's me again.
[3:12:11] Many of you know that in the giving
[3:12:13] machines we typically feature some
[3:12:16] international charities and
[3:12:19] I remember a couple of years ago Mayor
[3:12:21] McCanless when she was with Community
[3:12:23] Action Services, we had a meeting with
[3:12:25] all the charities beforehand and she
[3:12:27] told them,
[3:12:28] "I know you all want to
[3:12:31] have the high amount, but you'll never
[3:12:33] beat out the goats and piglets.
[3:12:36] You were wrong this year."
[3:12:38] Yeah, so
[3:12:40] one of our international charities was
[3:12:43] Church World Services, a charity which
[3:12:45] began in 1946 in the aftermath of the
[3:12:48] Second World War. They have a mission to
[3:12:50] feed the hungry and help those in need.
[3:12:53] They operate in over 31 countries
[3:12:56] and in the giving machines
[3:12:59] their offerings included one goat
[3:13:03] and they sold or they
[3:13:06] 2,366
[3:13:08] goats were donated. And Tim Wright, if
[3:13:11] you haven't seen it, came up with a
[3:13:13] great AI thing where you put money in
[3:13:16] and a goat actually comes out of the
[3:13:17] machine. It's pretty impressive, but
[3:13:20] the 200 2,366,
[3:13:23] they also had 4,152
[3:13:27] 52 female hygiene kits donated
[3:13:30] and the total amount for those two was
[3:13:32] 309,458.
[3:13:35] Tabitha's way ahead over 400,000. So,
[3:13:38] they were defeated for the first time.
[3:13:41] At least the
[3:13:43] >> Well, it really This is a thing you
[3:13:45] never beat the goats.
[3:13:46] Well, congratulations.
[3:13:53] » And our final charity is Water for Good.
[3:13:55] And I'd invite Tyson Wise to come up. He
[3:13:58] came all the way from Boise for this
[3:13:59] today. So, we appreciate that.
[3:14:05] Uh
[3:14:06] Water for Good is an international
[3:14:08] faith-based nonprofit organization
[3:14:10] committed to creating a future where
[3:14:12] those no one dies from preventable
[3:14:14] water-related disease.
[3:14:16] And you'd be surprised how many people
[3:14:18] in this world die from
[3:14:20] those types of things.
[3:14:22] In partnership with churches and
[3:14:24] leaders, they help communities establish
[3:14:26] access to reliable water and critical
[3:14:28] sanitation and hygiene practices.
[3:14:31] Their offerings in the Giving Machines
[3:14:33] included a school toilet. Imagine going
[3:14:36] to school and not having a toilet. That
[3:14:37] happens in the world.
[3:14:39] There were 2,168
[3:14:42] of those donated.
[3:14:43] A water pump repair kit, I guess, to
[3:14:47] help
[3:14:48] >> Yep. Sustainability.
[3:14:49] >> to help sustain the the water pumps and
[3:14:52] keep them going. 4,121
[3:14:55] were donated. And family hygiene
[3:14:58] training.
[3:14:59] So, there were 341 of those for a total
[3:15:02] of $145,048.
[3:15:07] So, thank you can go over there. And uh
[3:15:10] Those are distinguished city council
[3:15:12] members are the charities that were
[3:15:14] represented in the Giving Machines last
[3:15:16] December. We appreciate their
[3:15:18] participation and the good work they do.
[3:15:22] We especially appreciate the generosity
[3:15:24] of our community here in Utah Valley
[3:15:27] in supporting them in such a way that
[3:15:29] can only be classified as astonishing.
[3:15:33] Thank you.
[3:16:01] » Oh, Peter's got the good camera.
[3:16:03] >> All right.
[3:16:03] >> Oh, what is that?
[3:16:05] >> That's going to come up in a second.
[3:17:15] » Those are all my people from a prior
[3:17:18] chapter in my life and it's it's so good
[3:17:20] to see them and I can assure you that
[3:17:23] the generous donations
[3:17:27] are going are spent wisely and I'm so
[3:17:30] excited to have
[3:17:33] for our local nonprofits and our our two
[3:17:36] international nonprofits to have
[3:17:38] additional resources to help those in
[3:17:41] our community. So, thank you. Thank you
[3:17:43] very much community and thank you
[3:17:47] those who provide services. It's not an
[3:17:49] easy task and appreciate you.
[3:17:53] The next item on our agenda council is
[3:17:56] the presentation building safety
[3:17:59] awareness month and is Paul Ash, there he is. Is Paul Ash, our
[3:18:05] chief building official, is here
[3:18:07] for that.
[3:18:10] » Mayor and council, I'm Paul Ashton. I'm
[3:18:13] the building official for Orem.
[3:18:15] I believe Pete has or someone has given
[3:18:18] us a video to to present, but something
[3:18:21] that also wanted to
[3:18:23] make you aware of is my my team
[3:18:27] consists of four inspectors, a three
[3:18:30] well, two and a half
[3:18:33] permit techs cuz Gary McGinn stole half
[3:18:36] of my permit techs.
[3:18:38] Thanks, Gary.
[3:18:40] And a build a deputy building official.
[3:18:42] And in with those those folks, there's
[3:18:45] 120 certifications between the
[3:18:50] our crew to make sure that Orem is kept
[3:18:53] safe.
[3:18:54] Buildings in in Orem are safe safely
[3:18:57] built. I also wanted to acknowledge that
[3:18:59] we have four master code professionals
[3:19:03] in Orem City.
[3:19:05] I want to also let you know that there's
[3:19:06] only 36 master code professionals in the
[3:19:10] state of Utah.
[3:19:11] So, we have a great crew to help keep
[3:19:16] the buildings in Orem safe. So,
[3:19:25] » Building Safety Month is set aside by
[3:19:28] the International Code Council to
[3:19:30] encourage people to be aware of their
[3:19:33] surroundings in their buildings and use
[3:19:35] the buildings in a safe manner.
[3:19:37] >> A building inspector is basically an
[3:19:38] editor but
[3:19:40] for a three-dimensional building.
[3:19:42] >> So right now we have four inspectors and
[3:19:45] they are all certified to do commercial
[3:19:49] and residential inspections. They
[3:19:51] understand the code. They know what
[3:19:53] they're doing. They have a great
[3:19:55] attitude.
[3:19:56] >> I like construction. I like seeing how
[3:19:57] things fit together.
[3:20:00] Right, this is where all the magic is.
[3:20:02] My job is look at the plans, make sure
[3:20:04] you followed the plans, did we miss
[3:20:05] anything?
[3:20:07] Why are you happy?
[3:20:10] And we left the blocking down here,
[3:20:11] looks like. This side we're missing
[3:20:13] blocking, too.
[3:20:15] >> I have two permit techs that take care
[3:20:18] of our front office and inspection
[3:20:20] scheduling. They are very helpful with
[3:20:22] the the public as well as as us as
[3:20:24] co-workers.
[3:20:25] >> What I typically do is I'll pull out the
[3:20:28] plans, I'll look at all of the framing
[3:20:30] and make sure that it matches the plans.
[3:20:31] And I start with the roof so I can
[3:20:33] follow the weight from the roof down.
[3:20:36] >> Well, I'm going to start at the top cuz
[3:20:38] that's how I usually look at things, so.
[3:20:43] What are you? Are you a vent? You're a big vent.
[3:20:47] And then I can kind of visually follow
[3:20:48] down. This distributes the weight down
[3:20:50] to here, down to here. We've got a beam
[3:20:52] that puts it down here.
[3:20:54] And then after I've done the framing,
[3:20:55] I'll go back through the whole house
[3:20:56] again and do the other three trades.
[3:20:59] It looks funky but it works.
[3:21:02] There.
[3:21:03] It's not bad. I think a lot of
[3:21:05] homeowners think building inspectors are
[3:21:07] here to bust them when they're building
[3:21:09] things and I think a lot of contractors
[3:21:10] think building inspectors are here to
[3:21:12] tell them they're wrong. Usually we're
[3:21:14] just here to make sure things get
[3:21:15] documented and get done right.
[3:21:17] >> I we we literally are just here to make
[3:21:19] sure that things fit together right and last longer and don't hurt people.
[3:21:25] >> Building Safety Month helps the citizens
[3:21:28] of Orem be a little bit more aware of
[3:21:31] those things that are happening in their
[3:21:32] buildings so that they
[3:21:34] are kept safe.
[3:21:45] » I believe in your packet there's a
[3:21:47] proclamation that
[3:21:50] ICC encourages you as a mayor and
[3:21:52] council to sign to name May May as
[3:21:57] Building Safety Month. So, and I have
[3:22:00] most of my crew here.
[3:22:02] So, I'd like them to stand up
[3:22:04] and be acknowledged for what they what
[3:22:06] they do for the city of Orem.
[3:22:17] » Thank you. Thank you for what you do. I
[3:22:19] love how she talks to the building.
[3:22:22] Because you know, a house
[3:22:23] >> to a lot more of than just the building.
[3:22:26] >> Yes. I like I like that. She just Yeah.
[3:22:30] >> That's why we had her on the on the
[3:22:31] video.
[3:22:34] » All right. Thank you. We'll get that
[3:22:36] proclamation signed.
[3:22:39] All right. Not only is it Building
[3:22:41] Safety Awareness Month,
[3:22:44] but we are in the midst of National
[3:22:47] Police Week.
[3:22:49] So, I'd like to invite our
[3:22:50] uh Police Chief um Chief B.J. Robinson
[3:22:53] to come up
[3:22:54] and for his uh presentation.
[3:22:58] >> Thank you, Mayor.
[3:23:00] During this calendar week, our nation
[3:23:02] pauses to pay tribute to the
[3:23:04] professionals of law enforcement and to
[3:23:06] honor the fallen officers on May 15th,
[3:23:09] Peace Officer Memorial Day.
[3:23:11] As police officers, we honor the fallen
[3:23:13] by picking up where they left off. Take
[3:23:15] the watch from here is a the phrase
[3:23:17] often heard at a cop's funeral.
[3:23:19] It's not as simple, nor is it enough for
[3:23:21] us to just check on duty and to show up.
[3:23:23] We must serve with integrity and honor,
[3:23:25] living up to the oath that we have sworn
[3:23:27] to one another
[3:23:28] and the public that we serve.
[3:23:31] I will also say here at Orem, we serve
[3:23:33] with distinction, not in order to be
[3:23:35] promoted or to be officer of the month,
[3:23:38] but because this is our expectation of
[3:23:40] one another and the level of service
[3:23:42] that we strive to provide.
[3:23:44] This level of service is also demanded
[3:23:46] from those officers who lost their lives
[3:23:48] upholding this oath.
[3:23:50] I can only imagine
[3:23:52] what they would give
[3:23:58] now to respond to those boring calls and
[3:24:00] those routine daily calls.
[3:24:04] Later this year, it will have been 30
[3:24:06] years since I graduated the police
[3:24:08] academy.
[3:24:11] Since that time, 34 officers in Utah
[3:24:14] have died in the line of duty.
[3:24:17] Six of those from Utah County.
[3:24:23] Lawrence Penrod,
[3:24:26] Joe Adams,
[3:24:28] Trent Halliday,
[3:24:30] Corey Ride,
[3:24:32] Joseph Shinners,
[3:24:34] Bill Hooser.
[3:24:36] For me, it's a little different when you
[3:24:38] put names to the fallen.
[3:24:40] I have personal and distinct memories of
[3:24:43] working and training with four of those
[3:24:45] men.
[3:24:46] The men and women of Orem Police
[3:24:48] Department know what it means to be an
[3:24:49] officer with Orem Police Department.
[3:24:52] Here we require a little bit more from
[3:24:54] our officers in order to provide the
[3:24:56] high service
[3:24:58] citizens of Orem are accustomed to.
[3:25:01] We are as kind as people allow us to be,
[3:25:03] understanding kindness is not weakness,
[3:25:07] and that some people refuse to allow us
[3:25:08] to be kind.
[3:25:10] We meet this mark far far more than we
[3:25:12] do not.
[3:25:13] We regularly train to better ourselves
[3:25:15] so those instances are few and far
[3:25:17] between.
[3:25:19] The support from you, our city council,
[3:25:22] and from our executive staff
[3:25:25] fuels us in our mission to make Orem the
[3:25:27] safest place to live, work, and play.
[3:25:30] This is accomplished as a team involving
[3:25:32] every employee of the city.
[3:25:34] To the people of our community, thank
[3:25:36] you.
[3:25:38] are a pleasure to serve.
[3:25:41] Orem is the best.
[3:25:44] You are the reason why we are here to
[3:25:46] answer your calls for service.
[3:25:49] You are the reason why we choose to
[3:25:50] stand up between you
[3:25:52] and the dangers of the most of the
[3:25:54] moment you face.
[3:25:56] We feel of your love and support
[3:25:57] throughout the year not just only during
[3:25:59] this week.
[3:26:00] We will continue to work hard to keep
[3:26:02] and be deserving of your trust.
[3:26:07] Thank you for your time today
[3:26:09] and during this week to recognize the
[3:26:10] great work of the men and women of your
[3:26:12] police department.
[3:26:14] They are truly deserving
[3:26:17] of the recognition
[3:26:19] and are always working to be better.
[3:26:21] It is my honor to serve alongside of
[3:26:23] them. Thank you.
[3:26:26] >> Thank you.
[3:26:51] Chief.
[3:26:52] And on behalf of the city council
[3:26:55] and myself, thank you to your department
[3:26:58] and you
[3:27:01] for for all you do
[3:27:03] to
[3:27:04] help keep our community safe and
[3:27:09] thriving. Thank you.
[3:27:12] Next item is
[3:27:15] National Public Works Week, which is
[3:27:18] next week.
[3:27:20] But we don't meet next week, so uh we
[3:27:22] have Chris Cherki, our Public Work Works
[3:27:24] Director here tonight to present about
[3:27:26] National Public Works Week.
[3:27:31] » Thank you, Mayor and Council.
[3:27:33] I don't know why I do this every year
[3:27:35] right after the Police Chief. It's
[3:27:37] really hard to follow.
[3:27:41] BJ, I love you.
[3:27:43] And the police and all you do for for
[3:27:45] our community.
[3:27:46] Um Public Works Week happens to fall
[3:27:49] right about the same time as uh
[3:27:53] as the uh police week does as well, so
[3:27:56] and that's that's a blessing and a
[3:27:58] curse, I suppose, but
[3:28:00] National Public Works Week is May 17th
[3:28:03] to 23rd.
[3:28:05] And we are going to have a luncheon at
[3:28:08] our facility. We we've invited each of
[3:28:10] you and our exec staff to attend. We
[3:28:13] usually have a gathering time at about
[3:28:14] 10:30 till 1:30. Well, 10:30 at the
[3:28:17] beginning then we have lunch and then
[3:28:19] a variety of prizes and and other fun
[3:28:21] activities and so forth.
[3:28:23] Um I wanted to remind you also that we
[3:28:26] have a a Deer Creek Intake Project
[3:28:28] Ribbon Cutting uh this Thursday, May
[3:28:31] 14th at the Sale Bowl Beach up at Deer
[3:28:34] Creek Reservoir. That's from 11:30 to
[3:28:36] 2:00 to celebrate the nearly 1 million
[3:28:39] uh
[3:28:40] 100 million-dollar project that's uh
[3:28:42] that's being completed there
[3:28:44] to provide drinking water for our
[3:28:45] community.
[3:28:47] Um I just like to share a few statistics
[3:28:49] with you. Um
[3:28:51] Parks this year, our Parks Division was
[3:28:54] recently absorbed into uh Bryce's
[3:28:57] Department of Recreation. It's now a
[3:28:59] Parks and Recreation Department.
[3:29:02] With that though, I'd like to recognize
[3:29:05] that they are they have provided a
[3:29:07] substantial service to this community in
[3:29:09] providing recreational opportunities at
[3:29:12] parks. And we have some of the nicest
[3:29:15] parks I believe in the state of Utah.
[3:29:17] I'm I'm just going to share some of our
[3:29:19] statistics with you right now though.
[3:29:22] Parks manages the cemetery as well as
[3:29:25] places to play and so forth. We have 34
[3:29:29] 34,110
[3:29:31] burial plots in our in our cemetery.
[3:29:35] Storm water in in 20
[3:29:38] 25 they maintained 3,940
[3:29:43] lane miles of road with street sweepers.
[3:29:46] In other words,
[3:29:47] they actually clean the all the gutters
[3:29:49] in the streets probably about eight or
[3:29:52] nine times a year.
[3:29:53] So, if you have a concern with that,
[3:29:56] anybody here that you haven't got your
[3:29:58] street swept then let me know. But we do
[3:30:00] have records of that, so be careful.
[3:30:03] We have documentation on that.
[3:30:07] We're happy to do so. It provides
[3:30:10] it helps to ensure clean environment. A
[3:30:13] lot of that what's in the street and the
[3:30:14] debris that comes in the street then
[3:30:16] goes into our storm water systems. We
[3:30:18] help to strive to maintain that and to
[3:30:20] ensure that the waters that flow into
[3:30:23] the
[3:30:24] waters of the state including Utah Lake
[3:30:27] are preserved and kept as clean as
[3:30:28] possible.
[3:30:30] Our streets division
[3:30:32] the cost to reconstruct all of the road
[3:30:35] surfaces that we own today in today's
[3:30:38] dollars would be about 377 million
[3:30:41] dollars.
[3:30:42] So, we we are grateful to the community
[3:30:45] and for the support of the funds to help
[3:30:48] provide some really nice quality streets
[3:30:50] I believe in our community. So, thank
[3:30:52] you to the council and and our citizens
[3:30:55] for that support.
[3:30:56] Well, we have another division called
[3:30:58] the traffic operations division.
[3:31:00] Uh they um actually maintain 11,976
[3:31:05] street signs in the city.
[3:31:08] Um that's a lot of street signs.
[3:31:10] And that's not including uh stop signs,
[3:31:14] uh
[3:31:14] regulatory signs and so forth. That's
[3:31:16] strictly just street signs, address
[3:31:18] signs on your corners. Yeah. The green
[3:31:20] ones that are on the corners. We have
[3:31:22] several other signs though that they do
[3:31:24] maintain as well.
[3:31:25] In fleet, we have 1,360
[3:31:28] total vehicles, equipment, and small
[3:31:30] equipment that we maintain with the
[3:31:33] staff of around six fleet mechanics and
[3:31:35] employees.
[3:31:37] In water, uh
[3:31:39] in 2025, we produced 8.7 billion gallons
[3:31:43] of water. On the flip side, on the water
[3:31:45] reclamation side, we treated just over
[3:31:48] uh 3 billion gallons of water. You might
[3:31:50] ask, "Well, what's the difference
[3:31:51] there?" Well, it is 5.7, but um the
[3:31:56] difference is that 5.7 billion gallons
[3:31:58] of water is going onto the ground
[3:32:00] to to water gardens and grass and so
[3:32:03] forth.
[3:32:04] In water reclamation or sewer division,
[3:32:07] we have 154 miles of pipe that was
[3:32:10] cleaned in 2025.
[3:32:12] In our GIS division,
[3:32:14] they maintain all of the citizen connect
[3:32:16] requests that come in through our help
[3:32:19] uh in 311 center. We had 1,522
[3:32:23] uh connect requests by citizens in Orem,
[3:32:27] um
[3:32:27] most of which we have responded and
[3:32:29] satisfied.
[3:32:30] So,
[3:32:32] we are appreciative of your support as
[3:32:34] the mayor and city council and the
[3:32:36] citizens of Orem for all that we were
[3:32:38] able to do to be able to provide a high
[3:32:40] quality and level of service in all of
[3:32:42] these areas. So,
[3:32:44] thank you on behalf of uh
[3:32:46] about 100 employees that we do have at
[3:32:48] our public works department.
[3:32:50] >> Thank you. Thank you for the work and the the
[3:32:56] I know. I'm just so I'm just thinking
[3:32:58] I'm so grateful when I when I flush the
[3:33:00] toilet, it goes away from me and that's
[3:33:03] because of you guys.
[3:33:04] >> One of our models at water reclamation
[3:33:06] is we're here so you can flush with
[3:33:08] confidence. So.
[3:33:10] >> Oh, I like to I'm so confident. Thank
[3:33:13] you.
[3:33:13] >> Thank you.
[3:33:14] >> And they have great drinking water and the streets. Thank you for all of
[3:33:19] you and your team, too.
[3:33:20] >> Thank you all very much.
[3:33:27] » That's what I expect. You know, it says
[3:33:30] well, I don't even know where we put
[3:33:31] that on our our our seal. You can flush
[3:33:33] with confidence. Like no, that doesn't
[3:33:35] belong up there with that right now.
[3:33:37] Anyway,
[3:33:38] um next presentation and our final
[3:33:40] presentation
[3:33:42] under the mayor's report and items
[3:33:44] report by council is our Orm Youth
[3:33:46] Council report and I would like to
[3:33:49] invite Jenica Jones, our strategies and
[3:33:51] innovation manager, innovations manager,
[3:33:53] Sydney Bailey, our events coordinator,
[3:33:56] and we have some of our youth council
[3:33:58] members here tonight. And so I'd like to
[3:34:00] welcome you.
[3:34:06] Oh, they're being shy.
[3:34:07] >> They'll they'll come in a little bit.
[3:34:09] >> Oh, they'll come in a little bit. Okay,
[3:34:10] good. Good.
[3:35:06] » All right, thank you Mayor and Council.
[3:35:08] We're excited to be here tonight uh with
[3:35:10] some of our youth council members who
[3:35:12] you'll hear you'll hear from in just a
[3:35:13] bit to share a little bit about our
[3:35:15] experience this year.
[3:35:17] >> Yeah, so we've been able to work with 20
[3:35:19] amazing members of the Youth Council
[3:35:21] this year. And as advisors, our role has
[3:35:24] been to coordinate activities,
[3:35:26] facilitate discussions, and help our
[3:35:29] Youth Council members like learn more
[3:35:31] about how Orem works.
[3:35:32] >> Our Youth Council members have spent
[3:35:34] many hours this year serving about our
[3:35:36] serving our community and learning more
[3:35:38] about how Orem works. We're very proud
[3:35:40] of their learning and growth. And today
[3:35:42] you'll have the opportunity to hear from
[3:35:43] a few of our members about their
[3:35:45] accomplishments and takeaways from this
[3:35:47] past year. We want to express our
[3:35:48] gratitude to each of the members of our
[3:35:50] Youth Council and also to you, Mayor and
[3:35:52] Council, for your support of this
[3:35:54] program, especially to those of you,
[3:35:56] Jen, Jeff, Crystal, Chris, that have
[3:35:57] been advisors during this past school
[3:35:59] year.
[3:36:00] >> Yeah, and so these are probably some of
[3:36:03] the brightest kids in Orem, and we will
[3:36:06] now turn the time over to a few of them
[3:36:08] to share their experiences with you.
[3:36:19] » Welcome.
[3:36:27] » Good evening, everyone.
[3:36:29] Thank you, Mayor and Council, for the
[3:36:31] opportunity to present. We're very
[3:36:33] excited. My name's June
[3:36:34] Hungerford-Weiss. I'm a sophomore at
[3:36:36] Orem High, and this is my first year
[3:36:38] serving
[3:36:40] on Orem Youth Council.
[3:36:42] >> Hi Mayor and Council. My name is Malu.
[3:36:45] I'm currently 16 and I'm a sophomore at
[3:36:47] Mountain View, and this is also my first
[3:36:49] year on Orem Youth Council.
[3:36:51] >> I'm Katherine Collings. I'm a senior at
[3:36:53] Timpanogos High School,
[3:36:54] and this is my second year on the Youth
[3:36:56] Council.
[3:36:57] >> Perfect. So, just an introduction. This
[3:36:59] year the Youth Council consisted of 20
[3:37:01] members. We are all high school students
[3:37:03] in grades 10 through 12 with eight
[3:37:05] members from Timpanogos High School,
[3:37:07] seven members from Mountain View High
[3:37:09] School, four members from Orem High
[3:37:10] School, and one member from the Utah
[3:37:12] County Academy of Science.
[3:37:15] >> Okay.
[3:37:16] Um at our first activities we wrote and
[3:37:18] adopted a mission statement to guide our
[3:37:19] year, reading as follows. Our mission is
[3:37:21] to foster a thriving community in the
[3:37:23] city of Orem by providing exemplary
[3:37:25] service and developing leadership skills
[3:37:27] in order to contribute to our
[3:37:28] communities throughout our lives. We
[3:37:29] believe in having fun while learning and
[3:37:30] developing lasting friendships in which
[3:37:32] everyone feels they belong. Our
[3:37:33] activities throughout the year focus on
[3:37:35] these elements, providing service,
[3:37:36] developing leadership skills, learning
[3:37:38] about the city, and developing lasting
[3:37:39] friendships.
[3:37:41] >> So, this year we participated in some
[3:37:43] service projects not only to
[3:37:46] serve the community, but also to
[3:37:48] make our city more beautiful than it
[3:37:50] already is. So, we cleaned up some
[3:37:52] flower beds at Nielsen's Grove Park, and
[3:37:55] we also
[3:37:56] donated some
[3:37:58] We did a clothing, book, and toy drive
[3:38:00] for United Way, and we also did welcome
[3:38:03] baby kits. So, and a lot of other
[3:38:06] activities such as Taste of Orem. We
[3:38:10] volunteered at a Friendship Center dance
[3:38:12] at the Senior Center, and then also
[3:38:14] helping with Lights On.
[3:38:17] >> Perfect. Learning about Orem was really
[3:38:18] fascinating. We participated in a Q&A
[3:38:21] session with our police department,
[3:38:22] learning from our representatives from
[3:38:24] many different divisions within the
[3:38:25] department, including patrol,
[3:38:27] investigations, and evidence. We also
[3:38:29] went on a tour and Q&A session for the
[3:38:31] library, learning about the circulation
[3:38:33] process, the maker space, the new
[3:38:35] greenhouse and courtyard, library hall,
[3:38:37] and more.
[3:38:40] » Um one of the activities that we got to
[3:38:42] participate in was local officials day.
[3:38:44] Um so in January we went on a field trip
[3:38:46] to the Utah State Capitol for locals
[3:38:47] officials day officials day along with
[3:38:49] hundreds of other youth council members
[3:38:51] from around the state. We were able to
[3:38:52] meet with Val Peterson, one of the state
[3:38:54] representatives from Orem. We were also
[3:38:55] able to participate in mock debates
[3:38:57] where two of our members had the
[3:38:58] opportunity to present our youth
[3:38:59] council's policy idea to create a
[3:39:01] program where small and medium-sized
[3:39:03] businesses could donate unused food or
[3:39:04] meal vouchers to students in need. We
[3:39:06] learned a lot and had an amazing time.
[3:39:10] » Uh we also did a bunch of activities to
[3:39:12] learn more about our city government. So
[3:39:13] we had a mock city council meeting
[3:39:16] um which we discussed uh issues and from
[3:39:20] our city legal, finance, and planning
[3:39:21] staff.
[3:39:22] And at our last activity, we also
[3:39:24] created and presented our own ideas to
[3:39:26] improve life in Orem such as
[3:39:28] um
[3:39:29] improving residents' emergency
[3:39:30] preparedness knowledge, partnering with
[3:39:32] local businesses to provide
[3:39:34] opportunities for youth to gather and
[3:39:35] connect throughout the summer, and
[3:39:37] investing in bike infrastructure
[3:39:38] throughout the city.
[3:39:40] >> So this year Orem Council, I just want
[3:39:42] to say it's been an awesome opportunity
[3:39:44] and I would say my favorite thing about
[3:39:46] OAC was not only the connections and
[3:39:48] memories I made with everyone, but the
[3:39:50] knowledge I gained regarding service and
[3:39:52] how much of an impact that has on each
[3:39:54] and every one of us in Orem.
[3:39:57] » Uh one of my favorite activities was the
[3:39:59] veteran check-in activity where we
[3:40:01] worked with American Legion to call
[3:40:03] veterans that um
[3:40:05] recently came back to just see how they
[3:40:06] were and I just loved doing that because
[3:40:09] I got to see um the veterans and I met a
[3:40:11] lot of awesome people and I'm just so
[3:40:13] grateful for what they do for our
[3:40:14] country.
[3:40:15] >> Um I've loved being on Orem Youth
[3:40:17] Council for the past um two years. Um I
[3:40:19] think probably my favorite thing was um
[3:40:21] local officials day and getting to meet
[3:40:23] everybody from all the um different
[3:40:25] youth councils. That was a super fun
[3:40:26] opportunity. Um and I also just loved
[3:40:28] learning about um how much work goes
[3:40:30] into making our city such a wonderful
[3:40:32] place to live.
[3:40:35] Thank you, guys.
[3:40:37] Thank you. Council, do you have anything
[3:40:38] you want to know if you want to
[3:40:40] All right, Councilmember Gale. You guys
[3:40:42] were such a fun bunch and there was so
[3:40:43] much energy. It was fun to go to the
[3:40:45] meetings and watch you. I think it was
[3:40:46] the mock city council debate. Jeff, you
[3:40:48] and I were there watching and it there
[3:40:49] was just so much energy and enthusiasm
[3:40:50] and you honestly look like you belonged
[3:40:52] up here. So, I look forward to like 10
[3:40:53] years, 20 years, 30 years down the road
[3:40:54] where you guys will be sitting in these
[3:40:55] seats. So, thank you.
[3:40:59] All right, thank you. Yes, it was so fun
[3:41:01] to get to know some of you some of the
[3:41:03] council better at the the capital when
[3:41:06] we had our at the
[3:41:07] legislature and meet with our
[3:41:09] legislators. And so, thank you for your
[3:41:12] service and I Congratulations on your
[3:41:14] graduation. And are you two coming back
[3:41:16] to youth council next year?
[3:41:18] >> Yes, ma'am.
[3:41:19] >> All right. So, good luck to you going
[3:41:22] forward and we'll see you again next
[3:41:23] year.
[3:41:24] >> Thank you.
[3:41:25] guys.
[3:41:25] >> Thank you.
[3:41:34] » All right, Council. The next item on our
[3:41:36] agenda is
[3:41:37] uh our our agenda Excuse me. Are our
[3:41:41] consent items. We have approval of the
[3:41:44] April 28th and May 5th, 2026 meeting
[3:41:47] minutes, a resolution adopting the Heart
[3:41:49] of Downtown Master Plan, and a an
[3:41:51] appointment to the Historic Preservation
[3:41:54] Advisory Commission. Rod Erickson, Mr.
[3:41:56] Erickson, are you here tonight?
[3:41:59] Okay, he's not here here tonight. But we
[3:42:01] I have those are the three items on our
[3:42:03] consent calendar. And I would entertain
[3:42:05] a motion if you'd like to do that.
[3:42:08] >> Here, I move that we approve the consent
[3:42:09] items.
[3:42:11] >> All right, thank you. We have a motion.
[3:42:12] Is there a second?
[3:42:13] >> Second.
[3:42:14] >> All right, thank you. We have a motion
[3:42:15] and a second.
[3:42:17] Um
[3:42:18] Go ahead and Councilmember Lamson and
[3:42:20] start with you.
[3:42:21] >> I
[3:42:31] >> All right, the motion carries. Thank
[3:42:32] you.
[3:42:33] Right, the next item on our agenda is
[3:42:35] time set aside for personal appearances.
[3:42:38] Time has been set aside for the public
[3:42:40] to express their ideas, concerns, and
[3:42:43] comments on items not scheduled as
[3:42:45] public hearings on the agenda. So, if
[3:42:47] there is something that you like to come
[3:42:49] to speak to that is later on in the
[3:42:50] agenda under it has a public hearing
[3:42:53] phrase next to it.
[3:42:55] That's where you will want to do that
[3:42:56] rather than during personal appearances.
[3:42:59] Those wishing to speak are encouraged to
[3:43:01] show respect for those who serve the
[3:43:02] city. Comments should focus on issues
[3:43:05] concerning the city.
[3:43:07] And those who will be speaking during
[3:43:09] personal appearances have signed in
[3:43:12] before the beginning of the meeting and
[3:43:13] I have that right list right here. And I
[3:43:16] would like to just remind you and invite
[3:43:18] you to limit your comments to no more
[3:43:20] than 3 minutes. And
[3:43:22] we'll go ahead and we'll start with
[3:43:24] Grant Ivans.
[3:43:28] Welcome.
[3:43:28] >> How's it going?
[3:43:30] Okay, we'll be brief. So, my name is
[3:43:32] Grant. This is my co-founder Nick. We're
[3:43:35] both currently students down at BYU.
[3:43:38] Um right now we're working on a new app
[3:43:41] and it's designed to help with community
[3:43:44] security or community safety.
[3:43:47] So, the idea is you guys I'm pretty sure
[3:43:49] all familiar with Google Maps, Waze, and
[3:43:51] how you can create alerts of traffic,
[3:43:54] obstruction on the road, anything. The
[3:43:56] idea is that, but for public safety. So,
[3:43:58] picture you're in your neighborhood and
[3:43:59] you can create an alert alerting someone
[3:44:01] of something going on outside of your
[3:44:02] neighborhood. And so, we want to work
[3:44:04] with
[3:44:06] city council to
[3:44:08] Well, we're kind of curious as to how we
[3:44:09] can work with city council. So, Nick is
[3:44:11] going to talk about kind of a legal
[3:44:12] matter that we need to kind of solve and
[3:44:14] figure out. And then we also want you
[3:44:16] guys thinking about how we could
[3:44:17] possibly work with you guys
[3:44:19] and endorsing it, promoting it, or just
[3:44:20] any possible ways we can work with you
[3:44:22] guys to
[3:44:22] >> Okay.
[3:44:23] >> get others. So
[3:44:24] >> Thank you.
[3:44:24] >> One other things
[3:44:26] >> Yeah, so
[3:44:27] we are actually already in the Google
[3:44:29] Play Store with Android
[3:44:31] but Apple is a little bit more
[3:44:33] restrictive and something that they
[3:44:35] require is that any application working
[3:44:38] in conjunction with community safety,
[3:44:41] crime alerts, stuff like that
[3:44:43] needs to be like there needs to be
[3:44:46] a connection and like an agreement with
[3:44:51] the local police department saying yes,
[3:44:53] like they're aware that we're trying to
[3:44:55] help the city like be safer and they
[3:44:58] like approve of that. It's not in any
[3:45:01] way like a legal binding
[3:45:04] commitment. It's just like a recognition
[3:45:06] that yeah, we're aware and okay with
[3:45:08] that.
[3:45:08] We talked to a couple of the police
[3:45:10] departments by phone today and they just
[3:45:12] told us that our best bet in like
[3:45:16] getting in contact with the police chief
[3:45:18] would be coming to a city council
[3:45:20] meeting. So that's why we came here.
[3:45:23] Um uh
[3:45:25] but that's kind of
[3:45:26] >> Okay.
[3:45:28] >> So we have that. So I don't know really
[3:45:30] if we just need to meet like a schedule
[3:45:32] meeting to meet with the police chief or
[3:45:34] >> Why don't you take it over to give it to
[3:45:36] our city recorder Teresa
[3:45:38] and uh
[3:45:40] Brent, would you mind
[3:45:42] I you talk about that at at exact staff
[3:45:45] to learn what the best way to go about
[3:45:47] that is if if it's something we can do
[3:45:49] or or look at it.
[3:45:51] >> Yeah, no promises but we'll definitely
[3:45:53] look into it.
[3:45:54] >> Um just one more quick thing. So well
[3:45:57] one thing we noticed when like doing
[3:45:58] research was that sometimes city
[3:46:00] councils they allocate a budget to
[3:46:03] neighborhood watch with the police
[3:46:05] departments or something like that of
[3:46:06] the sorts and I guess we're kind of
[3:46:07] curious to see what Orem has for
[3:46:08] neighborhood watch in your city like how
[3:46:10] you guys kind of mitigate
[3:46:12] going through and doing stuff like that.
[3:46:14] >> Tonight, you're lucky night because
[3:46:16] we're talking about the budget. But if
[3:46:18] But rather than sit through all that, if
[3:46:19] you I don't know if if someone from our
[3:46:21] staff can talk about what
[3:46:24] if what our budget is for community
[3:46:25] policing or neighborhood watch. Is there
[3:46:27] anyone or we get back with them?
[3:46:30] Okay, Chief Robinson will get back with
[3:46:32] you.
[3:46:32] >> Okay.
[3:46:33] >> on that.
[3:46:33] >> Perfect. Thank you, guys.
[3:46:34] >> All right, thank you.
[3:46:37] All right, next we have Lenore Rudolph.
[3:46:45] » Hi, my name is Lenore Rudolph and I'm
[3:46:49] um lived in Utah County for over half my
[3:46:51] life
[3:46:52] in both Provo and Orem.
[3:46:55] And a couple weeks ago I was here when
[3:46:57] we were talking about short-term rentals
[3:46:58] and I noticed that
[3:47:00] there was nobody talking about the
[3:47:01] benefit of short-term rentals to people
[3:47:03] who don't own short-term rentals, but
[3:47:05] might use them here in the city. So, I
[3:47:06] thought I would
[3:47:07] put my name in the hat and give you a
[3:47:09] little bit of information about how the
[3:47:11] short-term rentals have have enhanced
[3:47:13] our family's life.
[3:47:15] Um
[3:47:16] there are three points.
[3:47:18] Um
[3:47:20] Today I want to talk about the value.
[3:47:22] Oh, see, I do want to go back to
[3:47:24] something that I didn't say.
[3:47:26] Um
[3:47:27] I love that this area is family
[3:47:29] oriented, kind, service oriented, and
[3:47:32] that we have a community that looks
[3:47:33] after one another.
[3:47:36] I want to talk about three different
[3:47:37] things. Family reunions are all about
[3:47:39] family, so Family City USA is the right
[3:47:41] place for that. Um when a family is in
[3:47:43] crisis, having a short-term rental
[3:47:45] nearby so a family member can come and
[3:47:47] help is really a helpful and wonderful
[3:47:50] um service that short-term rentals
[3:47:52] provide. And housing in Orem can
[3:47:55] potentially price out young families. Um
[3:47:58] and then being able to rent a portion of
[3:48:00] your home as a
[3:48:02] short-term rental can help you pay your
[3:48:04] mortgage. And so, that is
[3:48:06] the three things that I wanted to point
[3:48:08] out. Um grew up connecting with family
[3:48:11] at family reunions
[3:48:12] knowing my cousins, second cousins,
[3:48:14] aunts, uncles, great aunts, and great
[3:48:16] uncles.
[3:48:17] And my parents cousins have enhanced my
[3:48:19] life.
[3:48:21] We have started having family reunions
[3:48:25] that are just for my parents in our in
[3:48:27] our family and we have had family
[3:48:30] reunions
[3:48:31] across the nation all the way from the
[3:48:33] East Coast to the West Coast.
[3:48:36] Idaho, Utah, Bear Lake, everywhere. And
[3:48:39] just last summer, 2025, we had a family
[3:48:42] reunion here in Orem in a large house
[3:48:44] that accommodated over 50 people.
[3:48:47] We had heard about it from the McMurray
[3:48:50] family who is related to us because one
[3:48:52] of the niece one of our nieces is in
[3:48:54] that family and it was wonderful. They
[3:48:56] had brought 11 children and all their
[3:48:58] spouses and grandchildren and said it
[3:48:59] was a wonderful place to stay.
[3:49:02] So my parents, Leonard and JoAnn Hadden,
[3:49:04] brought their six children, six spouses,
[3:49:06] 24 grandchildren,
[3:49:08] some
[3:49:09] spouses of some of the grandchildren,
[3:49:10] some fiancés, some boyfriends and
[3:49:13] girlfriends who were just being
[3:49:14] introduced to the family and were not
[3:49:15] like blood related but they're because
[3:49:18] they're part of the family. Very
[3:49:19] inclusive family.
[3:49:21] The couple of kitchens, 18 bedrooms,
[3:49:25] a pool, everything made it just a really
[3:49:27] lovely visit. Additionally, there was a
[3:49:30] elevator in the house and my husband who
[3:49:31] uses a wheelchair full-time was able to
[3:49:33] participate in everything which was just
[3:49:35] wonderful. Um
[3:49:38] So that's family reunions. Recently, our
[3:49:40] autistic son had Oh my gosh, I'm out of
[3:49:42] time.
[3:49:43] He had a crisis and we had my daughter
[3:49:46] come and stay at a rental for a month
[3:49:48] and help us out. And I will close but
[3:49:50] thank you so much um mayor and council
[3:49:53] members for letting me express how
[3:49:56] short-term rentals really help people
[3:49:57] here in Orem who are here as residents.
[3:50:01] >> Thank you, uh Ms. Rudolph. Appreciate
[3:50:03] your comments.
[3:50:04] Right. Um
[3:50:06] Leonard Hadden.
[3:50:13] » My name is Leonard Hadden. I have um
[3:50:17] lived um border to border and coast to
[3:50:20] coast, but for the past 10 years I've
[3:50:21] lived here in Orem.
[3:50:23] And before that I've lived in this area
[3:50:26] for a total of 19 years.
[3:50:30] We have six children. I don't think
[3:50:32] that's exceptional in the city of Orem.
[3:50:35] But they're scattered from Germany to
[3:50:37] California and from
[3:50:40] uh I don't know, from here Utah and
[3:50:42] California and and Idaho.
[3:50:45] And we have been having
[3:50:47] semi-annual reunions, I think that's
[3:50:50] called once every 2 years.
[3:50:53] And we've had to travel many hundreds of
[3:50:56] miles most of the time to have those
[3:50:58] reunions to find something to
[3:51:00] accommodate 50 or so people.
[3:51:03] And uh that's how many people we had at
[3:51:05] our reunion last year in
[3:51:08] we found a building, a home here in Orem
[3:51:10] that would accommodate that large number
[3:51:12] of people comfortably.
[3:51:14] Uh at and it was uh a very
[3:51:18] uh successful experience for us.
[3:51:22] I realize that uh there are some
[3:51:24] problems that you are trying to
[3:51:26] accommodate, but I think
[3:51:28] by making it impossible for people to
[3:51:30] use their property
[3:51:32] in an appropriate way
[3:51:34] is like looking for a problem
[3:51:38] or looking for a solution looking for a
[3:51:40] problem that doesn't exist.
[3:51:43] Or there are other ways to whatever
[3:51:45] those problems might be to find
[3:51:47] solutions.
[3:51:49] And I I would really appreciate it if we
[3:51:52] could utilize our property uh, in appropriate ways and not limit it
[3:51:58] on the basis of who's there and how long
[3:52:00] they're here and how they're related and
[3:52:02] how they're not related as long as they
[3:52:05] behave appropriately. And I think that's
[3:52:08] what I would like to say.
[3:52:10] >> Right. Thank you. Appreciate you coming
[3:52:12] this evening.
[3:52:13] That concludes our personal appearance
[3:52:15] section of our meeting.
[3:52:18] So, Council, go ahead and go on to our
[3:52:21] scheduled items. The first item on our
[3:52:24] scheduled items is a public hearing,
[3:52:26] excuse me, public hearing. It's an
[3:52:28] ordinance request to vacate a 0.16 acre
[3:52:32] portion of 1000 South right-of-way
[3:52:35] terminating at 590 East. So, I would
[3:52:38] like to invite Jared Hall, our planning
[3:52:41] manager,
[3:52:43] to come forward.
[3:52:47] And Mr. Hall, while you're waiting, is
[3:52:48] the app- Is this something that Is there
[3:52:50] an applicant here as well?
[3:52:52] Or is this Is the city
[3:52:54] I'm trying to remember the city's
[3:52:56] Is this Is this the
[3:52:57] >> There is a petitioner, uh, Woodbury
[3:52:59] Group, but, um, they're not here
[3:53:01] tonight. They weren't able to be here.
[3:53:03] >> Okay. Okay, then I won't I won't turn
[3:53:05] the time over to them.
[3:53:07] >> Thank you. Um,
[3:53:09] so this is a request, as you said, to
[3:53:11] vacate a portion of right-of-way, uh,
[3:53:13] right here just the terminus of 1000
[3:53:15] South uh, as it hits the shopping center
[3:53:17] at the Union
[3:53:19] I always say Union, I'm sorry,
[3:53:20] University Place.
[3:53:21] Um, vacating right-of-way is slightly
[3:53:23] different than surplus property or other
[3:53:25] property that we own. Right-of-ways are
[3:53:26] distinct and they have to be vacated.
[3:53:28] They're vacated to the parties on either
[3:53:30] side, adjacent to either side of the
[3:53:32] right-of-way portion to be vacated. In
[3:53:34] this case,
[3:53:35] it's easiest to understand it looking at
[3:53:36] a couple of maps. This is the area that
[3:53:38] we're talking about in that red square.
[3:53:40] It's 0.16 acres, as you mentioned. Um,
[3:53:42] it's been planned as part of the new
[3:53:43] Home Depot that's being built, uh, in
[3:53:45] that area and it's been approved. Uh, as
[3:53:47] the plat gets ready to be recorded, uh,
[3:53:49] we need to finish vacating this, um,
[3:53:52] and that's basically what we're doing.
[3:53:54] This is the description of it.
[3:53:56] Um this part has already been given over
[3:53:59] in the past. These two properties that
[3:54:00] are adjacent to it and the parts here as
[3:54:02] well are all owned uh by the shopping
[3:54:05] center. So, they're they're the ones
[3:54:06] that will receive that acreage and it'll
[3:54:09] be absorbed into the Home Depot site.
[3:54:11] That is the request in a nutshell.
[3:54:13] >> Thank you, Mr. Hall. Council, do you
[3:54:15] have any questions for Mr. Hall?
[3:54:16] >> I have a question. So, it you know, cuz
[3:54:19] I'm looking and the lines don't line up.
[3:54:22] Is that because of the 7-ft buffer that
[3:54:24] we added?
[3:54:25] >> Yeah, that's part of that that's part of
[3:54:26] that right-of-way as well.
[3:54:27] >> Perfect. Thank you.
[3:54:29] All right. Any other questions for Mr.
[3:54:31] Hall?
[3:54:32] All right. This is a public hearing. So,
[3:54:35] I invite I'll open that the public
[3:54:36] hearing up and invite anyone here who
[3:54:39] would like to speak on this particular
[3:54:42] agenda item to do so now.
[3:54:50] All right. I don't see anybody who is
[3:54:53] coming forward. So, I'll go ahead and
[3:54:55] close the public hearing and bring this
[3:54:58] back to the city council for
[3:54:59] consideration.
[3:55:05] » Uh Jared, quick question.
[3:55:07] >> Sure.
[3:55:07] >> Um I think I understand this from our
[3:55:09] planning commission meeting, um but I
[3:55:11] just want to confirm that vacating the
[3:55:13] right-of-way here
[3:55:14] is just vacating right-of-way in a
[3:55:15] property that is already owned by
[3:55:17] University Place
[3:55:18] um and has no effect on the
[3:55:20] neighborhood.
[3:55:20] >> It doesn't impact the neighborhood at
[3:55:22] all. That's correct. So, the folks that
[3:55:24] use uh 1000 South right now and access
[3:55:26] the properties from it will still be
[3:55:27] able to do that.
[3:55:29] It's already kind of effectively it's
[3:55:31] bordered by only property that's owned
[3:55:33] by the Woodbury Group and that and the
[3:55:34] shopping center. So.
[3:55:36] >> All right. Thank you. Any other
[3:55:38] questions? All right. What would you
[3:55:40] like to do, Council?
[3:55:45] » All right. I'll make a movement that we
[3:55:47] approve of the vacation of the 0.16 acre
[3:55:50] portion of the 1000 South right-of-way
[3:55:53] terminating at 590 East.
[3:55:56] >> Right, thank you. A motion. Is there a
[3:55:57] second to the motion?
[3:55:59] >> I'll second.
[3:56:00] >> Right, thank you Council member Gale. Is
[3:56:01] there any more discussion on it before
[3:56:04] we vote?
[3:56:06] All right, I will start the voting with
[3:56:08] Council member Millet.
[3:56:10] >> I vote aye.
[3:56:12] >> Aye.
[3:56:18] >> All right, thank you. The motion
[3:56:19] carries.
[3:56:20] >> Thank you.
[3:56:22] >> All right, we have now have item 10.2.
[3:56:26] It's another public hearing and it's an
[3:56:28] ordinance request to amend Article
[3:56:30] 22-5-3A
[3:56:33] and the zoning map of the city of Orem
[3:56:35] by changing the zone of the property
[3:56:36] located generally at 92 South 800 East
[3:56:39] from R8 single-family residential to C1
[3:56:43] commercial. Approximately 1 acres 1.0
[3:56:46] acres in conjunction with a development
[3:56:48] agreement limiting the use of the
[3:56:50] property to assisted living facilities.
[3:56:52] So, we'll turn the time over to you, Mr.
[3:56:55] Hall.
[3:56:56] >> Thank you, and thank you for reading
[3:56:57] through the whole thing. That's it's a
[3:56:59] long description, but this is a little
[3:57:01] different this particular zone map
[3:57:03] amendment request. This is the Spring
[3:57:05] Hollow Care Center.
[3:57:07] All the land surrounding it is zoned R8.
[3:57:10] It's all solid in a residential area.
[3:57:13] Just a couple of things, we'll come back
[3:57:14] to them quickly, but there was a public
[3:57:16] hearing on March 18th. The Planning
[3:57:17] Commission did recommend approval, but
[3:57:19] in conjunction with a development
[3:57:20] agreement to further control that
[3:57:21] because it is all surrounded by RA
[3:57:24] zoning. Um
[3:57:26] one of the
[3:57:27] most important points in this particular
[3:57:29] application is that this care center,
[3:57:31] that you can see the church to the north
[3:57:32] of the Union Canal is just to the west.
[3:57:35] Um
[3:57:37] one of the important things to
[3:57:38] understand is that the subject property
[3:57:39] is zoned R8 and this is a care center.
[3:57:41] It's legal but non-conforming. It was
[3:57:43] approved under a conditional use permit
[3:57:45] in 1997.
[3:57:46] Uh and it at that time the city did
[3:57:49] allow larger numbers and they set the
[3:57:50] number of uh beds in a facility like this and
[3:57:54] allowed them in residential zones based
[3:57:55] on a conditional use. Uh later on things
[3:57:58] were changed and the numbers that are
[3:58:00] allowed under that code uh got smaller.
[3:58:03] So, currently uh in residential zoning
[3:58:05] there aren't facilities with more or
[3:58:07] there aren't facilities allowed with
[3:58:08] more than eight beds, eight residents.
[3:58:10] Uh this one currently has more than that
[3:58:13] and they would add they want to add an
[3:58:14] addition that would allow 18 more beds.
[3:58:17] Uh in order to do that, because of their
[3:58:18] status as legal non-conforming, uh the
[3:58:21] only the only really the only real
[3:58:23] recourse they would have would be to
[3:58:24] change the zoning. Um they really just
[3:58:26] want to expand their non-conforming use,
[3:58:28] but you can only do that in certain ways
[3:58:30] and it it wasn't um manageable
[3:58:33] in the in the in the zoning that we
[3:58:34] have. So, they're asking for a C1 zone.
[3:58:39] I think I put C2 there, but their
[3:58:40] application is for C1 zoning.
[3:58:42] Um and in that zone you can have a facility
[3:58:47] uh
[3:58:47] for assisted living and they've proposed
[3:58:49] a development agreement in order to
[3:58:53] number one, limit the the uh use,
[3:58:56] although there are several uses in the
[3:58:57] C1 zone that are allowed different
[3:58:59] service uses, etc.
[3:59:00] Um they just want to expand this
[3:59:02] facility, so they're willing to enter a
[3:59:03] development agreement that would limit
[3:59:05] the use to assisted living facilities
[3:59:06] and then further limit um that land use
[3:59:09] code to
[3:59:12] assisted living facilities for persons
[3:59:13] 60 years of age and older.
[3:59:15] Um that's that's effectively how they
[3:59:18] would
[3:59:18] limit their uses and then um the
[3:59:20] applicant is here tonight and can talk
[3:59:22] more about uh some of those things. Um
[3:59:25] the development agreement has been
[3:59:27] proposed and would do those things and
[3:59:29] that's that would allow the the
[3:59:30] expansion of the facility. Um
[3:59:34] there are this is There would tie this
[3:59:35] to a concept plan
[3:59:37] um for their expansion. As we said, it's
[3:59:39] 18 more beds they want to do. It would
[3:59:41] be a two-story addition between the two
[3:59:43] existing buildings that would add some
[3:59:45] more space for them for kitchen and
[3:59:47] dining facilities and again those
[3:59:48] additional beds. They're already 32
[3:59:51] existing rooms. This would be 18 more
[3:59:52] proposed.
[3:59:54] And a few additional parking spaces as
[3:59:56] well. They would still meet parking
[3:59:57] standards for these kinds of facilities.
[3:59:59] In that in that zone if they're approved
[4:00:03] for the rezone.
[4:00:04] Again, the reason for that development
[4:00:06] agreement is to control that rezone so
[4:00:08] that it doesn't allow anything but the
[4:00:09] expansion of their existing facility.
[4:00:11] That's the purpose.
[4:00:13] >> All right. Thank you. Council, do you
[4:00:15] have any questions for Mr. Hall?
[4:00:18] >> For this um
[4:00:20] C1 zone, can they um
[4:00:23] are those parking spots going to
[4:00:26] is it possible for them to be assigned
[4:00:27] to specific units?
[4:00:30] Or will they always be a general
[4:00:31] parking?
[4:00:32] >> I don't know that they couldn't be
[4:00:34] assigned to specific units. I'm not
[4:00:35] sure. I'm sorry, but the plan was just
[4:00:37] for them to be general spaces because
[4:00:39] most people don't drive in these
[4:00:41] facilities. So it's mostly visitors and
[4:00:42] employees.
[4:00:43] >> That's what it looked like from the
[4:00:44] layout of the bedroom of the rooms. I
[4:00:46] wondered if
[4:00:46] >> So I guess the reason I'm asking is
[4:00:48] because we have a care facility in this
[4:00:50] in the city that started out like this,
[4:00:53] but now has parking spots assigned to
[4:00:56] units and you cannot find a place to
[4:00:59] park there. And the businesses next door
[4:01:01] will tell you.
[4:01:02] >> I can I can see that would make it
[4:01:03] difficult.
[4:01:04] >> Wendy's. If hello, got you a little
[4:01:06] hint. Parking Wendy's. So I don't know.
[4:01:08] Is there a way to um
[4:01:10] cuz in this case if that were to happen,
[4:01:13] there would be parking in the church
[4:01:14] parking lot or parking in the neighbors.
[4:01:16] >> The the way to do that would probably be
[4:01:18] through the development agreement to amend the development agreement or
[4:01:21] the one that's been proposed to specify
[4:01:23] that you can't tie the parking to
[4:01:25] individual units.
[4:01:27] I'm not sure that that's there's nothing
[4:01:29] in my parking code that I'm aware of
[4:01:30] that would that would
[4:01:32] affect that.
[4:01:33] >> Okay.
[4:01:34] >> So.
[4:01:34] >> All right, thank you. Council Member
[4:01:35] Lamson, did you
[4:01:37] >> So, that was that was part of my
[4:01:39] question. The other question is
[4:01:41] or just for clarification, so the people
[4:01:43] that live here
[4:01:45] aren't out and about. They're they're
[4:01:48] receiving care. So, they so they won't
[4:01:50] be driving anywhere, but it would just
[4:01:52] be parking for those who come to visit
[4:01:54] with them.
[4:01:54] >> That's right.
[4:01:55] >> And and employees that would also be
[4:01:56] there.
[4:01:57] Uh would there be separate parking for
[4:01:59] employees?
[4:02:01] >> You can designate an employee parking.
[4:02:03] That could be done as well. Yeah.
[4:02:06] >> All right, thank you. Uh I have a I have
[4:02:08] a couple Oh, go ahead. Um Council Member
[4:02:10] Meacham.
[4:02:11] >> Um Jared, just on on the parking uh on
[4:02:14] this map, uh are are those with the
[4:02:17] green designated as additional parking
[4:02:18] spaces? Is that what
[4:02:19] >> Those are the additionals, yeah.
[4:02:21] >> And uh can you just confirm um I know
[4:02:23] that we've had residents approach us
[4:02:25] suggesting that there was a
[4:02:28] development agreement on the site
[4:02:29] beforehand that um prohibited uh zone
[4:02:32] changes. I'm just curious as to uh the
[4:02:35] history of this property um and um if uh
[4:02:42] if if moving to C-1 is the only way to
[4:02:44] do what they're proposing to do.
[4:02:46] >> Yeah, that's a good question and when we
[4:02:47] had heard that in emails and and such,
[4:02:49] um I I think that that's probably a
[4:02:52] reference to the conditional use permit
[4:02:53] that it was
[4:02:55] developed under in 1997. Prior to that,
[4:02:58] uh it appears in the in the minutes
[4:02:59] things that it was vacant. So, my
[4:03:01] assumption is that the conditional use
[4:03:03] permit, which is what we've been able to
[4:03:05] find on it. I haven't found a
[4:03:06] development agreement in any of our
[4:03:07] records that I can find. The conditional
[4:03:09] use permit specifies
[4:03:10] that it would be a certain number of
[4:03:12] beds, the 18 or the sorry, so it it
[4:03:14] started out at 16 beds, I believe, in
[4:03:15] each building, yeah. So, 32.
[4:03:17] And specifies a solid masonry fence between some of
[4:03:21] the properties and the and the
[4:03:23] development, but that's all that's in
[4:03:25] the conditional use permit.
[4:03:26] Uh so, there's nothing about changing
[4:03:28] the zoning or anything like that.
[4:03:29] Um the legal non-conforming status is is
[4:03:32] pretty clear. We could expand the
[4:03:33] building to do certain things, but we
[4:03:34] can't expand the unit count under that
[4:03:37] status. That would change.
[4:03:38] >> But but just so that I understand
[4:03:40] correctly, I think you you stated this
[4:03:42] earlier.
[4:03:44] Um moving to C-1 with a development
[4:03:46] agreement uh would prohibit any other
[4:03:48] uses at any time other than
[4:03:51] um
[4:03:52] using this as a residential care
[4:03:53] facility.
[4:03:53] >> That's right. And since the development
[4:03:55] since the zoning is tied to the
[4:03:56] development agreement, any change they
[4:03:58] would want to make would have to come
[4:03:59] back through the full city process.
[4:04:00] >> It it So, that was it would be bound to
[4:04:01] the property rather than to the owner.
[4:04:03] >> It gets recorded against the property,
[4:04:04] so.
[4:04:05] >> So, yeah, it's a record.
[4:04:06] Uh I have a question. Just what is the
[4:04:08] maximum height one can build in an R-8
[4:04:11] zone? Is that 35 ft?
[4:04:13] >> it's now So, until like last It feels
[4:04:16] like yesterday, but last week or the
[4:04:18] week before, until just recently it was
[4:04:20] 35 ft. Um and then now it's 30 ft if
[4:04:23] you're meeting the minimum setbacks, and
[4:04:25] 35 ft if you're as you incrementally
[4:04:28] make that setback larger.
[4:04:29] >> So, if this were to go residential,
[4:04:31] let's say if homes were to be built
[4:04:32] there, then the homes could it could be
[4:04:34] 30 ft.
[4:04:35] >> 30 ft, yes.
[4:04:35] >> And then it depending on setbacks, it
[4:04:37] would be 35 it could go up to 35 ft in an R-8 zone.
[4:04:41] >> they set back further, yes.
[4:04:42] >> All right, thank you.
[4:04:44] All right, any other questions? Um uh
[4:04:46] Council member Gale.
[4:04:47] >> Yeah, how how high is this building?
[4:04:49] >> That's a great question. I can't
[4:04:50] remember. I'm going to go to it.
[4:04:52] >> I think it's
[4:04:53] >> 30 ft high. That's to the peak right?
[4:04:55] >> So, it's the same basically for the
[4:04:56] residential or for whatever this is.
[4:04:57] >> It's like a it's like a kind of a
[4:04:59] typical two-story home.
[4:05:00] >> Thank you.
[4:05:00] >> Yeah.
[4:05:01] >> All right, if there are any other
[4:05:02] questions, I'd like to invite the
[4:05:03] applicant to come up
[4:05:05] and introduce you introduce yourselves
[4:05:08] and present any other additional
[4:05:09] information you'd like to before I open
[4:05:12] the public hearing.
[4:05:13] >> Okay. Um Julie Smith. Um
[4:05:17] Good evening, Mayor and Council members.
[4:05:18] Glad to be here tonight. Um as stated by
[4:05:21] the staff, the purpose of this zone
[4:05:22] change is to bring the current Spring
[4:05:25] Hollow Assisted Living into compliance.
[4:05:27] Um, like you said, in the current R18
[4:05:29] zone, you're only allowed eight bed max,
[4:05:31] and we currently have 32.
[4:05:33] So, the purpose of this is to allow us
[4:05:36] to expand, um, have a kitchen, two
[4:05:39] additional dining rooms, plus some
[4:05:40] additional
[4:05:41] bedrooms.
[4:05:43] Um,
[4:05:44] the rezoning of C1 would allow the
[4:05:46] property to be in a conforming use,
[4:05:48] and the C1 zone promotes non-retail
[4:05:51] commercial, and encourages, um,
[4:05:54] development in a manner compatible and
[4:05:56] adjacent with adjacent uses, residential
[4:05:59] uses, which we think out of all the
[4:06:01] commercial uses, that one was the most
[4:06:03] compatible for the, um, assisted living.
[4:06:08] Um, the development agreement will allow
[4:06:10] land use 1282,
[4:06:12] and limit it to seniors, um, 60 years of
[4:06:15] age and older.
[4:06:17] The property will be developed in
[4:06:19] conformance with the concept plan, the
[4:06:21] drawing and rendering that'll be
[4:06:22] attached to the development agreement.
[4:06:24] Um, we'll require the addition of trees,
[4:06:28] um, to block two-story, um, windows from
[4:06:31] vision to adjacent neighbors' backyards,
[4:06:34] and language regarding the air
[4:06:35] conditioning units. And please note that
[4:06:38] the use of this property cannot change
[4:06:41] without going through the zoning process
[4:06:42] again.
[4:06:43] Um, about the project now, we are
[4:06:46] connecting two existing buildings. They,
[4:06:48] like you said, they're built around
[4:06:49] 2019.
[4:06:51] On the main floor, we'll have two dining
[4:06:53] rooms and additional kitchen. Currently,
[4:06:56] there's a kitchen in each building, so
[4:06:59] those will go away, combining them into
[4:07:01] one area.
[4:07:03] And then the two dining rooms for the
[4:07:06] memory care unit and the level two.
[4:07:09] And, um, Linnae, um, and we can add the
[4:07:12] level two care if that if that helps
[4:07:15] you. And level two care, those people
[4:07:17] cannot drive. So currently they serve
[4:07:19] level two and memory care. So none of
[4:07:22] those people are able to drive and we
[4:07:24] can add that if if that will help.
[4:07:27] >> So you're saying that that would then
[4:07:29] prohibit the assigned parking from ever
[4:07:31] happening?
[4:07:32] >> Right. Cuz we can't change it to level
[4:07:34] one where people can have cars.
[4:07:36] >> And who who who defines those levels? Is
[4:07:39] that on a state level, the federal
[4:07:41] level?
[4:07:41] >> That's us. Is that state or federal?
[4:07:43] >> State.
[4:07:43] >> Okay.
[4:07:46] Let's see.
[4:07:48] So the parking requirement is one space
[4:07:51] per two and a half bedrooms. So they're
[4:07:52] required to have 20 and we have 21. I
[4:07:55] think at the most there's usually five
[4:07:57] or six cars there. It's very underused
[4:07:59] parking
[4:08:01] um lot.
[4:08:03] Um let's see. Our setbacks that we have
[4:08:06] um the rear setback and the existing is
[4:08:09] 19 ft at the time. So we're just
[4:08:11] extending that and 10 ft on the side of
[4:08:14] the church.
[4:08:15] Um
[4:08:16] we had a neighborhood meeting February
[4:08:19] and we had 310 notices sent out with
[4:08:21] four people attending.
[4:08:23] And Councilman Millett was at that
[4:08:25] meeting.
[4:08:26] Um the concerns were mostly noise of the
[4:08:30] air conditioning units, the height of
[4:08:31] the building, and senior citizens
[4:08:34] looking into the rear yards.
[4:08:36] Um concerns regarding the noise, we are
[4:08:38] placing the condensing unit on the north
[4:08:41] end of the new addition and that would
[4:08:43] be the side adjacent to the parking lot
[4:08:45] of the church.
[4:08:46] And they're using window AC units that
[4:08:49] are rated one of the highest for
[4:08:50] quietness and in the development
[4:08:52] agreement we stated um
[4:08:55] what model
[4:08:57] or equivalent on that. Um so the
[4:09:00] neighbors can be sure that it will be
[4:09:01] quiet. Regarding the height of the
[4:09:04] proposed addition,
[4:09:05] um it'll be 30 ft and in my notes I had
[4:09:08] it was 35 but apparently that just
[4:09:09] changed. So we will be the height of the
[4:09:12] R18 zone.
[4:09:14] Looking into the backyard, this will
[4:09:15] affect two neighbors as you can see
[4:09:19] right there. Um I wasn't able to attend
[4:09:21] the planning commission, so I had Mr.
[4:09:23] Washburn attend and cover for me.
[4:09:26] And he suggested that we install frosted
[4:09:29] glass in the second story
[4:09:31] uh rooms, and the planning commission
[4:09:33] liked that, and I think he suggested
[4:09:35] that to the city council.
[4:09:38] It made me feel bad when I when I heard
[4:09:40] that. Can you imagine your view out your
[4:09:41] bathroom window and that being your
[4:09:45] bedroom window
[4:09:46] or your front window with frosted glass?
[4:09:49] You You can't see anything. You can't
[4:09:51] enjoy the outside.
[4:09:52] And so, I was thinking about it, and I
[4:09:54] met with um
[4:09:57] Jeremy
[4:09:58] um
[4:10:00] What's his last name? With PKJ
[4:10:01] Landscaping. He's a landscape architect,
[4:10:03] and I told him my problem. And he
[4:10:05] suggested that I plant blue Atlas cedar
[4:10:08] trees 20-ft on center. So, it's a real
[4:10:10] wide cedar tree.
[4:10:12] And if we put it against the fence, it
[4:10:14] will block anybody from looking down
[4:10:16] into the neighbor's backyard, and that
[4:10:18] is in the development agreement.
[4:10:21] Um we've had a lot of questions on the
[4:10:23] canal.
[4:10:24] Obviously, we have no control over that,
[4:10:26] and I researched it a little bit, and it
[4:10:28] looked like on March 10th, you had quite
[4:10:29] a few people show up and talk about um
[4:10:32] the North Union Canal
[4:10:34] and um when it was going to happen. I
[4:10:36] understand it's mostly funding now, but
[4:10:39] I think it will be a trail at some
[4:10:41] point. Um and that's all I had, and Mr.
[4:10:44] Jones is the owner of the project, and I
[4:10:46] think he had a few comments.
[4:10:48] >> Um
[4:10:51] I think I think you covered Is that
[4:10:53] working?
[4:10:54] I think she covered most of the concerns
[4:10:55] that were were brought up at uh our last
[4:10:58] uh planning meeting, and I would just
[4:10:59] say
[4:11:01] there's a lot of demand for senior uh
[4:11:03] housing, uh for memory care as well as
[4:11:06] assisted living,
[4:11:08] and we kind of fill a little niche that
[4:11:09] we're not some big large corporation
[4:11:11] that's got 100 units. So, we're a small
[4:11:14] This is just the one and it's in a a
[4:11:17] tight little community and I think
[4:11:18] people like that. They like the feel of
[4:11:21] this and we're expanding because there
[4:11:23] is market demand for that and it was my
[4:11:26] understanding also that the general
[4:11:28] feeling of the council was that you would like to see more uh housing
[4:11:33] available. We do um uh allow Medicaid uh
[4:11:37] residents to be there, which is
[4:11:39] subsidized by the government and so
[4:11:42] we're we're trying to you know, be
[4:11:43] available for for everyone that has a
[4:11:46] need and
[4:11:47] we just think it's a great opportunity
[4:11:49] to you know,
[4:11:50] be there for our seniors in their last
[4:11:52] years of living.
[4:11:54] >> All right. Thank you. Council, do you
[4:11:56] have any questions for the applicant?
[4:11:59] Right. Thank you. Um Council member
[4:12:01] Meacom.
[4:12:03] >> Um thank you for your presentation. Uh I
[4:12:05] was also at Planning Commission uh when
[4:12:07] this was was brought before the Planning
[4:12:09] Commission and
[4:12:12] um there there were some neighbors'
[4:12:14] concerns that were brought up that uh I
[4:12:17] think have also been shared with me by
[4:12:19] email and otherwise. And so, I just want
[4:12:21] to make sure that I understand uh the
[4:12:23] way you're mitigating those. I think
[4:12:25] you've addressed some of those right
[4:12:26] now.
[4:12:27] I had a chance to spend some time at the
[4:12:28] property. Um I may have showed up on
[4:12:30] your security cameras. I'm sorry. But uh
[4:12:33] I I I really wanted to understand the
[4:12:34] feel of the property and and the buffers
[4:12:36] and uh
[4:12:38] I I think the fact that that church
[4:12:40] parking lot to the north
[4:12:42] um provides a significant buffer there
[4:12:44] away from the residential area is
[4:12:46] helpful. I think the canal also provides
[4:12:48] a buffer.
[4:12:49] Um the the concerns that I have heard
[4:12:52] right are
[4:12:54] um noise. So, air conditioning noise.
[4:12:57] You You just mentioned that yeah, your
[4:12:59] plan is to put
[4:13:01] quiet um air conditioning facilities but
[4:13:04] on the north side uh so away from the
[4:13:06] residents um
[4:13:08] parking which we've already talked
[4:13:09] about. I I didn't have a question in the
[4:13:11] development agreement specifically that
[4:13:13] I saw regarding privacy and trees. So,
[4:13:16] I I agree with you frosted windows just
[4:13:18] doesn't seem fair to the resident um
[4:13:21] but uh I I want to understand just make
[4:13:24] sure that those trees will be mature
[4:13:26] trees
[4:13:27] that um
[4:13:29] you know, winter um has a has privacy as
[4:13:32] well as summer.
[4:13:34] It sounds like maybe the type of tree
[4:13:36] that you're proposing uh would fit that
[4:13:38] bill but that that didn't see that in
[4:13:39] the development agreement.
[4:13:41] Um
[4:13:42] and I I've heard some some concerns
[4:13:44] about just uh how this might impact
[4:13:46] quality of care
[4:13:48] for residents expanding and if if you
[4:13:50] know, you felt like you had sufficient
[4:13:52] staff to make sure this was a a great
[4:13:54] experience uh for individuals. So, those
[4:13:56] were concerns that I I shared with with
[4:13:58] our neighboring residents.
[4:14:01] Um I do agree that uh there's a lot of
[4:14:04] demand for this um
[4:14:05] you know, there there's so much need in
[4:14:07] our community. I just want to ensure
[4:14:10] that all of those neighbors' concerns
[4:14:12] are are well thought through and that uh
[4:14:16] I I applaud you for the efforts you've
[4:14:17] made in that direction but just any
[4:14:18] other clarification you can provide
[4:14:20] would be great.
[4:14:21] >> Thank you.
[4:14:21] >> We did um
[4:14:23] consider what type of trees and I you
[4:14:25] know, we thought well, in the winter all
[4:14:26] the leaves are gone and it's they don't
[4:14:29] do any good. So, we we're planning on
[4:14:31] evergreen trees that are there all the
[4:14:32] time.
[4:14:33] We also wanted to um make sure that
[4:14:35] we're not planning saplings that take 20
[4:14:38] years to to grow to to provide and so
[4:14:41] we'll we will definitely put in mature
[4:14:43] trees to to allow that.
[4:14:46] Um
[4:14:49] What else?
[4:14:52] The care.
[4:14:54] Yeah, the one of the reasons we're doing
[4:14:56] this is because right now we have two
[4:14:57] kitchens.
[4:14:59] And and it's it's just it's not viable
[4:15:02] to run two kitchens. So, we're we're
[4:15:03] trying to put it into one kitchen and serve the residents there. So, it's
[4:15:08] a it's a more meaningful experience and cuts down on just the ridiculousness of what we're trying
[4:15:13] to do with, you know, two separate
[4:15:15] kitchens. And so,
[4:15:17] um you know, we we do run this through
[4:15:19] it's operated by Rocky Mountain and they
[4:15:22] have a lot of care centers and skilled
[4:15:24] nursing centers. So, they are always
[4:15:26] have professional staff there and and we don't get write-ups from the state
[4:15:31] for having problems. And we we try to
[4:15:34] give the best care
[4:15:35] um to our residents as possible.
[4:15:39] » All right, thank you. Okay, go ahead,
[4:15:41] Council member Millet.
[4:15:42] >> Sorry, are you a nonprofit or
[4:15:43] >> No.
[4:15:44] >> Okay.
[4:15:44] >> It feels like it.
[4:15:51] » All right, any other questions, Council?
[4:15:54] All right.
[4:15:55] This item is an a proposed change to the
[4:15:58] zoning ordinance. So, um it is a public
[4:16:00] hearing. I'm going to go ahead and open
[4:16:02] the public hearing. And those of you who
[4:16:05] have come this evening to to speak to
[4:16:07] this are welcome to do that. And I again
[4:16:10] invite you to keep your comments to less
[4:16:13] than 3 minutes
[4:16:14] as we go forward in in hearing what you
[4:16:18] think. So, I'll go ahead and open up the
[4:16:20] public hearing.
[4:16:22] Just as you're thinking about coming up,
[4:16:23] I will tell you that we did receive some
[4:16:25] emails. Uh our city recorder Teresa did
[4:16:28] distribute some emails to us. And we've
[4:16:31] had the opportunity to review those. So,
[4:16:35] I just want to let if there if
[4:16:37] somebody's live streaming if as part of
[4:16:38] live stream that we did get those as
[4:16:40] well. So, all right, I'll go ahead and
[4:16:42] open the public hearing.
[4:16:47] Welcome fellow colleague or former
[4:16:49] colleague of mine.
[4:16:51] >> Well, thank you.
[4:16:53] Uh my name's Dean Dickerson.
[4:16:55] Uh I live in this neighborhood.
[4:16:57] Uh
[4:16:58] from what I can tell, this is a good
[4:17:00] project. I'm not necessarily opposed to
[4:17:02] this.
[4:17:03] Uh but the members
[4:17:06] me included of this neighborhood are
[4:17:10] concerned about the C-1 zone.
[4:17:13] Uh
[4:17:14] I can tell you from
[4:17:16] some heated experiences, Mrs.
[4:17:18] McCandless, I'm sure will remember that
[4:17:21] the spot zoning of commercial in the
[4:17:23] middle of residential is negative.
[4:17:26] Uh but I do have a couple of questions
[4:17:29] that uh
[4:17:31] we would like not to have the parking
[4:17:34] overflow of the church.
[4:17:36] used as overflow or
[4:17:39] whatever. That is R-8. Uh that is an
[4:17:42] older building.
[4:17:44] Uh
[4:17:44] there are, I'm sure,
[4:17:47] potential of of liquidating that
[4:17:49] property since it's older and that will
[4:17:52] be R-8.
[4:17:54] The second thing is and I've been
[4:17:56] racking my memory, I don't remember a
[4:17:59] mechanism where a
[4:18:00] uh property agreement
[4:18:03] attached to a piece of property,
[4:18:07] how does the city handle that?
[4:18:10] Um
[4:18:12] has that ever happened before?
[4:18:14] Uh
[4:18:14] if somebody else acquires this property,
[4:18:17] they're going to acquire it because it's
[4:18:18] C-1,
[4:18:20] not because it's anything else other
[4:18:22] than that. I if there is, it's just not
[4:18:25] in my memory. I just don't remember
[4:18:27] that. But how does the How does the city
[4:18:30] search a property? Do they do a title
[4:18:32] search? Do How do How do they do that?
[4:18:36] Um The other things I think that the
[4:18:38] neighbors are concerned about, I think
[4:18:40] this has been a good project. We have no
[4:18:41] problems with this being a neighbor,
[4:18:44] but the spot zoning of C-1 is a concern.
[4:18:47] Um I would almost prefer a PD zone or
[4:18:51] something like that. But anyway, if the
[4:18:53] city or the city staff or the elected
[4:18:55] officials could address, how do you
[4:18:57] search a property
[4:18:59] title?
[4:19:00] How is that done by the city?
[4:19:02] Thank you.
[4:19:03] >> All right, thank you, Mr. Dickerson.
[4:19:06] Mr. Hall, would you mind answering Mr.
[4:19:09] Dickerson's question about about Sounds
[4:19:12] like from what I understand, Mr.
[4:19:15] Dickerson, you're one It's about the
[4:19:16] development agreement and if the if in
[4:19:18] the future if if the develop if the use
[4:19:22] is going to possibly change to some
[4:19:24] other use, what would that be? Is that
[4:19:26] what
[4:19:27] Yes.
[4:19:28] >> What What my question is, I guess to put
[4:19:31] it more succinctly, is this is going to
[4:19:33] be C1.
[4:19:35] As
[4:19:37] former mayor used to say, you give
[4:19:39] somebody the sticks, they have it.
[4:19:42] That's a right of that
[4:19:44] property. And if as the city just
[4:19:48] changed C1 to allow a commissary kitchen
[4:19:52] were to move in there,
[4:19:54] how how is that in the middle of the
[4:19:57] of a residential area?
[4:19:59] You know, what if that church parking
[4:20:01] lot becomes homes? What it What happens
[4:20:04] then?
[4:20:04] >> Okay. Thank you for the clarification.
[4:20:06] Go ahead, Mr. Hall.
[4:20:07] >> It's a It's a great question. So,
[4:20:10] to to the three parts of it, we have we
[4:20:12] have done it before. The city has done a
[4:20:14] few rezones that are tied to development
[4:20:16] agreements.
[4:20:17] Our code allows for that, so we can we
[4:20:20] can limit zoning through development
[4:20:21] agreements as well. It's kind of what PD
[4:20:23] zones do in a way.
[4:20:25] But so that's how it gets tied to it.
[4:20:28] So, we do have a history of doing it.
[4:20:30] You would find it if you were a private
[4:20:32] person buying it Let's say a
[4:20:34] different company wants to buy it as as you mentioned,
[4:20:38] that would come up in the title search
[4:20:39] because we will record the development
[4:20:41] agreements for these kinds of properties
[4:20:42] against the property. So, it'll come up
[4:20:44] in a title search if someone was trying
[4:20:45] to buy it. Uh that'll come up in their
[4:20:47] due diligence. For the staff for city
[4:20:49] staff to be aware of it. Uh for people like
[4:20:53] me, it's recorded and put in our uh dev
[4:20:55] track system. It's the system we use to
[4:20:56] track these properties. So, if anything
[4:20:58] comes up on this property in the future,
[4:21:00] say 20 years from now and and I'm gone,
[4:21:02] I I plan to be gone. I plan to retire
[4:21:04] one one day.
[4:21:06] Hopefully. And if I'm retired by then,
[4:21:09] uh someone else can come along and they
[4:21:10] would click this property, see what's
[4:21:11] going on when the request comes in, what
[4:21:13] can we do with this piece of property,
[4:21:14] and that's one of the items that comes
[4:21:15] up is that development agreement that
[4:21:17] limits it. So, that's that's how we tie
[4:21:19] That's how it comes up and doesn't get
[4:21:20] lost in the shuffle. So,
[4:21:22] >> So, what would what would happen if uh
[4:21:25] someone did purchase the property and
[4:21:28] want
[4:21:29] to I think I know I know the answer to
[4:21:30] this, but I just want to I'm going to
[4:21:32] ask anyway.
[4:21:33] >> Sure.
[4:21:33] >> Uh change the use to another they want
[4:21:36] to put some other type of C-1 use. That
[4:21:38] would require
[4:21:40] this, right? To go through and change
[4:21:41] the development agreement?
[4:21:42] >> Yeah, and that would require the process
[4:21:45] with city council again. They would have
[4:21:46] to renegotiate that contract and say,
[4:21:48] "We don't want to just be limited by
[4:21:49] this." And the C-1 zoning
[4:21:52] is tied to that development agreement.
[4:21:53] So, my assumption is we would go back to formula, as they say, back to
[4:21:56] the planning commission to renegotiate
[4:21:57] the whole thing.
[4:21:59] Um so,
[4:22:00] and really
[4:22:02] I I'm going to if if I can be if I can
[4:22:05] expound a little bit, I don't think that
[4:22:06] would ever be likely because the only
[4:22:08] reason this is possible
[4:22:12] really and not spot zoning
[4:22:14] per se is because it exists already. Uh
[4:22:17] if this were just a blank piece of
[4:22:18] property and someone was asking for C-1
[4:22:20] zoning on it, I don't I don't see that
[4:22:23] happening. That's not that's not really
[4:22:25] realistic. Uh because the facility is
[4:22:27] already there and what they want to do
[4:22:28] is expand it. This is a way they can do
[4:22:30] that if the council feels like it's an
[4:22:32] appropriate expansion of the use. Or
[4:22:34] it's already existing, it can stay
[4:22:36] exactly the way it is under that legal
[4:22:37] non-conforming status forever in spite
[4:22:40] of the zoning underneath.
[4:22:42] Um but if if they want to be able to
[4:22:43] expand, C1 is the way to do it and
[4:22:45] limiting it by the development agreement
[4:22:46] is really the only way to feel confident
[4:22:48] that you don't have to deal with
[4:22:49] catering kitchens or commissary kitchens
[4:22:51] or other kinds of uses that would be
[4:22:53] allowed in the C1 zone.
[4:22:55] >> Okay, thank you. Is there anyone else
[4:22:57] here this evening who would like to
[4:22:58] speak to this?
[4:23:01] All right, come on up.
[4:23:09] If you could state your name when you
[4:23:10] come up, that'd be great for our
[4:23:12] records.
[4:23:14] Welcome.
[4:23:19] » Uh my name Excuse me, my name is John
[4:23:21] Henninger. I'm a resident on Eastwood
[4:23:24] Drive. My home is directly
[4:23:26] west of where this proposed addition is
[4:23:28] going to be built.
[4:23:30] Um
[4:23:31] one concern I have about the C1
[4:23:34] classification
[4:23:35] is I understand that they could build a
[4:23:38] structure as tall as 48 ft.
[4:23:41] Um although they say that it's only
[4:23:43] going to be 30 ft.
[4:23:45] But what would be prevent somebody from
[4:23:47] building an actual 48-ft
[4:23:50] structure, which would be, I believe,
[4:23:52] four stories, which
[4:23:54] sounds totally inappropriate for
[4:23:57] uh uh being surrounded by residential
[4:23:59] homes, which are all less than 20 ft.
[4:24:03] Um
[4:24:06] they did talk about the noise.
[4:24:09] I wonder if it is classified commercial,
[4:24:12] if that would allow them to use
[4:24:14] uh commercial equipment, which is
[4:24:16] generally noisier than
[4:24:18] uh residential as far as air
[4:24:20] conditioning and
[4:24:22] exhaust fans for the kitchen.
[4:24:25] Uh finally, I wanted to
[4:24:28] this wasn't addressed to me at the
[4:24:31] planning commission. I brought up that
[4:24:33] the uh
[4:24:35] the neighborhood plan it mentions that
[4:24:38] um
[4:24:39] one of the goals of the plan is to
[4:24:42] locate high-density housing on major
[4:24:44] roads such as State Street and Park uh
[4:24:48] University Parkway.
[4:24:51] Also, it states that the city has a goal
[4:24:55] to prohibit zone changes within
[4:24:57] neighborhoods
[4:24:58] to maintain the
[4:25:00] single-family residential character.
[4:25:03] And that's all the comments I have.
[4:25:05] Thank you.
[4:25:06] >> All right. Thank you. Uh Mr. Hall, would
[4:25:08] you mind addressing the height and the I don't know if it's you or the
[4:25:13] applicant with the commercial equipment
[4:25:14] and then the the neighborhood and the
[4:25:16] maybe the type of street that 800 East
[4:25:18] is.
[4:25:18] >> I can I can I can do my best to do that.
[4:25:20] I'll try I'll do my best to do it in
[4:25:22] under 3 minutes. How's that?
[4:25:24] Um
[4:25:26] No, I I want the timer started, please.
[4:25:27] If you I'm just
[4:25:29] Um the the it's a good question about the
[4:25:32] height. So, the let me go back to the
[4:25:35] Oh, I'm going forward. Sorry. Spoiler
[4:25:37] alerts. So, the it's a good question
[4:25:39] about height. So, C-1 would allow
[4:25:40] greater heights than R-8 zoning, as you
[4:25:42] mentioned earlier asking about the R-8
[4:25:43] zone. However, this is the concept plan
[4:25:45] and elevations that will be part of the
[4:25:48] development agreement that limits it.
[4:25:49] So, if they come in let's say they come
[4:25:51] in in the future and say we want a third
[4:25:52] story. Well, I'm sorry that development
[4:25:53] agreement that development agreement is
[4:25:55] tied to these elevations. This is what
[4:25:56] you get under that development
[4:25:58] agreement. The
[4:26:00] it's still a good question to ask though
[4:26:01] because and and two points um are that
[4:26:04] it is it is a development agreement. So,
[4:26:06] it could be renegotiated. But, zoning
[4:26:08] and land use and things like that are
[4:26:09] always they're always on the table for
[4:26:11] renegotiation, so there's no real safety
[4:26:13] net from that. You just have to trust
[4:26:15] that um it's tied to this for a reason.
[4:26:18] Uh and that would that would be the
[4:26:19] reason. The great point about the
[4:26:20] neighborhood plan. So, your your your
[4:26:22] challenge is to ask yourselves if this
[4:26:25] plan and time the development agreement
[4:26:28] limits the C1 enough to say that this
[4:26:30] facility is still in keeping with residential
[4:26:34] character of the neighborhood. It's it's
[4:26:35] people living there. It's a kind of
[4:26:37] residence, but it is different in the
[4:26:38] massing and the scale, etc. So, is it is
[4:26:41] that out of character with the
[4:26:42] residential nature of the neighborhood
[4:26:44] and is it too far out of character
[4:26:46] because right now it's already there
[4:26:47] existing as a legal non-conforming.
[4:26:48] Which is a great point.
[4:26:50] >> Can I make a comment to that, Mayor?
[4:26:53] Um
[4:26:54] Jared
[4:26:55] >> I'm sorry, my 3 minutes are up. So.
[4:26:56] >> So, it appears that that elevation that
[4:26:58] you just showed showing the height of
[4:27:00] the building is not currently shown as
[4:27:02] an exhibit in the development agreement.
[4:27:04] So, if we wanted to include that
[4:27:06] limitation on the height, we we would
[4:27:08] need to add that as an exhibit to the
[4:27:10] development agreement.
[4:27:11] >> Yeah, it was supposed to be. I'm sorry
[4:27:12] about that. That should be included.
[4:27:14] >> At least it's not in what I have. It's
[4:27:16] not in there.
[4:27:16] >> I have a question about that as well. I
[4:27:18] think this says it's 30 ft. Julie said
[4:27:21] she thought it was 35 ft. From these
[4:27:22] elevations it looks like maybe as goes
[4:27:24] towards the pitch of the roof it might
[4:27:25] be taller. I don't know, but maybe let's
[4:27:27] just verify the height.
[4:27:28] >> I I don't know. I might be wrong and
[4:27:29] Julie can raise her hand if I'm wrong. I
[4:27:30] think the 35 she was referring to was
[4:27:32] the height that was allowed in the
[4:27:33] resident in the RA zone, not the height
[4:27:35] of the building. Is that right?
[4:27:37] >> And then the
[4:27:39] gentleman had a question about the
[4:27:40] commercial equipment. I don't know. It
[4:27:42] sounds like I don't I don't know if
[4:27:44] >> That that did come up in the public
[4:27:45] hearing at the planning commission and
[4:27:47] their plan was to use the quietest they
[4:27:49] can get. So, they've attached that for
[4:27:51] the development agreement as well.
[4:27:52] That'll be the use and putting on on the
[4:27:54] north side against the parking lot of
[4:27:56] the church to add additional buffer.
[4:27:58] >> Okay.
[4:27:59] we Councilmember Milstein.
[4:28:01] >> So, what is the noise allowance
[4:28:04] ordinance in a C1 versus an R8?
[4:28:07] >> I don't know that there's a difference,
[4:28:08] really. I'm not prepared to tell you.
[4:28:11] >> There's not one?
[4:28:12] >> No, not that I'm not that I'm aware of.
[4:28:13] You can still And and this is C1 zoning,
[4:28:16] but all of its neighbors are R8 zoning.
[4:28:18] So, it doesn't get different times that
[4:28:19] it's allowed to make more noise or
[4:28:21] anything like that. Those are standard. Um
[4:28:26] but um
[4:28:27] yeah, I I don't know how to answer
[4:28:28] better than that. I'm not I'm not sure.
[4:28:31] >> All right, thank you. Anybody else wants
[4:28:33] to speak to the uh
[4:28:35] public hearing?
[4:28:38] All right, I'll go ahead and close the
[4:28:39] public hearing. Council member Miller,
[4:28:41] you had a question.
[4:28:42] >> a few questions. Um
[4:28:45] so where are you putting your dumpsters?
[4:28:50] Can you show me?
[4:28:54] Oh, they're right It's right
[4:28:55] >> Please.
[4:28:56] >> It's right there.
[4:28:57] >> Yeah, it's right. You can see where it's
[4:29:00] >> It's resting right there.
[4:29:02] >> Do you have a
[4:29:02] >> You can't zoom it right here.
[4:29:04] >> Yeah, thank you. Okay, awesome.
[4:29:06] Um
[4:29:07] so we don't have to worry about that
[4:29:09] being next to the homes. Just want to
[4:29:10] point that out. And then so let me just
[4:29:13] ask you this. So and maybe I'm being
[4:29:15] picky here, but 20 ft on center, 20 ft
[4:29:18] pretty big on center. You're going to
[4:29:20] have a hole there for a while. Would you
[4:29:22] consider I mean, I don't know what blue
[4:29:24] cedars are.
[4:29:25] >> There's a picture of it that's supposed
[4:29:27] to be part of the development agreement
[4:29:29] also.
[4:29:31] So we In in the one that I proposed, we
[4:29:34] had several exhibits that were going to
[4:29:35] be part of the development agreement.
[4:29:37] It's a really wide tree.
[4:29:39] >> Uh-huh.
[4:29:39] >> Um It's so it's wide and tall.
[4:29:41] >> that wide? So in other words
[4:29:42] >> Well, this came from the I didn't bring
[4:29:44] the landscape architect. He I told him
[4:29:46] the problem and he suggested the 20 ft
[4:29:48] on center. I assumed that so if you have
[4:29:50] them too close, your trees are going to
[4:29:52] >> Uh-huh.
[4:29:52] >> hit, but that's what his suggestion was.
[4:29:55] It came directly from the architect.
[4:29:58] >> how many feet per year they grow?
[4:30:00] >> Oh, no, I didn't I didn't ask. You know,
[4:30:03] he just said this would be your best
[4:30:05] tree and to uh
[4:30:07] 20 ft on center is what he wanted.
[4:30:09] >> Okay, so maybe the best tree for winter
[4:30:10] screen, summer winter So it is for
[4:30:13] purposes to evergreen
[4:30:15] becomes point.
[4:30:16] >> Yes, ma'am.
[4:30:17] >> Um, I guess my concern would be how long
[4:30:20] is it going to take to grow that to take
[4:30:22] care of a second story tall window?
[4:30:25] You know, I mean, am I going to be long
[4:30:27] >> Right, you know, these people don't see
[4:30:28] that well. I mean, these are old people.
[4:30:31] So, it's not like they can see 40, 50
[4:30:34] feet anyway. So,
[4:30:37] it's a big concern, but I really don't
[4:30:39] get it. I mean, these guys
[4:30:42] I mean, they they're lucky to see, you
[4:30:45] know, 5 feet in front of them. So, I
[4:30:46] don't think it's a real problem.
[4:30:48] >> Okay, and really I'm just in
[4:30:49] consideration of the neighbors, right?
[4:30:51] Just to kind of their concern.
[4:30:54] And then, let's see, what was the other
[4:30:56] thought that I had? Oh, so and I'm I
[4:30:58] guess I'm just going to say I tend to
[4:31:00] agree with you on the frosted glass. I don't know that I as a council member
[4:31:05] I would
[4:31:06] recommend
[4:31:07] that.
[4:31:09] So, that's just my opinion. I don't know
[4:31:10] how my other county feel, but
[4:31:13] yeah.
[4:31:14] >> All right, who Okay.
[4:31:16] Did anyone else have any other comments?
[4:31:20] All right.
[4:31:22] Any questions? So, council, we've heard
[4:31:25] from the applicant, we've heard from our
[4:31:26] staff, we've heard from the public. So,
[4:31:28] now it's it's time to
[4:31:31] What would you like to do?
[4:31:32] >> I have one more question. Sorry.
[4:31:34] >> Can I Go ahead, Jen.
[4:31:35] >> Just to your point about the frosted
[4:31:36] glass, your point about the frosted
[4:31:37] glass, I Well, that's not in the
[4:31:39] development agreement, is that correct?
[4:31:41] >> No, not that I'm aware of, but if Can I
[4:31:44] This is a good point for for me. Can you
[4:31:46] please I think there there's another
[4:31:47] version of the development agreement,
[4:31:48] and I want to make sure that it gets the
[4:31:50] attachments that it needs. The
[4:31:52] elevations, etc. So, can you please in
[4:31:55] any kind of motion that's for approval,
[4:31:57] including the development agreement,
[4:31:58] make sure that it includes the
[4:31:59] discussion tonight and the attachments
[4:32:01] pertaining to that.
[4:32:02] >> So, the level one facility
[4:32:04] >> Level one facility
[4:32:06] >> I think it was level one. Level two?
[4:32:07] >> That deals with the parking concern.
[4:32:09] >> For parking.
[4:32:10] >> And the the landscaping plan changed
[4:32:12] including those cedars. So, those things
[4:32:15] um
[4:32:16] we we've I want to make sure we've got
[4:32:19] those as attachments like they should be
[4:32:20] or they're intended to be. So, if
[4:32:22] >> So, level two landscaping with the
[4:32:24] cedars 20-ft on center and then the
[4:32:27] elevations showing a 30-ft max.
[4:32:30] >> Yeah. Those are those
[4:32:32] >> Are those all the items that we're
[4:32:34] talking about that
[4:32:37] >> That north side the equipment on the
[4:32:38] north side there.
[4:32:39] >> Equipment on the north
[4:32:40] >> That's in the site plan. I know that's
[4:32:41] attached. I'm I'm confident that one.
[4:32:42] The others are what I'm worried about
[4:32:44] just cuz it is
[4:32:46] um a C-1 zone.
[4:32:48] If if I may be frank, a C-1 zone in this
[4:32:50] area with no development agreement
[4:32:53] attached would be in my view wholly
[4:32:55] inappropriate. The development agreement
[4:32:56] needs to control it if it's going to be
[4:32:57] appropriate. So, if you are
[4:32:59] um looking at approving it, we want that
[4:33:02] development agreement to have those
[4:33:03] correct attachments and make sure
[4:33:04] >> So, Derek, can I read this and you tell
[4:33:06] me
[4:33:08] uh if this is I we need to add the level
[4:33:10] two and maybe the type of tree. I don't
[4:33:12] know if we need to add that. But anyway,
[4:33:13] let me tell you.
[4:33:15] Uh
[4:33:15] I item number one in the development
[4:33:17] agreement, development in conformance
[4:33:19] with concept plan.
[4:33:21] That gives us what um the parties
[4:33:23] acknowledge and agree that the concept
[4:33:25] plan drawings and renderings that
[4:33:27] developer presented to the city council
[4:33:29] were significant factor in the city
[4:33:31] council's favorable consideration of
[4:33:33] developer's request to rezone the
[4:33:34] property to C-1. The property shall be
[4:33:36] developed in conformance with the
[4:33:38] concept plan drawings and renderings
[4:33:40] attached here to to exhibit B including
[4:33:42] but not limited to conformance with
[4:33:44] building location, design, layout,
[4:33:46] lighting, landscape including trees to
[4:33:48] block second story window vision from
[4:33:49] adjacent neighbors, elevations and
[4:33:52] building finish materials.
[4:33:54] Package terminal air conditioner and
[4:33:56] condensing units to be placed on the
[4:33:58] north side. And then exhibit B is
[4:34:00] attached here to by reference is made a
[4:34:02] part here of.
[4:34:04] Is which Which is exhibit B? Do we have
[4:34:06] all that?
[4:34:06] >> I I
[4:34:08] right.
[4:34:09] >> The air conditioning, so I'm not going
[4:34:11] to air conditioning, but I understand
[4:34:12] the condenser will be on the north side
[4:34:15] and then the package AC units are
[4:34:17] attached to the windows and they're just
[4:34:19] the little
[4:34:21] ones that are attached on the windows,
[4:34:22] but the noise maker is the condensing
[4:34:24] unit, which will be on the north side
[4:34:26] and that is part of the development
[4:34:28] agreement.
[4:34:29] >> Yeah, there is a comma and an and there,
[4:34:31] so I see what you're saying. Okay.
[4:34:34] » Okay, did that cover Do we have
[4:34:36] everything covered then? I'm looking at
[4:34:37] our legal staff looking at Mr. Hall.
[4:34:40] >> It covers it for me.
[4:34:42] >> If I could make a comment, Mayor.
[4:34:44] So, I think the main thing that we're
[4:34:45] missing right now is that uh part of the
[4:34:47] exhibit that show the elevation, you
[4:34:49] know, on the height of the building.
[4:34:51] Um
[4:34:53] you know, that that wasn't in the
[4:34:55] current version of the agreement that
[4:34:56] has been signed. It's been signed by uh
[4:34:59] the owner, it's been signed by Bren.
[4:35:02] So, what when they signed that, they
[4:35:03] agreed to what was already there without
[4:35:05] that exhibit, so probably we would need
[4:35:07] to go
[4:35:08] get that exhibit,
[4:35:10] have another version of that agreement
[4:35:12] and have both parties resign it just to
[4:35:14] make sure that it's clear that they are
[4:35:16] agreeing to that.
[4:35:18] So,
[4:35:19] if that's what we would like to do, then
[4:35:21] maybe you want to continue uh this not
[4:35:24] to just
[4:35:26] to the next go to the next item, we can
[4:35:27] come back to this item tonight. I can
[4:35:30] get that taken care of, have both
[4:35:31] parties sign it, then you can come back
[4:35:33] to it and then you're inclined to
[4:35:35] approve it, you could at that time. Does
[4:35:36] that make sense?
[4:35:37] >> Okay.
[4:35:39] So, so we need a motion then to continue this until
[4:35:46] >> You can just go to the next
[4:35:48] >> the next item. Okay, we're putting a
[4:35:50] pause button on this for a minute.
[4:35:55] » No.
[4:35:56] okay.
[4:35:59] >> That's an option. I'm not saying you
[4:36:00] have to do that.
[4:36:01] >> Council, what do you think?
[4:36:02] >> have control over the agenda, so you
[4:36:03] should go to today.
[4:36:04] >> Okay, but is that Are you okay with
[4:36:06] that, Council? Okay. But, we will move
[4:36:08] on to the next item while you guys go
[4:36:12] hash that out
[4:36:13] on that. The next item on the agenda is
[4:36:17] a another public hearing.
[4:36:19] And it's an ordinance to amend the
[4:36:22] zoning ordinance Article 22-5-3A
[4:36:25] in the zoning map of the City of Orem by
[4:36:27] changing the zone of the property
[4:36:28] located generally at 1875 South Geneva
[4:36:31] Road from OS5, open space, to PRD,
[4:36:35] planned residential development, and to
[4:36:37] amend Appendix KK site plan Farmhaven to
[4:36:42] include the property, approximately 2.9
[4:36:45] acres.
[4:36:46] So, we'll turn it back over to you, Mr.
[4:36:48] Hall.
[4:36:49] >> Thank you. Um as you said, this is a a
[4:36:52] request for zoning map amendment. It
[4:36:54] actually has a couple of a couple of
[4:36:56] components. So, I want to take a little
[4:36:57] time and explain best I can for this.
[4:37:00] Um
[4:37:01] it This is a a
[4:37:03] an existing PRD right here is called
[4:37:06] Farmhaven.
[4:37:07] Uh this property is the property that's
[4:37:09] up for rezoning or that's been
[4:37:10] requested. It's currently in the OS5
[4:37:12] zone.
[4:37:14] Um they would like to The applicants
[4:37:16] would like to include it with their PRD
[4:37:18] that they have here already approved as
[4:37:19] Farmhaven and make it part of that that
[4:37:22] plan. In order to do that, they need to
[4:37:24] be included in the PRD zone.
[4:37:26] Um
[4:37:27] the Farmhaven component of it, that
[4:37:28] Appendix KK, all of the
[4:37:31] When the city approves a PRD, a planned
[4:37:33] residential development, they include
[4:37:35] with that
[4:37:37] uh into our appendix, into Appendix KK,
[4:37:39] a site plan for that development that
[4:37:41] helps control what gets done there. Um
[4:37:43] in this case, it was Farmhaven.
[4:37:45] And I'm going to skip back to it in just
[4:37:48] a moment, but uh the existing Farmhaven
[4:37:50] area is here. This is the property
[4:37:52] they'd like to add to it. Uh
[4:37:54] the new version of Farmhaven would be
[4:37:56] called Westerly Way because it would
[4:37:58] include twin homes instead of the
[4:38:00] single-family detached on smaller lots
[4:38:01] we call cottages Farmhaven cottages is
[4:38:04] Yeah, well good question.
[4:38:05] >> Sorry, how many were in the existing
[4:38:07] original the approved PRD?
[4:38:09] >> This is the original approved PRD.
[4:38:10] >> So 19, let's see. No, 25.
[4:38:13] >> 25.
[4:38:13] >> Okay, thank you.
[4:38:14] >> Yep. And then you can see
[4:38:16] the difference actually just right
[4:38:17] there. The existing property
[4:38:20] and then the OS 5 zone that they would
[4:38:22] like to add to it.
[4:38:24] Um
[4:38:25] the twin home lots uh add up to
[4:38:30] a total
[4:38:32] um
[4:38:33] can't remember how many exactly. I'm
[4:38:34] sorry right now as I'm still thinking about Spring Hollow.
[4:38:37] So I got to get over that. Move on.
[4:38:39] The um
[4:38:41] the question actually occurs as well
[4:38:43] because
[4:38:44] the planning commission's uh
[4:38:47] the planning commission's recommendation
[4:38:49] for approval included a requirement for
[4:38:51] a road.
[4:38:52] Sorry. Based on this road out to Geneva
[4:38:55] Road, a public access that goes from the
[4:38:57] project to Geneva Road. Uh so the
[4:39:00] planning commission recommended approval
[4:39:01] of the zone change of this land being
[4:39:03] included in the PRD but including a road
[4:39:05] out to Geneva.
[4:39:06] Um so the the the applicants have kept
[4:39:10] their design as it is and are requesting
[4:39:13] to move forward with it as it is. It
[4:39:15] includes a secondary access so there's
[4:39:17] emergency service access but there is
[4:39:19] not full uh neighborhood access out to
[4:39:22] Geneva Road.
[4:39:23] So these units then access the other
[4:39:24] roadways and that was the concern of the
[4:39:26] planning commission.
[4:39:27] >> So I have a question then. Just want to
[4:39:28] make sure I understand.
[4:39:30] >> Yes.
[4:39:30] >> So the original PRD had a road
[4:39:34] that went to Geneva Road.
[4:39:37] >> Correct.
[4:39:37] >> And the current proposal does not have
[4:39:40] that road but has an emergency access
[4:39:42] should there be like for fire or police?
[4:39:46] And then can you go back to the
[4:39:47] proposal?
[4:39:48] And currently
[4:39:50] the it would everything this development
[4:39:53] until the property it's I know the
[4:39:56] property to the east is being developed
[4:39:58] but the road there's nothing built yet.
[4:40:01] So traffic would need to go
[4:40:05] the traffic from the 44 twin homes would
[4:40:08] go down through the 800 West and meet up
[4:40:11] with 2000 South. Is that right?
[4:40:13] >> That's right. Eventually Whitestone is
[4:40:15] the property to the east here that's
[4:40:17] being developed.
[4:40:20] When they build that road will connect
[4:40:22] as well.
[4:40:23] So there will be two ways out of the
[4:40:25] twin home subdivision if that's the case
[4:40:27] but yeah all that traffic would go down
[4:40:28] 8th.
[4:40:29] Or up into Whitestone and then again out
[4:40:31] to 2000.
[4:40:31] >> Out to 2000. So there would not be any
[4:40:33] type of
[4:40:36] western access.
[4:40:37] >> No, that's right. It would only be
[4:40:39] emergency access.
[4:40:40] >> Okay, thank you.
[4:40:41] >> Yep.
[4:40:41] And the um
[4:40:43] Oh, yeah, go ahead.
[4:40:44] >> Go ahead Councilman Millet. Go ahead,
[4:40:46] finish your
[4:40:46] >> Oh, I was just going to say this is so I
[4:40:48] keep referring it to it as the plan that
[4:40:50] they had. It's the plan that they have.
[4:40:52] It's it's actually on the books right
[4:40:53] now. This this could be built. It's been
[4:40:55] approved. This particular site plan.
[4:40:58] But with the they they developed that
[4:41:00] assuming they couldn't get this property
[4:41:01] when they were able to purchase this
[4:41:03] property that changed their plans. So
[4:41:06] >> And before it was I'm sorry go back to
[4:41:08] that 25 homes approved?
[4:41:09] >> Correct.
[4:41:10] >> And we're looking at 44.
[4:41:11] >> 44.
[4:41:12] >> So yeah, taking out the road and almost
[4:41:14] doubling the density.
[4:41:16] Um here's my question. The the road 2000
[4:41:20] South
[4:41:21] >> Mhm.
[4:41:21] >> If I'm remembering we had some some
[4:41:24] conversations about this uh
[4:41:27] Whitestone the Wolcott farm that's what
[4:41:29] I know it as.
[4:41:30] Um the the one farthest east the exit
[4:41:34] was going to have a pork chop or a right
[4:41:36] turn only or some restrictions.
[4:41:38] >> That's right. And the
[4:41:40] one further west was full but the one
[4:41:42] further east is a right in right out.
[4:41:44] >> Okay, so this one the 800 West would be
[4:41:47] the more
[4:41:48] >> It's the more flexible. This one goes to
[4:41:49] the full
[4:41:50] >> Okay, full access. Okay.
[4:41:53] All right. Um thank you, and Council
[4:41:54] Member Meacham has a question.
[4:41:56] >> This is actually just follow up on on
[4:41:57] Laney's question because I I don't have
[4:41:59] the Whitestone map in my head.
[4:42:01] Um there is another exit to 2000 South
[4:42:04] from Whitestone. Is that's correct?
[4:42:06] >> Yes.
[4:42:07] >> Um so
[4:42:08] Um from those two properties, those two
[4:42:10] adjacent properties, there'd be two
[4:42:11] exits both funneling down to 2000.
[4:42:14] >> Yeah, that's right.
[4:42:15] >> And um the railroad crossing, which I
[4:42:18] know can cause cars to back up, is to
[4:42:21] the east of both of those exits. Yes,
[4:42:23] that's right. Okay. That's right. Um
[4:42:26] okay, thank you.
[4:42:27] >> All right, thank you. Sorry to
[4:42:29] interrupt, but go ahead and
[4:42:30] >> No, you're you're just fine. I I like
[4:42:32] the questions. So um
[4:42:35] that is in a nutshell kind of the the
[4:42:37] consideration. 44 proposed twin home
[4:42:40] lots at six units to the acre. Um
[4:42:43] form standard sub local streets, so they
[4:42:45] get curb gutter and sidewalk, the
[4:42:46] buffered sidewalks. They're all two-car
[4:42:48] garages. Uh there are additional parking
[4:42:50] spaces. Oh, should have made you aware
[4:42:51] of that. There's some additional parking
[4:42:53] spaces provided. Some of them are
[4:42:54] actually on that part that Just going to
[4:42:56] zip back here.
[4:42:57] That's additional parking for the
[4:42:59] subdivision.
[4:43:00] Uh this parking is for the autism
[4:43:02] academy
[4:43:03] as well.
[4:43:05] Um most of the storm drainage happens in
[4:43:06] this area for both the project and for
[4:43:09] the autism academy.
[4:43:11] Um the elevations here you can see uh
[4:43:13] those need to be modified. The rear
[4:43:15] elevations uh and side elevations need
[4:43:17] to include um
[4:43:19] more stone on them uh like the front
[4:43:22] elevation.
[4:43:23] But those are twin homes. Uh they're
[4:43:24] garage They're single level. Uh they're
[4:43:26] not two-story homes in this deal. And
[4:43:28] this is like what we were talking about
[4:43:30] with the concept plan for Spring Hollow.
[4:43:33] This gets recorded. This is part of our
[4:43:35] appendix our appendix, and they they're
[4:43:37] bound to build these units.
[4:43:40] So if that's what gets approved, then
[4:43:42] that's what they have to build.
[4:43:44] Um and that is my presentation. If you
[4:43:46] have any questions uh about the project
[4:43:48] or how that works.
[4:43:49] >> Okay, Council, do you have any more
[4:43:50] questions for Mr. Hall?
[4:43:52] >> I I just have the concern. So, can you
[4:43:54] share with us, the Council, what the
[4:43:57] Planning Commission challenge was about
[4:43:58] the street and what was brought up in
[4:44:00] that meeting?
[4:44:01] >> Sure. Um so, this is actually the
[4:44:03] aerial's a good slide to talk about that
[4:44:05] with. This is that connection. I'm going
[4:44:07] to go back to it so you can see it
[4:44:08] clearly.
[4:44:10] That is the extension of that
[4:44:11] connection. Uh this is the one going out
[4:44:13] into Whitestone. So, when you take a
[4:44:14] look at it from the air,
[4:44:16] that's the way out of the project and
[4:44:18] then there are two exits as uh
[4:44:20] Councilman Meacham mentioned in the
[4:44:22] Whitestone project. Uh this goes
[4:44:24] straight through Peyton Crossing, the
[4:44:26] existing subdivision, and then two more
[4:44:27] out through Whitestone. The Planning
[4:44:29] Commission felt that uh because the
[4:44:32] existing PRD that was approved included
[4:44:35] an access to Geneva, there was no reason
[4:44:37] for the new project with additional
[4:44:38] units not to include an access to
[4:44:40] Geneva. Uh the the traffic study
[4:44:43] uh that had been on the traffic impact
[4:44:45] study that was done doesn't require it.
[4:44:47] Uh the number of units doesn't reach levels that requires us to
[4:44:52] have a third access, but it does make
[4:44:53] all the traffic flow better throughout
[4:44:56] the additional subdivision here, the
[4:44:58] subdivision that exists at Peyton
[4:44:59] Crossing, and then the new 44 units. All
[4:45:01] that traffic flows better if there's an
[4:45:02] access to Geneva directly west. Um it's
[4:45:05] not required by that
[4:45:07] um traffic impact study, but it does
[4:45:09] make traffic flow better. Um and the
[4:45:12] Planning Commission felt like that was a
[4:45:13] good trade-off for the 44 additional
[4:45:15] units in the PRD.
[4:45:17] >> All right, thank you.
[4:45:18] >> that answers your question.
[4:45:20] >> All right, if there are any more
[4:45:21] questions, okay, Council member um
[4:45:23] Lampson.
[4:45:24] >> So, the the PRD uh the zone that was
[4:45:27] previously uh or is currently OS5
[4:45:30] proposed to be PR PRD.
[4:45:32] So, that property, it looks like there
[4:45:35] are 12 units that would fit on that
[4:45:38] property. So, there were 25 before being
[4:45:40] proposed on just
[4:45:44] the previous land. Now that they're
[4:45:45] expanding that and on that land, then
[4:45:47] that's where they'll add 12 more.
[4:45:50] So, the So, the density for the actual
[4:45:52] land that was that was being developed
[4:45:53] originally
[4:45:55] was 25, and now we've got this another strip of land that we're adding
[4:45:58] 12 more
[4:45:59] houses.
[4:46:00] >> That sounds about correct. I think
[4:46:02] there's a few a few more than that as it
[4:46:05] Or are are the ones on the other side of
[4:46:07] the road these are from the original?
[4:46:10] And these units here
[4:46:12] are on the new property.
[4:46:14] >> Okay. So, it's So, those 12
[4:46:15] >> So, it does get a little more dense on
[4:46:16] the on the existing property. Yeah.
[4:46:19] >> 145 I think it's
[4:46:21] >> Mhm.
[4:46:22] >> Somehow.
[4:46:24] >> There's another
[4:46:26] It's It's the twin homes. You You lose
[4:46:28] that side yard by by zeroing zeroing the
[4:46:30] lot line between the two units. So,
[4:46:32] they're still ownable. Um they can still
[4:46:34] be They can still be owner-occupied.
[4:46:36] They can still be purchased
[4:46:37] individually, own the land underneath.
[4:46:38] You just have a common wall with your
[4:46:39] neighbor. It's like a duplex with a
[4:46:40] property line down the middle. So.
[4:46:43] Um it just allowed them to increase the
[4:46:45] number of units on the existing
[4:46:46] property, as well as add those
[4:46:47] additionals on the new property.
[4:46:50] >> All right. Any other questions? Yes,
[4:46:52] Council member Miller.
[4:46:53] >> So, would you compare and contrast for
[4:46:55] me the setbacks from the plan before to
[4:46:59] this plan?
[4:47:00] >> That's a great question. I don't know if
[4:47:02] I can do it really well.
[4:47:03] Um the existing plan, the the Farmhaven
[4:47:06] plan, has some pretty close setbacks,
[4:47:08] but they're not quite as They're
[4:47:09] obviously not as close as the zero lot
[4:47:11] lines. The other lot lines or sorry, the
[4:47:13] other property line distances stay about
[4:47:15] the same. Between the Between each
[4:47:16] building, they're about the same between
[4:47:18] units.
[4:47:19] >> Are they 4 ft to property line?
[4:47:21] >> Yes.
[4:47:22] These are Sorry, they're five to
[4:47:24] property lines.
[4:47:25] >> So, what we're what we're doing is we're
[4:47:28] pretty much what you said is zero
[4:47:29] property line cuz it's a twin home now.
[4:47:31] >> Yes.
[4:47:32] >> And then four
[4:47:33] >> 10 ft between buildings.
[4:47:37] Um
[4:47:39] >> All right. Thank you. Um we'll go ahead
[4:47:41] and invite the applicant if the
[4:47:42] applicant's here. Come up and introduce
[4:47:44] yourself and if you would like to
[4:47:46] provide any other information that would
[4:47:48] be helpful in our deliberation, that
[4:47:50] would be great.
[4:47:51] >> Thanks. Thank you. My name's Trisha
[4:47:52] Nelson. I'm the president and founder of
[4:47:55] Utah Autism Academy and we're we're the
[4:47:57] owners of this property as a nonprofit
[4:47:58] organization. Um and I think it's
[4:48:00] important, I know it's been a really
[4:48:01] long day of meetings for you all, but I
[4:48:03] think it's really important that I
[4:48:05] help you understand where this project
[4:48:07] comes from because as a parent of a
[4:48:09] 24-year-old autistic individual, I
[4:48:12] started our organization um out of the
[4:48:15] love for this community and the need for
[4:48:17] services. I was born and raised in Orem
[4:48:20] and I've come back here to live with my
[4:48:22] family for 13 years
[4:48:24] and my parents taught me that uh it was
[4:48:26] important for me to try to do my best to
[4:48:28] make the community better based on my
[4:48:30] experiences and that's why I took being
[4:48:33] a stay-at-home mom and and went to the
[4:48:35] business world and tried to create
[4:48:37] solutions for families like mine. And
[4:48:39] this has been a dream project that we've
[4:48:41] been working on for several years. It
[4:48:43] was originally called Farm Haven because
[4:48:45] it was surrounded by farm. We never
[4:48:47] expected that there would be a high
[4:48:50] development um a an development going in
[4:48:53] where Wilkerson Farm used to be. We were
[4:48:55] told that it would always be farmland
[4:48:57] surrounding us and that's why creating
[4:48:59] an access to that neighborhood that was
[4:49:01] Wilkerson Farm was not a big deal. It
[4:49:02] was never going to be developed. And so
[4:49:04] having a road to Geneva Road made sense.
[4:49:07] There was never going to be a large
[4:49:08] development of uh
[4:49:10] of cars going through our neighborhood
[4:49:12] of autistic individuals. So we um
[4:49:16] proposed that plan a few years ago to
[4:49:18] this council and everything came to a
[4:49:21] screeching halt when the land adjacent
[4:49:24] to our property was being developed. And
[4:49:26] that created a lot of concern for our
[4:49:29] population that we're serving. Um and we
[4:49:32] were also in the process of building a
[4:49:33] beautiful new community center that
[4:49:35] would serve as a pillar for our
[4:49:37] community and is actually being
[4:49:38] recognized nationwide. This whole
[4:49:40] project is being looked at on a national
[4:49:42] scale from those in the autism community
[4:49:45] and Orem is being mentioned all over the
[4:49:47] country and I'm very proud of that
[4:49:49] because this is Family City USA and this
[4:49:51] is where I was born and raised. Um my
[4:49:53] concern is that that we as we created
[4:49:56] and built that new building while we
[4:49:58] were trying to figure this all out, we
[4:50:00] were able to purchase that 3 acres of
[4:50:01] land which is why we um decided to
[4:50:04] expand and change this project a little
[4:50:06] bit. Um but also it was very important
[4:50:08] to the council at the time and to us
[4:50:10] that we create affordable housing
[4:50:11] options for these folks. And this is why
[4:50:15] we went to twin homes is because it
[4:50:17] creates a more affordable option for
[4:50:19] families like mine to house individuals
[4:50:21] like this in a way that is conducive to
[4:50:24] what the community needs. And we need
[4:50:27] more options for these folks. Um it does
[4:50:30] increase the density. I understand the
[4:50:31] concern. And there are, you know, I
[4:50:34] believe there's five or six homes that
[4:50:35] this street goes right past their front
[4:50:37] door and and for those neighbors I am
[4:50:39] concerned and we've looked at
[4:50:41] and uh
[4:50:42] tens and hundreds of iterations of what
[4:50:44] we can do to really remediate some of
[4:50:47] those concerns. And uh we've come to you
[4:50:50] with this plan after lots and lots of
[4:50:53] work and we've been in front of this
[4:50:55] community a lot of times and brought many iterations and I
[4:51:00] respect and value what you guys bring to
[4:51:02] the table and I hope I can answer your
[4:51:04] questions so that we can
[4:51:05] finally move forward on this really
[4:51:07] important project that our families are
[4:51:08] waiting for.
[4:51:09] >> All right, thank you.
[4:51:11] I want to thank you for your for what
[4:51:13] you do.
[4:51:15] I think sir I saw you today. I was I
[4:51:17] drove around the back and I waved to you
[4:51:19] and I was looking at the property.
[4:51:21] But appreciate what what the Utah Autism
[4:51:24] Academy how it contributes to the
[4:51:26] community and I'm grateful for that.
[4:51:29] Council, do you have any questions for
[4:51:31] the applicant? Council member Meacham.
[4:51:35] >> Thank you for being here. Thank you for
[4:51:38] founding the academy.
[4:51:40] I think it's a population that we want
[4:51:43] to thrive and care for and it's clearly
[4:51:46] a labor of love
[4:51:47] for for you.
[4:51:48] >> Thank you.
[4:51:50] >> So, grateful for that contribution to
[4:51:52] our community.
[4:51:54] I am not terribly concerned about the
[4:51:57] Twin Home model. I think
[4:52:00] that we do have a need for more
[4:52:02] affordable housing. I know that
[4:52:04] an autism friendly community also could
[4:52:06] benefit from this kind of of housing.
[4:52:11] My concern and the concern that I've
[4:52:14] heard, you know, from many folks
[4:52:17] in the
[4:52:18] neighborhood adjacent to the south
[4:52:21] is is just that um
[4:52:25] it it sounds to me that with the
[4:52:28] Whitestone development that you're
[4:52:30] nervous about people coming and
[4:52:32] accessing Geneva Road next to your
[4:52:33] property.
[4:52:35] Um and
[4:52:37] um that's
[4:52:39] please correct me if I'm wrong, but it it it sounds to me that one of your
[4:52:42] main concerns of taking and the reason
[4:52:44] you would take the Geneva Road access
[4:52:47] off of your property is because it would
[4:52:49] be transiting cars through a
[4:52:51] neighborhood of
[4:52:53] generally vulnerable individuals are
[4:52:54] going past the academy and I I know
[4:52:56] that there are a lot of children in the
[4:52:57] neighborhood to the south that they have
[4:52:59] the exact same concern.
[4:53:01] Um and so I'm I'm wrestling with the the
[4:53:04] question of how do we
[4:53:09] find an equitable solution that meets
[4:53:10] the vulnerabilities on all sides of that
[4:53:12] road and just would like to hear your
[4:53:14] thought process about that.
[4:53:16] >> Yeah, there's there's a lot of
[4:53:17] components to that. And one of those
[4:53:19] includes the fact that when we built our
[4:53:20] community center and saw the needs for
[4:53:22] what the community center would hold,
[4:53:24] like we needed that space on that side
[4:53:26] of the property for parking. And also we
[4:53:28] wanted to create a pavilion and a grass
[4:53:30] area for that that community over there.
[4:53:32] So, um the where our
[4:53:36] new building actually sits is right
[4:53:39] where right where that Geneva Road
[4:53:41] access would have gone right through
[4:53:42] that area. And so we would have to
[4:53:45] reconfigure to go through a different
[4:53:47] way and and potentially cut out some
[4:53:49] parking and and the playground area and
[4:53:51] the park area. Um and it was important
[4:53:54] to us to to impact as few uh neighbors
[4:53:58] as possible to the south, which is why
[4:54:00] the twin home the parking is on is
[4:54:02] behind the one home and the grassy area
[4:54:04] is behind the other three homes um to
[4:54:06] try to minimize the impact there. But we
[4:54:09] also uh have thought about proposing
[4:54:11] that if the the
[4:54:13] entrance to the Whitestone property was
[4:54:15] moved to the north end of us, that
[4:54:18] potentially people aren't going to come
[4:54:20] down 800 West if they're coming through
[4:54:22] the Whitestone property cuz they would
[4:54:23] have to go all the way to the top and
[4:54:25] then come all the way down in order to
[4:54:27] get out when they have two accesses to
[4:54:29] get out as well. Um but it there's a lot
[4:54:31] of different reasons why we had to
[4:54:33] eliminate the access. One of them was in
[4:54:34] talking to UDOT the the access has to be
[4:54:37] to specific place on Geneva Road and it
[4:54:40] can't converge with the apartment
[4:54:42] complexes that went across the road from
[4:54:45] there as well. So, it's really tricky to
[4:54:46] try to match those accesses with what
[4:54:48] UDOT would like and require for us as
[4:54:51] far as the Geneva Road access with what
[4:54:53] we currently have built.
[4:54:55] Just makes it tricky. I understand your
[4:54:57] concern. I mean, I I I really do. I just
[4:55:00] don't know
[4:55:01] what a good answer is. I'm not trying
[4:55:03] Yeah.
[4:55:03] >> You just you you don't know quite how to
[4:55:05] solve it, but but you understand the the
[4:55:06] concern that
[4:55:07] >> Certainly do.
[4:55:08] >> that that is that you're shifting
[4:55:09] traffic away from uh a previous design
[4:55:13] to a community where
[4:55:15] they might feel vulnerable to that
[4:55:17] traffic as well.
[4:55:20] » Right, thank you. Any other questions?
[4:55:22] Council member Millet.
[4:55:24] >> Yes, so I've been in your facility. I
[4:55:27] was at the very first neighborhood
[4:55:29] meeting.
[4:55:30] When was that? 3 years ago?
[4:55:33] When we did that and you know, I
[4:55:35] remember the neighborhood was very very
[4:55:37] supportive of that first iteration
[4:55:41] that you put there.
[4:55:43] I just want to kind of get the timeline
[4:55:46] in place here. Will you go back to the
[4:55:49] prior the
[4:55:50] current zoning there?
[4:55:53] So
[4:55:54] I'm sorry.
[4:55:55] The PRD.
[4:55:57] Yeah.
[4:55:58] So
[4:56:00] now what I'm remembering from when we
[4:56:03] had this cuz I was on the council then.
[4:56:07] The Geneva Road access was actually
[4:56:10] negotiated back then for the
[4:56:14] Payton Place Payton Landing I can't
[4:56:16] remember what they're called Payton
[4:56:17] Place Payton Crossing.
[4:56:20] Subdivision down below.
[4:56:22] Because there were those concerns of
[4:56:25] down 800 West I think it is or
[4:56:28] something. So that was something that we
[4:56:31] had put in order to approve this development.
[4:56:36] >> Yeah.
[4:56:37] >> And then I remember that you started
[4:56:40] adding on.
[4:56:41] I mean I had heard that you were going
[4:56:43] to have to come back anyway cuz you your
[4:56:45] addition took away some of the
[4:56:48] housing that was going to be built here.
[4:56:51] >> No.
[4:56:52] you can see the addition right
[4:56:54] there. It just extends into the parking
[4:56:55] a little bit more. So it's just the
[4:56:57] shape of what was there is just the
[4:57:00] shape has changed a little bit and it
[4:57:02] comes into the parking. It just affects
[4:57:04] how the Geneva Road access can come in
[4:57:06] but it's just shaped a little bit
[4:57:07] different, but it's still listed there.
[4:57:09] One thing I want to note, maybe this
[4:57:10] will be helpful, is that at the time we
[4:57:13] didn't have that 3 acres of property,
[4:57:15] and it And that owner of that property
[4:57:17] was at that meeting, and he swore to
[4:57:18] everyone he would never sell it, so
[4:57:20] there would never be an access through
[4:57:22] their land. And even if we had a Geneva
[4:57:25] Road access, if we developed the 3
[4:57:27] acres, there would still is my
[4:57:29] understanding that the city would still
[4:57:31] require us to be open to their property.
[4:57:34] So, even with the Geneva Road access,
[4:57:36] there would still be an option for
[4:57:37] Whitestone in our development and others
[4:57:40] to come down their property. Am I wrong?
[4:57:42] >> That's correct. No, but I think it was
[4:57:44] the the the
[4:57:46] it just provides another access.
[4:57:49] >> Sure.
[4:57:49] >> for us to take a lot of traffic off that
[4:57:52] street. So, I take your point. So, I
[4:57:53] guess my question is from cuz I'm kind
[4:57:55] of looking and I'm thinking, well, I I
[4:57:57] felt like that we there was a commitment
[4:57:59] there when we approved this to have a
[4:58:01] Geneva exit.
[4:58:03] >> There was, but there was also a
[4:58:04] commitment that that farmland would
[4:58:05] never be developed.
[4:58:07] >> Yeah. Well, I can't speak to the land
[4:58:09] owner's commitments. Yeah, obviously, he
[4:58:12] didn't keep that commitment. Well, we
[4:58:14] know what happened there, right?
[4:58:15] >> do.
[4:58:15] >> No, that
[4:58:16] he was given a commitment that it would
[4:58:18] be farmland, too, when he sold it to
[4:58:19] that person.
[4:58:19] >> Yeah.
[4:58:20] >> So, yes, lot of problems with
[4:58:24] >> things have changed, so
[4:58:25] >> things aren't written down, right?
[4:58:26] Um I guess my question for you is when
[4:58:29] we're looking at maybe a solution, is um
[4:58:32] I see the parking up there on the left
[4:58:34] corner.
[4:58:36] It Can you kind of flip between the two,
[4:58:38] Jared? Can we Can we move your detention
[4:58:40] basin and stick your parking up there
[4:58:42] and allow to get that access? So, in
[4:58:45] other words, take your street here your
[4:58:48] lower street out to Geneva and bump your
[4:58:51] put some parking over there like it was
[4:58:53] originally planned in that first PRD.
[4:58:55] >> Or I had I
[4:58:57] Potentially.
[4:58:58] I I don't know what that would mean.
[4:59:00] Obviously, the access to the community
[4:59:02] center is what we're looking for in the
[4:59:03] front doors are on that very south end
[4:59:05] of the property. Could that mean that
[4:59:06] they walk around potentially?
[4:59:10] » Yeah, I mean, I don't know how many
[4:59:12] you'd spots you'd be moving there, but
[4:59:13] just an idea because I'm I'm like with
[4:59:15] Quinn or Council member Meachem trying
[4:59:17] to find a balance here.
[4:59:19] >> Sure.
[4:59:19] >> To pull some of that traffic off that
[4:59:22] exit cuz we all know we've now got,
[4:59:25] you know, 100 homes
[4:59:28] exiting to the south.
[4:59:30] Um
[4:59:30] >> With Whitestone project, is that what
[4:59:32] you're referring to?
[4:59:32] >> Yeah.
[4:59:33] >> So, that's kind of the question I and
[4:59:36] then once again, I just want to kind of
[4:59:38] the same thing we talked about before,
[4:59:40] you know, fair housing laws don't allow
[4:59:42] any respector of persons, you know, you
[4:59:44] can't really limit this to autism only
[4:59:46] families, correct?
[4:59:47] >> I and I have said from the beginning
[4:59:49] that like this would never be limited to
[4:59:51] only, but there will be an intentional
[4:59:53] HOA that will say this is an autism
[4:59:56] intentional community much like you
[4:59:57] would in a 55 and older community, um
[5:00:00] but we would hope that the community
[5:00:01] would want to be surrounded by these
[5:00:03] folks and that they they're the access
[5:00:05] to services would bring our families to
[5:00:07] this area. We're we're required by
[5:00:09] federal law to not limit the access to
[5:00:11] where individuals can live and we want
[5:00:13] them to be able to live with executive
[5:00:15] views of the mountains just like
[5:00:16] everybody else should.
[5:00:19] >> Right, thank you. Anybody else have any
[5:00:21] questions
[5:00:22] at this point?
[5:00:24] All right, but Councilmember Meachem.
[5:00:26] >> So, my question isn't on any of the
[5:00:28] stuff that's presented here, but in our
[5:00:30] packet there was, you know, a mock-up of
[5:00:33] the houses and there was a top story
[5:00:34] plus a basement and the basement looked
[5:00:37] like it could be finished out to provide
[5:00:40] kitchen area.
[5:00:42] Would there ever be
[5:00:44] outside access to that basement where it
[5:00:47] could be an accessory dwelling unit?
[5:00:49] >> It's not designed that way, no.
[5:00:51] >> And it's not put that way in the plans.
[5:00:52] It was it's it's not intended
[5:00:56] The answer is no. It's intended to
[5:00:58] prevent that. That's correct.
[5:01:00] >> Our our Sorry, I don't want to I don't
[5:01:02] mean to jump in and interrupt, but our
[5:01:03] codes would prevent it, too. PRDs are
[5:01:05] not allowed to have accessory
[5:01:07] apartments. Thank you.
[5:01:09] >> And since it's a PRD, they couldn't.
[5:01:11] >> All right.
[5:01:12] Thank you.
[5:01:14] All right, this is a This is a public
[5:01:16] hearing. And so, if I would invite those
[5:01:21] members of the public who would like to
[5:01:23] come and speak to this item, if you can
[5:01:24] prepare to do that. And while we're
[5:01:26] doing that, I just want to note that we
[5:01:29] did receive some emails from individuals
[5:01:34] expressing their thoughts on the on the proposed zone change. Did
[5:01:39] we Teresa, do we have video? Do we have
[5:01:42] receive any
[5:01:43] Okay, we received a video How many
[5:01:45] videos? Three. Okay.
[5:01:49] We received three videos from
[5:01:51] individuals who wished to speak at the
[5:01:55] tonight's meeting, but were unable to
[5:01:57] attend. And so, I've made a decision to
[5:01:59] go ahead and do that. But, I will say
[5:02:03] just ask that I have no idea how long
[5:02:05] these videos are, but at 3 minutes, we
[5:02:06] need to stop them.
[5:02:08] So, we'll go ahead and and do those
[5:02:12] three videos right now. And then then
[5:02:14] we'll go ahead and open the public
[5:02:16] hearing to those who are here in the
[5:02:18] audience this evening.
[5:02:26] I did it backwards, didn't I? Should I
[5:02:28] have had them speak first, Teresa?
[5:02:32] Should I have Okay. No, okay, if you're
[5:02:33] going to go ahead and
[5:03:18] » Hello, my name is Bronson Cameron and I
[5:03:20] live at 849 West 1950 South in Orem in
[5:03:23] the Payton's Crossing neighborhood. And
[5:03:26] I'm sending this video to convey my
[5:03:28] concern for the current development
[5:03:30] proposed by the Autism Center and the
[5:03:33] main egress on 800 West, which is right
[5:03:35] through our neighborhood. Um, I am not
[5:03:39] against the development itself, although
[5:03:41] I feel that it's been treated with some
[5:03:43] amount of distrust. When this was
[5:03:45] submitted back in 2023, we were battling
[5:03:48] the gas station that eventually got
[5:03:50] built behind our home.
[5:03:51] And uh, that was very disappointing. My
[5:03:54] wife and I fought that for a long time
[5:03:56] and um, it's a disappointing outcome, so
[5:03:58] we're living with that. And we felt like
[5:04:00] the City Council and um,
[5:04:03] you know, many people in the city didn't
[5:04:06] um, support us at that point. Uh, while
[5:04:08] there were many that were want to give a
[5:04:10] shout out to the people that did. Thank
[5:04:11] you for that. Um, unfortunately it just
[5:04:13] didn't go our way for because of the
[5:04:15] previous council.
[5:04:16] In our mind favoring what we considered
[5:04:19] to be um, profits over people. And that
[5:04:23] uh, again we fought another development
[5:04:25] that's proposed in the Wilkerson Farm
[5:04:27] area. We we know that things need to be
[5:04:29] built. We're not against things being
[5:04:30] built. Um, and the R8 proposed in
[5:04:34] Wilkerson is, you know, fine. That'll be
[5:04:36] okay. Um, rather have it be homes than
[5:04:38] anything else. And R8's great. Um, but
[5:04:40] when this was proposed, uh, the Autism
[5:04:42] Center development was proposed in 2023,
[5:04:45] we were initially huge proponents of it.
[5:04:47] I said at that meeting that I feel like
[5:04:49] a civilization can be judged based upon
[5:04:52] how we treat our um
[5:04:54] you know, our weakest individuals, and I
[5:04:57] still believe that. However, I feel like
[5:04:59] what has happened since is the
[5:05:00] development has changed, the proposed
[5:05:02] development has changed to something
[5:05:05] that I don't agree with.
[5:05:06] And while I feel like my voice still
[5:05:09] probably won't matter because the the
[5:05:11] council or whoever makes these decisions
[5:05:14] will ultimately decide to do whatever
[5:05:16] and won't listen to residents because
[5:05:18] that's my perception over the last
[5:05:20] 4 years of living in our home.
[5:05:22] Um I still want to express myself and
[5:05:25] say that I don't think that the current
[5:05:26] proposed development is is good for that
[5:05:29] area.
[5:05:30] The autism center said initially they
[5:05:32] would put an egress on Geneva Road. Uh
[5:05:34] now that is not part of it because they
[5:05:36] want to keep the value of their land.
[5:05:38] I think that is short-sighted and only
[5:05:41] again focused on profits instead of
[5:05:43] people. If the main egress is only
[5:05:46] through 800 West, and I know there's
[5:05:48] another one through a parking lot, very
[5:05:49] few will use that.
[5:05:51] There If the main egress is through 800
[5:05:53] West, that will be a huge detriment to
[5:05:55] our neighborhood where there are many
[5:05:56] kids, and they'll be just stacked with
[5:05:58] traffic and make that
[5:06:00] unsafe.
[5:06:01] I believe that the autism center and we
[5:06:03] need to and they need to build an egress
[5:06:06] on Geneva Road. It's okay if there's one
[5:06:08] on 8th West as well.
[5:06:09] But there needs to be another main one
[5:06:11] on on Geneva, and that is my strong
[5:06:26] » Hi Orem City Council. Thank you for
[5:06:28] taking my video here and for sharing it
[5:06:30] in the
[5:06:31] meeting this evening. I'm sorry that I'm
[5:06:32] not able to attend. I'm out of town for
[5:06:34] work. I'm sending this video to express
[5:06:37] my opposition to rezoning this Spring
[5:06:41] Hollow site to BAC-1 commercial building
[5:06:44] instead of the R-8 residential
[5:06:47] classification that it has right now. I
[5:06:49] don't believe that will be good for our
[5:06:50] community. I don't believe that it will
[5:06:53] stay a residential location. There's a
[5:06:56] note that is in the staff report
[5:06:59] available on the Orem City website that
[5:07:00] says concept plans are required as part
[5:07:03] of a rezone application that are not
[5:07:05] considered binding documents. Any
[5:07:08] structure plans or uses that meet C-1
[5:07:10] requirements will be allowed in this
[5:07:12] location if a C-1 rezone is passed. That
[5:07:15] says to me that yes, right now it might
[5:07:18] be changed to continue to be Spring
[5:07:19] Hollow and it might continue to be an
[5:07:23] » assisted living facility.
[5:07:24] >> Yes, sister gentleman's his
[5:07:27] Yeah, we if you would like or if
[5:07:30] Let's
[5:07:31] okay.
[5:07:33] >> assisted living facility. However, what
[5:07:35] about in 1 year? What about in 5 years?
[5:07:37] It could be changed and anything that
[5:07:38] meets a C-1 commercial building could be
[5:07:40] built there. We do not want businesses
[5:07:43] in our neighborhood and in our in our
[5:07:46] community here. And I don't I don't
[5:07:49] trust that that won't happen. In fewer
[5:07:52] than 10 years since I've lived in this
[5:07:53] neighborhood, this location has been
[5:07:56] rebranded and my assumption is that
[5:07:58] that's because it's been purchased. So,
[5:08:00] as soon as someone else buys this, they
[5:08:02] could tear it down and build whatever
[5:08:03] they want there and we we don't want
[5:08:05] added traffic in
[5:08:07] a foot traffic area like this where the
[5:08:10] kids are walking to school and where
[5:08:12] they are walking to church activities
[5:08:14] throughout the week. And so, changing it
[5:08:16] to a commercial building
[5:08:19] there's no way for I don't I don't have
[5:08:21] confidence that we won't be able to
[5:08:22] enforce that it will stay Spring Hollow
[5:08:25] or assisted living facility.
[5:08:27] Additionally, there were plans that were
[5:08:29] shared with me privately after concerns
[5:08:31] were raised that residents on the uh,
[5:08:35] the that canal um,
[5:08:37] fence line.
[5:08:39] They have their windows frosted so that
[5:08:40] they wouldn't look into our backyard
[5:08:42] where our kids are playing. And I I
[5:08:44] think that's just not a great solution
[5:08:46] for those residents there that already
[5:08:47] are lacking in mobility and now they
[5:08:49] can't even look outside their windows. I
[5:08:51] don't think that it is a practical use
[5:08:54] of of resources. I I think very strongly
[5:08:58] that it will not serve our community
[5:09:01] well to have 56% more beds added when I
[5:09:05] have concerns over the residents that
[5:09:08] live there right now anyways. I
[5:09:11] spend time there throughout the year as a member of the community. I I go in
[5:09:15] there and I try and help and and visit
[5:09:18] with people on a regular basis and I
[5:09:20] don't think that it is run in such a way
[5:09:23] that that would
[5:09:25] benefit the residents there adding that
[5:09:27] many more beds. Not opposed to them
[5:09:29] adding further to the building, but I
[5:09:32] don't want it to be able to look into my
[5:09:35] backyard where my kids are playing and I don't want it to be re-zoned to be a
[5:09:38] commercial structure because the notes
[5:09:41] in the staff report say that any
[5:09:44] building could be built there as long as
[5:09:46] it meets one requirements. Thank you.
[5:09:48] Please vote no.
[5:10:06] » off the lights
[5:10:12] I think I had the
[5:10:28] big
[5:10:30] I just want to let you smile. I know how
[5:10:32] to make it bigger.
[5:10:38] Whatever. Hi, my name is Cindy Damron
[5:10:40] and I live at 849 West 1950 South in
[5:10:43] Orem, Utah.
[5:10:45] Just south of the proposed developments
[5:10:48] that the autism center is putting
[5:10:49] forward. Um, my husband and I are not
[5:10:51] able to be there tonight to in person.
[5:10:54] So, appreciate you spending the time to
[5:10:57] listen to our videos. Um, in some
[5:10:59] respects, it's kind of a blessing to not
[5:11:01] be able to be there tonight because we
[5:11:02] have spent countless hours fighting for
[5:11:07] our home and the safety of those that
[5:11:09] live in our neighborhood and
[5:11:11] uh, just this morning we were woken up
[5:11:13] multiple times over by a car alarm in
[5:11:16] the uh, gas station parking lot that we
[5:11:19] have so
[5:11:21] loved being next door to and fought for
[5:11:24] many, many months and we often feel like
[5:11:26] no matter how much we
[5:11:30] voice our concerns and no matter how
[5:11:32] hard we try to be good neighbors, that
[5:11:34] we ultimately are not as important as
[5:11:37] those that are coming in with bigger
[5:11:39] dollar signs.
[5:11:40] So, in some ways it's kind of a blessing
[5:11:42] to be able to send this in a video. So,
[5:11:44] thank you.
[5:11:45] Um,
[5:11:47] I am extremely concerned about the main
[5:11:50] ingress going into this proposed
[5:11:52] development being on 800 uh, West for a
[5:11:56] number of reasons. One is if you spend
[5:11:58] any amount of time in our neighborhood,
[5:12:00] you will see a number of kids riding
[5:12:02] bikes, driving around little motorized
[5:12:04] cars, young, young kids that have grown
[5:12:07] accustomed to that way of life that I
[5:12:10] worry about their safety if we in like
[5:12:13] if we flood this area with additional
[5:12:14] cars.
[5:12:16] Uh, if you spend any amount of time on
[5:12:18] 2000 South, I worry about just what it's
[5:12:22] going to do to this
[5:12:24] intersection that has absolutely nowhere
[5:12:27] near the amount of infrastructure that
[5:12:29] it needs to already support the number
[5:12:30] of cars that are now coming into the gas
[5:12:32] station.
[5:12:33] Um, anytime I go to turn left onto 800
[5:12:36] West off of 2000 South, I have to sit
[5:12:40] and wait for oncoming traffic. And if we
[5:12:43] double, triple the amount of cars that
[5:12:45] are trying to get into this teeny tiny
[5:12:46] road that is barely suitable for the
[5:12:49] number of people who live on that street
[5:12:52] as is, if we add a whole host of new
[5:12:55] development going through that road,
[5:12:57] there's going to be a backlog that
[5:12:59] affects not only 2000 South, but clear
[5:13:01] onto Geneva as people are turning left
[5:13:03] onto 2000 South and then left again onto
[5:13:04] 800 West. I don't know that that has
[5:13:07] been thought through. I don't know that
[5:13:08] anybody has spent the time to go down
[5:13:10] and actually look and see how
[5:13:13] overdeveloped we are making this tiny
[5:13:16] corner of Orem, but it's important to us that we maintain a
[5:13:22] quality of life, that we maintain
[5:13:24] safety,
[5:13:26] and that we don't overrun this tiny
[5:13:27] corner. So, thank you so much for
[5:13:29] listening.
[5:13:32] » Right, thank you.
[5:13:33] We'll go ahead and open the public
[5:13:34] hearing for those who are here in the
[5:13:36] council chambers. And if you could, when
[5:13:38] you come up, please just state your name
[5:13:41] for the record. And again, we'd just
[5:13:43] invite you to keep your comments to less
[5:13:46] than 3 minutes. So, we'll go ahead and
[5:13:47] open the public hearing.
[5:13:53] » Uh, Thomas Fong. I live in Payton's
[5:13:55] Crossing also, just 1950. Thank you,
[5:13:58] Mayor and city for
[5:14:00] hearing us and and hopefully listening.
[5:14:02] Regardless, I I wanted to comment first
[5:14:05] on one thing I think needs be corrected.
[5:14:07] Um, um, I don't think minor. It's
[5:14:09] actually only 23 residences that were
[5:14:11] approved.
[5:14:13] 25 lots, but two of those are parking.
[5:14:16] So, you're going from 23 to 44.
[5:14:19] Okay? And of course, the number of cars
[5:14:21] that will be included. But, just want to
[5:14:23] limit my comments to the HOA statements
[5:14:26] that were made. Although I know she
[5:14:27] stated that they would try to do HOA
[5:14:30] restrictive covenants. As we all know
[5:14:32] and she admitted herself, federal law
[5:14:35] and state law prohibits certain
[5:14:36] restrictions that would which cannot be
[5:14:38] abided by. They can suggest them that
[5:14:40] they cannot be held to. In fact, could
[5:14:42] be sued if they tried to do so.
[5:14:44] But HOAs themselves
[5:14:46] can be changed. Um I've experienced that
[5:14:49] myself with some property owners in HOA.
[5:14:51] It's been amended two times and is in
[5:14:53] the process of being amended a third
[5:14:55] time. So when they the attempts they
[5:14:57] make can can be changed. Enforcement is
[5:15:00] another issue. If HOAs don't enforce the
[5:15:03] rules, they mean nothing. So I just add
[5:15:05] those as considerations that HOA
[5:15:08] restrictions are limited and can be
[5:15:10] changed at any time. Thank you.
[5:15:14] >> Great. Thank you.
[5:15:22] » I'm Sherry Fong. I also live in Payton
[5:15:24] Crossing. Thank you, Mayor Council
[5:15:27] members, for time and consideration
[5:15:30] you're giving to the matter before us.
[5:15:33] The desire of the school to provide
[5:15:35] housing for special needs community is
[5:15:37] very commendable. But that project
[5:15:40] should not be allowed to place the
[5:15:42] burden
[5:15:43] of the development on the neighboring
[5:15:45] residents who purposely bought their
[5:15:47] homes in a small community to enjoy a
[5:15:50] small town feeling in Orem's Family
[5:15:53] City, USA. We chose that nice rural
[5:15:57] area.
[5:15:58] I'm very concerned about the proposed
[5:16:00] changes from the Farm Haven original
[5:16:02] development which was approved to the
[5:16:05] Westerly Way development which I should
[5:16:08] I feel should not be approved as it was
[5:16:10] presented to the City Council
[5:16:13] uh City Planning Committee.
[5:16:15] Excuse me. After much consideration and
[5:16:17] research, that commission decided to not
[5:16:20] recommend it for approval as it was
[5:16:23] presented, but rather recommended
[5:16:25] approval only with the addition of the
[5:16:28] access road to Geneva put back in. Uh it
[5:16:31] was stated by a city rep that an exit to
[5:16:34] Geneva would make a 1/4 reduction to the
[5:16:38] 800 West daily trips that they
[5:16:41] calculated would happen. It would take
[5:16:43] it from 800 trips
[5:16:45] down to 600. And so that makes a
[5:16:49] difference to those of us who live
[5:16:51] there.
[5:16:52] Um the school's plan to have no access
[5:16:55] will add hundreds more cars the day to
[5:16:58] 800 West
[5:17:00] with their 44 units and Whitestone's 54
[5:17:03] units and the right-in, right-out only
[5:17:07] is going to force everybody down to 800,
[5:17:10] which is either way. And so it's really
[5:17:13] going to make a big difference
[5:17:16] to the traffic on 800.
[5:17:18] Unfortunately, 200 South has already
[5:17:21] become a major thoroughfare without the
[5:17:23] school's traffic and the two farmland
[5:17:26] develops, the Provo side and the Orem
[5:17:27] side.
[5:17:29] Uh when 2000 has a backup of traffic
[5:17:32] waiting for a train to pass or the red
[5:17:35] light on Geneva to turn green,
[5:17:37] sometimes we sit for 10 minutes trying
[5:17:40] to get out of 800 West, and that's with
[5:17:42] just 19 car uh houses there.
[5:17:45] Uh if we're adding all of those other
[5:17:49] 100 on our side, 50 on the Provo side,
[5:17:54] to 2000, it's just going to get worse
[5:17:56] and worse.
[5:17:58] Um
[5:18:01] we need more exits. We need Geneva Road.
[5:18:05] I understand the school's desire to make
[5:18:09] it safe for their students and their
[5:18:11] community.
[5:18:13] But they, and please you, consider the
[5:18:16] safety of our children.
[5:18:18] The school again a lot from the sale of
[5:18:22] the homes, but they're trying to not
[5:18:25] have any of the
[5:18:26] inconvenience of noise pollution,
[5:18:28] congestion, and danger from all the
[5:18:31] added traffic.
[5:18:32] Um
[5:18:34] our 20-plus children in those 19 houses
[5:18:38] need to be protected as well.
[5:18:40] The best solution that we've been able
[5:18:41] to come up with as a family is that the
[5:18:44] exit proposal that was adopted
[5:18:46] originally
[5:18:47] having the road to Geneva be put back
[5:18:51] in.
[5:18:52] This way there are three
[5:18:55] ingress and ingre- you know,
[5:18:57] um
[5:18:59] which makes it safer for the minors and
[5:19:01] those adults, autistic adults, who might
[5:19:03] need
[5:19:04] um additional consideration.
[5:19:07] Most importantly, that section of Geneva
[5:19:10] Road in front of the school will have
[5:19:12] hardly any traffic at all.
[5:19:14] With the implementation implem-
[5:19:17] mentation of the Lakeview Parkway
[5:19:19] connectors, which is going to make that
[5:19:21] local access only. So, they won't have
[5:19:24] any trouble getting out left or right
[5:19:26] when everybody gets on the connector and
[5:19:28] bypasses that section.
[5:19:31] So, it's not going to be
[5:19:33] a big deal for them.
[5:19:35] Uh in the planning commission, the
[5:19:37] academy indicated their their new adult
[5:19:39] building that they built behind is
[5:19:41] larger than was a proposed and approved.
[5:19:44] I don't know if that enlargement was
[5:19:46] approved, if it was authorized, or if
[5:19:48] they just did it
[5:19:50] with an assumption that they were going
[5:19:52] to get approval to not need a road
[5:19:54] there,
[5:19:55] or if it was an effort to discourage an
[5:19:58] exit to Geneva.
[5:20:00] But even if they just took out one
[5:20:03] duplex, one twin home,
[5:20:05] and made parking there, there's plenty
[5:20:08] of room for that road to go back the way
[5:20:09] it was designed to be originally.
[5:20:12] Um either way
[5:20:14] whatever the reasoning was, the planning
[5:20:16] commission uh
[5:20:18] um
[5:20:19] talked about alternative ways
[5:20:22] and they recommended not approving it
[5:20:25] unless the access to Geneva was put back
[5:20:28] in.
[5:20:29] So, I respectfully ask the council to
[5:20:31] maintain the originally approved public
[5:20:33] access to Geneva plan
[5:20:35] to
[5:20:37] prevent all of the
[5:20:39] excessive traffic being routed through
[5:20:42] 800 West. Thank you very much.
[5:20:45] >> Thank you.
[5:20:47] All right.
[5:20:48] And something just remind you that we've
[5:20:50] got um we we need to stick to 3 minutes
[5:20:54] on that. So, thank you.
[5:20:57] » I'm John Porter. I live in the same
[5:20:59] neighborhood.
[5:21:01] I will incorporate what my neighbors
[5:21:03] have said about this project, but I
[5:21:05] would actually add one thing.
[5:21:07] I was a trial attorney in Southern
[5:21:09] California for 50 years representing
[5:21:11] fire and police and the municipalities
[5:21:14] that employ them.
[5:21:16] I became very close to those
[5:21:17] professions. I saw those men and women
[5:21:20] show bravery and sacrifice time and time
[5:21:23] again
[5:21:24] often without any concern for their own
[5:21:27] safety.
[5:21:28] When I saw this new plan that has
[5:21:31] extremely limited access to this
[5:21:33] neighborhood
[5:21:35] I thought of certain situations that often arise.
[5:21:39] There could be a res- residential fire,
[5:21:41] vehicle fire, medical aid call,
[5:21:45] heaven forbid there could be criminal
[5:21:47] activity,
[5:21:49] a hostage taken by armed suspect
[5:21:51] barricaded in a home.
[5:21:54] In any of those kinds of situations
[5:21:56] we are going to see police and fire
[5:21:59] arriving at the same time.
[5:22:02] If it's a fire primarily, the police are
[5:22:04] there to back up, but ready to step in
[5:22:06] if they are needed. And just the
[5:22:07] opposite. So, police issue, fire
[5:22:10] develops, fire will be there and able to
[5:22:13] assist.
[5:22:15] You know how big those fire trucks are?
[5:22:17] And you know how many police cars come
[5:22:20] on on an incident like this? And there's
[5:22:22] going to be an ambulance and an incident
[5:22:24] commander and
[5:22:25] who knows who else.
[5:22:27] If you take out a real road going into
[5:22:30] Geneva, you have eliminated a major
[5:22:33] access point to deal with these sort of
[5:22:36] situations.
[5:22:37] You will have placed the people that
[5:22:39] live in that community at danger and you
[5:22:42] will have placed our first responders at
[5:22:44] risk and that's wrong. A plan has been
[5:22:47] approved.
[5:22:48] It has the access to Geneva, which will
[5:22:51] make the situation more safe. And thank
[5:22:54] you for your time.
[5:22:56] >> All right, thank you.
[5:23:05] I'm a little sparky, so my name's Connie
[5:23:07] Porter and I'm 78 and I can see pretty
[5:23:09] well.
[5:23:10] So, uh
[5:23:13] I live in Payton Crossing. My backyard
[5:23:17] looks at the beautiful gas station
[5:23:19] parking lot.
[5:23:21] And we have
[5:23:23] plus 20 little children on our street.
[5:23:27] And they ride electric cars, they ride
[5:23:29] scooters, they ride bicycles, they run
[5:23:34] like children are supposed to do. And if
[5:23:36] you dump
[5:23:39] 100 more cars on two on 800, what's
[5:23:42] going to happen to our children? Our
[5:23:44] children are
[5:23:46] as important as any other child.
[5:23:49] And they need the same consideration.
[5:23:51] So, when you look at this,
[5:23:54] it sounds lofty, but who's it lofty for?
[5:23:57] our little kids? Our
[5:24:01] you know, we'd all like to support
[5:24:02] autism, but really we have to protect
[5:24:06] our children. And I think your motto for
[5:24:09] Orem is family-friendly city.
[5:24:13] Or is it developer-friendly city? And I
[5:24:15] say this with a sincere heart.
[5:24:20] Thank you.
[5:24:23] So, anyone else who'd like to speak to
[5:24:25] this issue? Right.
[5:24:27] >> Hi, my name is Ryan McDougall.
[5:24:29] Um I live my my family and I we live on 800 and uh we have seven kids, so I
[5:24:35] feel partially responsible about halfway
[5:24:37] responsible for a lot of the kids
[5:24:39] running around, so apologies to my
[5:24:40] neighbor. Um
[5:24:42] I I too um I have a
[5:24:46] brother-in-law who has autism and and
[5:24:48] he's um just turned to into an adult, so
[5:24:51] I understand, you know, the need. Um my
[5:24:54] concerns are
[5:24:58] what this proposal I I don't have any
[5:24:59] problems with the proposal as it was
[5:25:01] approved previously.
[5:25:03] Um I think my concerns center on the
[5:25:06] fact that um this proposal would create
[5:25:09] what the planners would recognize as an
[5:25:11] inverted
[5:25:12] density pattern, placing the highest
[5:25:14] density housing furthest from the
[5:25:16] arterial access and directly behind an
[5:25:19] established low-density single-family
[5:25:21] neighborhood. That runs contrary to
[5:25:23] standard plan planning practices. Higher
[5:25:25] density usage should
[5:25:27] be located closer to arterial or
[5:25:29] collector roads where infrastructure is
[5:25:31] designed and I think the the problem is
[5:25:33] compounded by the fact that
[5:25:35] the street
[5:25:36] exactly
[5:25:38] to the east of us that goes into the new
[5:25:40] neighborhood as a right in and right
[5:25:42] out. And unfortunately, what that does
[5:25:44] is it makes 800 a shortcut to get to all
[5:25:48] those homes
[5:25:49] that are just to our east.
[5:25:51] Um and so I think there are other ways
[5:25:55] to to to handle this. I think there I
[5:25:58] don't understand maybe why we don't have
[5:26:00] um, a an a sole access on Geneva and
[5:26:03] then maybe we could put a crash gate on
[5:26:05] 800 or or there are diff- a lot of
[5:26:07] different ways I think this could be
[5:26:08] handled.
[5:26:10] Um,
[5:26:11] and I would be happy to to to speak with
[5:26:13] the developer and and try and come to
[5:26:14] some type of a solution that would be
[5:26:16] good for everyone. I think greater
[5:26:19] density if if if the traffic were all
[5:26:22] directed toward Geneva, I'd be okay with
[5:26:23] that. I I I think that would be a good a
[5:26:26] good option and I think there are ways
[5:26:28] to do that um, other than just putting
[5:26:31] all the burden on us as as on 800. I
[5:26:34] don't want I don't want to belabor the
[5:26:35] point that my neighbors have made but I
[5:26:36] agree with. And so I would say
[5:26:39] um,
[5:26:40] I think it you know, I don't oppose the development. I supported the
[5:26:44] development on to the to the east of us.
[5:26:47] Um, even the town homes I was okay with
[5:26:49] just because it didn't they weren't
[5:26:51] placing that the access burdens or at
[5:26:53] least I didn't think they were placing
[5:26:54] the access burdens on us. They had two
[5:26:56] accesses but then it turned out to be
[5:26:58] one of those to be a partial access
[5:27:00] which already is going to push a lot of
[5:27:02] the traffic onto us and so I believe
[5:27:04] that there are some some ways that that
[5:27:05] could be mitigated and so I um,
[5:27:09] I I would ask the council to please um,
[5:27:12] not
[5:27:14] recommend that that this proposal be
[5:27:16] approved but that maybe it be sent back
[5:27:18] and and you know, I'd be happy again to
[5:27:20] work and and talk with with people to to
[5:27:23] try and help something that would
[5:27:24] benefit everyone and work for everyone.
[5:27:26] Thank you for your time.
[5:27:28] >> All right, thank you.
[5:27:29] Is there anyone else who would like to
[5:27:31] speak to this this evening?
[5:27:34] Okay.
[5:27:35] Um,
[5:27:36] I would like to give the um, applicant
[5:27:38] the opportunity to um, say anything before I bring it
[5:27:44] back to the council if they would if
[5:27:46] they would like to.
[5:27:47] >> Sorry. I'm sorry that I'm emotional.
[5:27:51] I will just say I'm not a paid lobbyist.
[5:27:53] This is outside of my wheelhouse.
[5:27:56] I think I take
[5:27:58] a real issue with people
[5:28:00] that are um not trusting the entirety of
[5:28:03] what we're trying to do. We can talk
[5:28:04] logistics. We can talk roads, but
[5:28:07] saying that there's money in it for
[5:28:08] someone that we're trying to pay
[5:28:10] developers pockets, that's just not the
[5:28:12] case. We're nonprofit. We don't walk
[5:28:14] away. We help autistic people and that's
[5:28:16] what we're going to do here.
[5:28:18] Trying to say that I have ulterior
[5:28:19] motivations is not the case. I care
[5:28:21] about these neighbors. I've visited with
[5:28:23] them a lot. I do care about creating a
[5:28:26] solution that works for everyone. So,
[5:28:28] the personal attacks are a little bit
[5:28:30] challenging for me.
[5:28:31] And I apologize
[5:28:33] for my emotions.
[5:28:35] Like I said, there have been a lot of
[5:28:36] iterations and the reason we had the
[5:28:38] initial iteration to Geneva Road, and I
[5:28:41] think everyone can agree that iteration has changed a lot because
[5:28:45] of the developments that are going on
[5:28:46] adjacent. It wasn't just us trying to
[5:28:48] flip the script and and pull the wool
[5:28:50] over anybody's eyes. It changed for us,
[5:28:53] too. It totally halted our project. So,
[5:28:55] we're trying to do the best that we can.
[5:28:57] So, I just want uh it to be on the
[5:28:59] record that we are uh very also wanting
[5:29:02] to work with these neighbors. We care
[5:29:04] about their lives. We don't prioritize
[5:29:06] these children that we work with lives
[5:29:08] over their grandchildren's lives or
[5:29:09] their children's lives. We care about
[5:29:11] that. Um and what we're trying to do
[5:29:12] here is out of the integrity of the
[5:29:15] importance of everyone's life and to
[5:29:18] increase the quality of the entire
[5:29:19] community. So, that's all I'll say and
[5:29:21] then I'll sit down.
[5:29:22] >> All right, thank you. I'm going to go
[5:29:24] ahead and close the public hearing and
[5:29:26] bring it back to the council.
[5:29:28] Oh, okay. Uh Council member Millet would
[5:29:31] like to ask you a question if that's if
[5:29:32] that's okay with you.
[5:29:33] >> one thing? I can't keep it together.
[5:29:34] Sorry.
[5:29:35] >> I'm so sorry.
[5:29:36] >> not emotional.
[5:29:36] >> And we do appreciate like I say, I
[5:29:37] visited your facility. It was really fun
[5:29:39] to see all the great stuff. I do have I
[5:29:41] also have um members of my family who
[5:29:45] deal with autism. So, I just and need
[5:29:47] services, so it's so grateful to hear
[5:29:49] that. And congratulations on your awards
[5:29:52] and your notoriety, I guess your your
[5:29:54] you know
[5:29:56] fame or whatever word you want to use.
[5:29:58] Um so, will you my question is kind of
[5:30:01] just a basic, are you building these
[5:30:04] homes? Are you getting this zone change
[5:30:06] and then selling the development for
[5:30:07] someone else to build? Or are you hiring
[5:30:10] a development company? How how is that
[5:30:13] going to work?
[5:30:13] >> That's a really great question.
[5:30:15] Honestly, like we've talked to several
[5:30:16] builders ourselves. We've talked to
[5:30:18] developers ourselves. Um the priority
[5:30:21] for us is the integrity of the project
[5:30:23] and how that happens. We're not certain
[5:30:25] until the anybody that is a builder or a
[5:30:29] developer that wants to do this project
[5:30:31] we're absolutely committed again to the
[5:30:33] integrity of an autism intentional
[5:30:34] community to whatever extent the law
[5:30:36] will allow us as this gentleman said,
[5:30:38] right? Like um but we don't have a set
[5:30:41] plan that way and I'm open to
[5:30:43] discussions about how to do that, but I
[5:30:45] can tell you we're absolutely committed
[5:30:47] and we're not interested in just saying
[5:30:49] like, "Yeah, we're doing this to to
[5:30:51] sneak our way through to grab some money
[5:30:53] from a developer to sell to." That's I I
[5:30:55] understand what the concern might be
[5:30:57] that way. That is not our intention, but
[5:30:58] we don't have a designated developer or
[5:31:01] builder lined up. We're looking at lots
[5:31:03] of them to try to see who can align with
[5:31:05] our mission and our values to complete
[5:31:07] the project successfully.
[5:31:10] » All right, thank you. All right, um
[5:31:12] council member Gail.
[5:31:14] >> Uh I just do have a question. Do you
[5:31:15] have anybody helping you through this
[5:31:16] process like a like a Julie Smith type
[5:31:18] person that can help you negotiate the
[5:31:20] planning and the zoning and the all
[5:31:21] that?
[5:31:22] >> some people that were at that first
[5:31:23] meeting can attest to the fact that we
[5:31:26] had some help initially and and it went
[5:31:29] a little awry and it wasn't true to what
[5:31:32] and and people felt misled by the
[5:31:34] information that was given. That's why
[5:31:36] we decided to handle it ourselves.
[5:31:38] We have contracted with professionals
[5:31:41] and builders and developers, but
[5:31:43] my dad who has a retired business owner
[5:31:47] has put his whole heart and soul into
[5:31:48] this project and he's talking to a lot
[5:31:50] of folks as well and and I'd be happy to
[5:31:52] have him answer any questions, but as
[5:31:54] far as like the communication of what
[5:31:56] this project is,
[5:31:58] we felt it better handled by the honest
[5:32:01] truth right from the horse's mouth
[5:32:02] rather than going through another
[5:32:04] agency. Does that make sense?
[5:32:07] >> Right, thank you.
[5:32:09] Right council,
[5:32:11] let's come back to us. Would you like to
[5:32:12] have a discussion
[5:32:14] on on this item?
[5:32:17] Council member Meacham.
[5:32:20] >> This has been a rich discussion tonight.
[5:32:22] Thanks thanks to everybody who has come
[5:32:25] and sent videos and shared their
[5:32:27] thoughts and really appreciate the
[5:32:28] applicant for
[5:32:30] the work that they're they've been doing
[5:32:32] on this.
[5:32:33] Um
[5:32:35] You know, some of this sounds kind of
[5:32:37] tricky.
[5:32:38] Um but I also I'm just really encouraged
[5:32:41] that there's just so much goodwill here.
[5:32:43] Um
[5:32:44] I'm
[5:32:46] grateful for the residents Payton
[5:32:47] Crossing for thinking about
[5:32:50] what good could come from that from this
[5:32:53] project and that development and the
[5:32:54] support for doing that. I mean you don't have to do that, right? I mean
[5:32:59] you you're on in your own little
[5:33:01] cul-de-sac away from the world and
[5:33:03] being willing to support a development
[5:33:05] to the north of you I think is is a
[5:33:07] great thing and appreciate your
[5:33:09] generosity
[5:33:11] for the applicant there and to the
[5:33:12] applicant you know, appreciate your your
[5:33:15] thoughts in terms of trying to make sure
[5:33:17] that
[5:33:18] you're open to working with the
[5:33:20] neighbors and and understanding their
[5:33:22] concerns and so
[5:33:24] I don't know
[5:33:26] what the technical solution to this
[5:33:28] might be tonight,
[5:33:30] but I'm encouraged by the fact that
[5:33:31] there could be a creative solution here,
[5:33:34] and I think what I've heard is there's a
[5:33:35] lot of support from the neighbors if we
[5:33:38] could find a way to get to Geneva. Um,
[5:33:41] and um, I would love to see
[5:33:44] uh, you come back. I'd love to see this
[5:33:46] get to this get uh, built, and I'd love
[5:33:48] to see you come back in a way that uh,
[5:33:51] satisfied a lot of the the concerns. I I
[5:33:54] spend enough time on uh, 2000 South
[5:33:57] to recognize the concern about turning
[5:33:59] left and uh, you know, again with that
[5:34:02] railroad crossing that helps back things
[5:34:04] up sometimes, and I think the the traffic concerns of the
[5:34:08] neighbors are valid, uh, and uh, they
[5:34:10] need need to be thoughtfully addressed.
[5:34:13] I'm just optimistic that they can be.
[5:34:16] >> Right, thank you, Council member.
[5:34:18] And okay, Council member Milstein.
[5:34:21] >> I agree with Council member Meekam on
[5:34:23] this. Um,
[5:34:25] just because
[5:34:26] the traffic could be handled on 2000
[5:34:28] South and on 8th West doesn't mean that
[5:34:30] it necessarily should, and I think that
[5:34:32] there can be a real win-win here for
[5:34:33] both communities that we can get this
[5:34:36] autism housing project built and ensure
[5:34:38] that Payton's Crossing uh, isn't bearing
[5:34:41] the burden
[5:34:43] of the extra traffic. Um, I'm wondering
[5:34:47] if there is a way for that traffic to be
[5:34:50] routed so there's not that straight shot
[5:34:52] into the Whitestone development, but
[5:34:54] going up and around. I think I'm I'm
[5:34:56] hoping that we can come to some creative
[5:34:58] ways to solve the this problem to meet
[5:35:01] both needs. Um, and I would love to see
[5:35:03] it come back it with a creative solution
[5:35:06] that we can do that, and and let's work
[5:35:08] with you to make that happen.
[5:35:10] >> Right, thank you, Council member Gale.
[5:35:12] >> Um, I also agree with Quinn, uh, Council
[5:35:15] member Meekam and um, Milstein. Um, I
[5:35:17] think it's a great project. I think
[5:35:19] there's a lot of support in the
[5:35:20] community, and I've loved seeing that
[5:35:21] tonight just, you know, from Payton's
[5:35:22] Crossing, but also from us and from you.
[5:35:24] There's a lot of passion around it, and
[5:35:26] I'm 100% convinced that there is a
[5:35:28] solution to this problem if we just work
[5:35:29] out it a little bit more. So, I and I
[5:35:31] encourage you to do that, but that's
[5:35:32] kind of where I sit.
[5:35:34] >> And then just to clarify, just so from
[5:35:36] what I'm hearing from the three of you
[5:35:37] that that you the solution you're
[5:35:39] thinking you we hope to see would be
[5:35:41] something that would have some
[5:35:42] connection to Geneva Road. Is that what
[5:35:44] I'm hearing?
[5:35:45] >> Yeah, just so that that um Payton's
[5:35:47] Crossing doesn't bear the entire burden
[5:35:48] for all the traffic for this autism
[5:35:50] community.
[5:35:51] >> Okay, thank you. Council Member Kilpack.
[5:35:53] >> That I would just say that that's so
[5:35:55] that on record you're you're hearing my
[5:35:58] opinion as well. Love the project, love
[5:36:00] the ideas.
[5:36:01] Um it would be nice to have some form of
[5:36:03] a continued communication those just so
[5:36:05] we can
[5:36:06] mitigate that concern about the traffic
[5:36:08] and the children and so everybody's
[5:36:10] safe. So, I think the concept's perfect
[5:36:12] a little more look at it and I think
[5:36:13] we're in great shape. Thank you.
[5:36:15] >> All right, thank you. Council Member
[5:36:17] Lambson and Council Member Millet.
[5:36:20] >> Well, not not to belabor the point, but
[5:36:23] I I'm in complete agreement. Um
[5:36:25] I I don't I I'm
[5:36:27] inspired by your vision
[5:36:29] and what you're doing and what you're
[5:36:30] building in the and the service that
[5:36:32] you're providing
[5:36:34] uh to a group and to families that are
[5:36:37] sometimes
[5:36:38] neglected or overlooked.
[5:36:40] So, huge applause. Thank you for for all
[5:36:44] that you're doing and again, thank you
[5:36:45] for your vision.
[5:36:47] Um
[5:36:48] and thank you to the neighbors of Payton
[5:36:50] Crossing. Thank you for being here and sharing your voices.
[5:36:54] I don't know that I could feel good
[5:36:55] about directing traffic through that
[5:36:57] neighborhood.
[5:36:58] And
[5:37:00] uh along with my fellow council members
[5:37:01] that have already spoken, I feel
[5:37:02] completely confident that there is a
[5:37:04] solution. There's something that can be
[5:37:06] done.
[5:37:08] Uh this is a win-win for for all
[5:37:09] parties.
[5:37:11] So, thank you.
[5:37:12] >> All right, thank you.
[5:37:14] >> Yeah, so I'm going to echo that, too.
[5:37:16] And you know, actually I'm looking at
[5:37:17] your red lines on the what's in the
[5:37:20] packet here, and it is kind of
[5:37:22] indicating that there are some issues
[5:37:24] with that detention basin that that that um if I'm looking at the notes here
[5:37:30] that um
[5:37:32] you know, that probably will need to be
[5:37:33] moved. It didn't seem like it was going
[5:37:35] to pass our DRC or development review
[5:37:37] commission and committee. And then also
[5:37:40] it says that needs some better fire
[5:37:42] access, which we heard that comment,
[5:37:44] too. So, I I just feel like it's saying
[5:37:47] put a road through because I think that
[5:37:49] that's going to be um if I can just
[5:37:53] uh just common sense say, "I think that
[5:37:56] will make your community safer, too."
[5:37:59] If if you can have access for whoever's
[5:38:02] living there, especially if it is a
[5:38:04] community of families with autistic
[5:38:06] children,
[5:38:07] um there needs there will need to be a
[5:38:10] lot more calm if there is an emergency
[5:38:12] um in that area. There will need to be
[5:38:15] some um
[5:38:17] safe exits and easier access, and I just
[5:38:21] feel like
[5:38:23] that we can make this work. You know,
[5:38:25] the original diagram that had the
[5:38:27] parking up in the top, I don't know like
[5:38:30] you say um it will affect your
[5:38:33] access to your facility you just built
[5:38:35] the the auditorium.
[5:38:37] But um
[5:38:39] I agree with my other council members
[5:38:41] that that that the access to Geneva is
[5:38:44] going to be a uh a a game changer for
[5:38:47] me.
[5:38:47] So, if we can make that happen, I think
[5:38:49] that helps Payton Crossing and
[5:38:52] actually helps your facility, too. So,
[5:38:55] that's my point.
[5:38:56] >> thank you. I have a question for you, if
[5:38:58] you don't mind. I'm the looks like I'm
[5:39:00] the last one to speak here. I
[5:39:02] to because of the time, I'm just going
[5:39:04] to say that I agree with my colleagues.
[5:39:06] And so, I and I express my appreciation
[5:39:09] to you, and and with the type of project
[5:39:12] you do, I'm completely supportive of the
[5:39:14] type of project that that you are
[5:39:16] proposing. and very grateful
[5:39:19] for the willingness of the neighbors,
[5:39:20] everything that I've that I everyone in
[5:39:23] this room and in the emails that I had
[5:39:25] received on this were no one was the
[5:39:27] ones I received were like that no one
[5:39:29] said no. That's it was let's come up
[5:39:31] with a solution. So I have your
[5:39:33] crossroads here as the applicant. Uh
[5:39:37] sounds like the council would like to
[5:39:41] continue this item as you work
[5:39:45] to come up with a way to obtain on your
[5:39:47] property an access to Geneva Road.
[5:39:50] So you have a decision to make. If you
[5:39:52] would like us to go forward
[5:39:55] with the application
[5:39:57] that you have presented to us this
[5:39:58] evening without that access to Geneva
[5:40:00] Road or would you like us to continue
[5:40:04] this to give you time to work on that?
[5:40:07] So
[5:40:08] I know not to put you on the spot, but
[5:40:10] I'm putting you on the spot. So Okay.
[5:40:12] >> No, I appreciate everyone's comments and
[5:40:14] support of everyone included. Um
[5:40:17] I'm I'm
[5:40:19] tired today clearly. Um and this process
[5:40:22] has been tiring for me and it's hard to
[5:40:24] want to
[5:40:26] continue to go down this road over and
[5:40:28] over.
[5:40:30] But we will.
[5:40:32] And I would hope that this council will
[5:40:35] engage outside of these meetings with me
[5:40:37] so that we can talk about it and that
[5:40:39] the city planners will engage with me
[5:40:42] because there's a lot of barriers and
[5:40:43] hoops to jump through to get things
[5:40:45] through a process and it's been very
[5:40:47] difficult to create any sort of
[5:40:49] iterations and then it gets brought
[5:40:51] before committee and it's told to go
[5:40:52] back and told to go back and and it's
[5:40:54] tiring.
[5:40:55] >> Yes.
[5:40:55] >> So
[5:40:56] I I'm committed to this and I will I'd
[5:40:59] be happy to work with people and I hope
[5:41:00] that people would be willing to have
[5:41:02] dialogues with me outside of this this
[5:41:04] venue as well.
[5:41:05] >> No, but I don't believe anyone's trying
[5:41:07] to intentionally exhaust you.
[5:41:08] >> Certainly. I don't think anyone
[5:41:10] >> but I understand that this is a special
[5:41:12] experience that you kind of feel like
[5:41:14] the call we would call it the whirlpool
[5:41:16] cycle that you just keep it going. Yeah,
[5:41:18] that's not the intention. And and again,
[5:41:21] I apologize that people attacked you
[5:41:22] personally this evening. It stings. I
[5:41:25] I've had that for my own personal
[5:41:26] experience, so don't don't worry about
[5:41:29] getting emotional about that.
[5:41:30] >> Thank you.
[5:41:31] >> So, I'm what I'm understanding is that
[5:41:33] you would like us to go ahead and
[5:41:35] perhaps continue this item and continue
[5:41:37] to work it out. So, see what we can do
[5:41:39] to get you Geneva Road get a Geneva Road
[5:41:41] access.
[5:41:42] >> And there's also the expedited
[5:41:44] conversations that would be helpful too,
[5:41:46] so we can move the process along as
[5:41:47] well.
[5:41:47] >> Okay. Council, is that something that
[5:41:50] you would be comfortable doing?
[5:41:51] All right. Would there be a certain
[5:41:53] applica- would there be certain time a
[5:41:55] time certain that we want to contin- or
[5:41:57] just how it how would we do that, uh Mr.
[5:42:00] Earl?
[5:42:00] >> So, if you continue it to a date
[5:42:02] certain, then you won't have to
[5:42:03] re-notice everything. If you just
[5:42:05] continue without a definite date, then
[5:42:07] we'll have to re-no- do the re-noticing.
[5:42:09] >> That's what I thought.
[5:42:10] >> When
[5:42:10] >> So,
[5:42:11] >> the time.
[5:42:13] >> But she's already got some prob- some
[5:42:14] DRC issues.
[5:42:16] They're going to have to redo this. I
[5:42:18] don't could we I don't know how we're
[5:42:19] going to know what date.
[5:42:21] Gary?
[5:42:22] >> Yeah, so maybe
[5:42:24] Gary, do you have thoughts on that? I
[5:42:26] mean, do you do you mind if we have to
[5:42:27] re-notice this?
[5:42:28] >> No, that's not a problem to re-notice.
[5:42:31] Um what we could do is continue without
[5:42:34] a date.
[5:42:35] We're more than happy to work with them.
[5:42:38] Depending on the nature of the project,
[5:42:40] we may want to go back to planning
[5:42:42] commission and then come back here. But
[5:42:45] if we can work something out and get
[5:42:47] that connection, which seems to be the
[5:42:49] big issue,
[5:42:51] >> Yes.
[5:42:51] >> we would just notice it and come back
[5:42:53] here.
[5:42:54] >> Come back here because so, as we
[5:42:55] continue it if we do continue it to a
[5:42:57] date certain and say that to give time
[5:43:00] for that and I guess if if it comes to
[5:43:02] that point and we're not and we're not
[5:43:04] ready yet, we just continue it again.
[5:43:08] Would that work? Could we do re-notice
[5:43:10] everything? I don't want the applicant
[5:43:12] to get caught in the
[5:43:14] >> It It kind of sounds like it might be
[5:43:16] best to continue it without dates
[5:43:18] because yeah, certainly and because it's
[5:43:20] it doesn't seem like it's a problem to
[5:43:22] re-notice this, so.
[5:43:23] >> Okay.
[5:43:24] >> That might be the best course.
[5:43:25] >> Okay, so go ahead and continue it
[5:43:27] indefinitely.
[5:43:29] All right. Um what would what would a
[5:43:31] motion look like
[5:43:32] for for account if a council member were
[5:43:34] to make a motion to that effect?
[5:43:36] >> it would just be a motion to continue
[5:43:37] this item to give the applicant an
[5:43:39] opportunity to go back and see if they
[5:43:41] can rework their plan to find a way to
[5:43:43] provide access connectivity to uh
[5:43:47] Geneva Road and then bring it back.
[5:43:50] >> That motion.
[5:43:51] >> All right, we have that motion um from
[5:43:53] Council Member Millet. Is there a
[5:43:54] second?
[5:43:55] >> I'll second.
[5:43:56] >> All right, thank you, Council Member
[5:43:57] Meacom.
[5:43:58] We have a motion and a second. Is there
[5:43:59] any further discussion before we vote?
[5:44:02] All right, Council Member Meacom.
[5:44:05] >> Do we need to refer Do we need to read
[5:44:06] that? Can we just say uh okay, that's
[5:44:09] >> That's fine. You can just uh adopt what
[5:44:11] I said.
[5:44:12] >> What he said.
[5:44:13] >> want.
[5:44:14] >> Yes, okay.
[5:44:17] >> I.
[5:44:22] >> All right, the motion Oh, sorry. I'm
[5:44:23] sorry. You made the motion, but you
[5:44:25] didn't vote yet. I'm sorry. Yes, motion
[5:44:26] carries. All right, so we'll go ahead
[5:44:29] and that's going to be continued and
[5:44:33] do not fear, my colleagues. After I
[5:44:35] would like to go back and take care of
[5:44:36] item 10.2, then then I would like to
[5:44:38] take a little bio break
[5:44:41] because we're going to we're coming up
[5:44:42] on hour six of the meetings that we've
[5:44:44] had today.
[5:44:46] And so, are we ready to go back to item
[5:44:48] 10.2?
[5:44:50] >> So, Mayor, if I can give you an update,
[5:44:51] so I went and revised the development
[5:44:54] agreement to include that exhibit that
[5:44:56] Jared had showed in his presentation
[5:44:59] that showed the elevation of the new
[5:45:00] building at 30th. It's actually 30.5 ft,
[5:45:04] but Um and so that's part of the exhibit
[5:45:07] the agreement that that uh binds them or
[5:45:10] limits them to that that height.
[5:45:13] Um the other thing there was some
[5:45:14] discussion about, you know, language
[5:45:16] regarding level two. I wasn't really
[5:45:18] clear if that was something you wanted
[5:45:20] to include in there.
[5:45:21] Um but I I did one version with that and
[5:45:24] one without, so you can have a
[5:45:26] discussion as to which one
[5:45:27] >> What would you
[5:45:28] >> you want to use.
[5:45:30] >> The parking The parking was the issue.
[5:45:31] Level two would have have less parking
[5:45:34] required. It's assigned parking, excuse
[5:45:37] me, not less parking. Level one would
[5:45:39] have assigned parking, so
[5:45:41] What would Council what would you like
[5:45:42] to do?
[5:45:44] >> I think including the level two
[5:45:45] specification is a good idea.
[5:45:47] >> Okay. It's a It's a consensus.
[5:45:49] >> I I just want to make sure the
[5:45:50] applicants are comfortable with that.
[5:45:51] >> Are you okay with that?
[5:45:55] So you'll do level two care, not level
[5:45:57] one care?
[5:45:57] >> Speaking into the microphone so we have
[5:45:59] it on the record.
[5:46:00] >> And so the question would be if it would
[5:46:01] be all right if as part of the
[5:46:03] development agreement
[5:46:05] if the if the facility was level two
[5:46:07] care.
[5:46:08] >> That'd be fine.
[5:46:11] » All right.
[5:46:13] So with that, are we ready for a motion?
[5:46:22] » So I'll motion. Do I need to say
[5:46:23] anything about the RDA or not the RDA?
[5:46:26] Sorry, development agreement.
[5:46:28] >> Uh yeah, you can just reference that
[5:46:30] it's subject to this development
[5:46:32] agreement that's been signed by both
[5:46:34] city manager and the uh it's actually
[5:46:37] manager of the uh company that owns the
[5:46:39] property.
[5:46:41] >> Okay. I move to approve by ordinance to
[5:46:44] amend Article 22-5-3A
[5:46:47] and the zoning map of the city of Orem
[5:46:48] by changing the zone of the property
[5:46:50] located generally at 92 South 800 East
[5:46:52] from R8 single family residential to C1
[5:46:55] commercial with a development agreement
[5:46:57] limiting the use of the property to
[5:46:59] assisted living facilities as has been
[5:47:01] signed by the city manager and the
[5:47:04] >> By the owner.
[5:47:06] >> Right, thank you Council member Gale. We
[5:47:07] have a motion, is there a second?
[5:47:10] >> Second.
[5:47:11] >> Right, Council member Lambson, there's a
[5:47:12] second. Any more discussion on this?
[5:47:16] Okay, Council member Millett.
[5:47:18] >> Um
[5:47:19] well, it looks like everybody's cleared
[5:47:20] out here, but I just feel I just I just
[5:47:22] want to ask about one thing. Um
[5:47:26] So, this is a legal non-conforming use
[5:47:28] right now.
[5:47:30] And my
[5:47:32] what experience thus far is the goal of
[5:47:35] uh
[5:47:36] planning
[5:47:37] is to when the opportunity presents
[5:47:40] itself
[5:47:41] to bring things within conforming use.
[5:47:46] >> Mhm.
[5:47:46] >> So, I'm feeling conflicted here.
[5:47:50] Because
[5:47:51] the there's two things that are making
[5:47:53] this non-conforming. The height, cuz
[5:47:56] we're now adding a second story, am I
[5:47:58] correct there? The The height is the
[5:48:00] same as the other buildings.
[5:48:02] >> It's the It's It would conform to the
[5:48:05] RA8 for the height, so it's It's not The
[5:48:07] structure itself is not non-conforming.
[5:48:10] It's the use The use.
[5:48:12] >> But, weren't the setbacks changed? I
[5:48:15] read that somewhere.
[5:48:16] >> in the in the C1 zone are a little
[5:48:19] different, but it would still meet all
[5:48:21] of those.
[5:48:22] Um
[5:48:22] >> For C1, but not for RA8.
[5:48:24] >> But, it's not non-conforming to the
[5:48:25] setbacks because it conforms to the
[5:48:27] conditional use permit that was approved
[5:48:28] originally in 1997.
[5:48:30] >> Right.
[5:48:30] >> So but it was a conditional use I guess
[5:48:32] my my issue is here.
[5:48:35] Um
[5:48:36] I just always was taught that when you
[5:48:38] have the opportunity as a city to bring
[5:48:40] something into a conforming use because
[5:48:43] there is some revitalization, some
[5:48:44] changes, some something to that property
[5:48:48] that's the natural path to follow um to
[5:48:51] try to have good zoning principles
[5:48:54] throughout your city.
[5:48:55] >> Sure.
[5:48:55] >> Would you speak to that? Help me feel
[5:48:57] about that.
[5:48:58] >> it's it's a really good it's a really
[5:48:59] good point. The difference here might be if if I
[5:49:03] could articulate it. The difference here
[5:49:05] might be that the the use actually
[5:49:08] it what's changed has been what we allow
[5:49:09] in the R8 zone. So, it's non-conforming
[5:49:12] that that's changed and and you're
[5:49:13] right. I
[5:49:15] Um, it's kind of the long game. Zoning
[5:49:17] sometimes selects things for extinction
[5:49:19] over the slow course of history. This
[5:49:22] would counter that, but that's the
[5:49:24] weight you have to
[5:49:25] that's what you have to consider is is
[5:49:27] this still residential enough? Because
[5:49:28] we do we do allow some facilities in
[5:49:32] residential zoning that are assisted
[5:49:33] living.
[5:49:34] Just not ones that are this large. So,
[5:49:37] that's really the that's really the
[5:49:38] question.
[5:49:39] >> Okay. Thank you.
[5:49:40] >> All right. Any other Okay, Councilmember
[5:49:42] Milstein.
[5:49:43] >> So, I have similar con- conflicting
[5:49:47] com- our feelings in about this. Um,
[5:49:51] why
[5:49:52] is a PD not more appropriate? Because
[5:49:54] like what Councilmember Millett was
[5:49:56] saying,
[5:49:58] changing the zoning, it's it's the
[5:50:00] camel's nose coming under the tent in
[5:50:02] which
[5:50:03] what's to stop that zoning from
[5:50:05] spreading around this residential area
[5:50:08] in the future
[5:50:10] as things happen. You've got farmland on
[5:50:12] the other side of 80th East.
[5:50:14] And you've got all residential around
[5:50:16] there.
[5:50:18] And putting commercial in the middle of
[5:50:20] there makes me very uncomfortable.
[5:50:22] >> Sure. Um, I I think
[5:50:25] in in some ways it's not it's not
[5:50:27] PD zoning wouldn't be less appropriate.
[5:50:29] It's just it's not necessarily any
[5:50:32] different because a PD zone, let's say
[5:50:35] that they did a PD zone that
[5:50:36] would do exactly what we're proposing or
[5:50:38] what's been proposed with
[5:50:40] the C1 zone and the development
[5:50:41] agreement. It would be a version of
[5:50:43] that. And any zoning that gets put in
[5:50:44] place can be petitioned for change at
[5:50:47] some point. There
[5:50:49] nothing is ever set forever.
[5:50:53] Um the development agreement tying to
[5:50:55] this
[5:50:56] zoning you could for example, let's say
[5:50:58] that the PD zone we did a PD 50 I think
[5:51:00] we're at 56 now.
[5:51:02] We propose a PD 56 zone instead and that
[5:51:04] PD 56 allows
[5:51:07] assisted living facilities for elderly
[5:51:08] persons level two or level two scare
[5:51:11] etc. etc. All those same things.
[5:51:13] Somebody could come in in a year and a
[5:51:15] half or two years or 10 years when the
[5:51:17] property changes hands and ask to amend
[5:51:19] that PD 56 zone to be different than and
[5:51:22] allow different uses.
[5:51:24] Um that happens. So it's not really it's
[5:51:26] not really any different. Um
[5:51:29] it's not really any different or more
[5:51:31] appropriate or less appropriate. It does
[5:51:32] the same things.
[5:51:33] >> I do think the public perception though
[5:51:35] is different.
[5:51:37] >> Yeah.
[5:51:37] >> With it being labeled commercial and
[5:51:39] that's where
[5:51:40] my mind is still trying to
[5:51:43] wrap around that.
[5:51:44] >> I guess that our thinking on it was just
[5:51:45] that that we have the zoning
[5:51:48] that allows it. So the applicants
[5:51:52] just applied for C1 because that's
[5:51:55] they're already in
[5:51:56] that's already allowed by C1 zoning and
[5:51:58] so it wouldn't be inappropriate to do
[5:52:00] it. It would just be a different method.
[5:52:02] >> Jared, maybe one clarification.
[5:52:04] PD zone is not PRD.
[5:52:07] >> Oh, true.
[5:52:08] >> Right? And so there are commercial uses
[5:52:11] in PD zones.
[5:52:13] >> Sure.
[5:52:13] >> Mhm. And residential uses or mixed uses
[5:52:15] in other PD zones, right? Maybe you
[5:52:18] could summarize uh that clarification.
[5:52:21] >> That's a good that's a good point,
[5:52:23] Brent. Thanks. So PD zones and there are
[5:52:25] PRD zones, planned residential
[5:52:27] developments, PD zones, planned
[5:52:29] development zones and then those can
[5:52:30] include commercial uses, mixed uses, uh
[5:52:33] residential uses that are different than
[5:52:35] the residential zones that we have. Um
[5:52:38] those are all possible.
[5:52:39] So there could be a PD zone
[5:52:42] um proposed instead.
[5:52:43] >> Could it be
[5:52:44] >> Can I just point out too that
[5:52:45] unfortunately or fortunately, depending
[5:52:47] how you look at it, our ordinance
[5:52:48] requires 3 acres to do a PD zone?
[5:52:51] >> Yeah, but could it be a PRD with a
[5:52:54] >> No.
[5:52:55] >> This wouldn't be allowed in a PRD zone.
[5:52:56] It's different kind of multi-family
[5:52:58] residential.
[5:52:58] >> And it is residential, so I'm just
[5:53:00] wondering if there's a way to allow
[5:53:01] that. Why aren't we using the same that
[5:53:03] was used before? The same um
[5:53:07] conditional use.
[5:53:08] >> Back back in 1997,
[5:53:10] a an assisted living facility of this
[5:53:12] size, and this one was approved at 32
[5:53:14] beds, it was permitted as a conditional
[5:53:16] use in an R8 zone.
[5:53:18] It's no longer allowed as a conditional
[5:53:20] use in an R8 zone. So,
[5:53:22] that mechanism that existed back in 1997
[5:53:24] no longer
[5:53:25] >> And I don't think we That was one of my
[5:53:27] reasons why I'm going to vote for this,
[5:53:28] is that I don't think we don't want more
[5:53:32] conditional use permits in our city,
[5:53:33] because I think it brings thing bring
[5:53:35] zoning into conformity. Conditional use
[5:53:38] permit means, yes, you will approve
[5:53:40] this.
[5:53:41] >> Yeah.
[5:53:41] >> And that there are enough conditions
[5:53:43] that are possible in the universe
[5:53:46] to to allow this. I think the C1 zone
[5:53:49] that we've done makes sense because it
[5:53:51] does allow it. It removes that
[5:53:53] conditional use permit off the books, as
[5:53:55] I understand it, because now it's got
[5:53:57] this C1 zone. Cuz I'll just say C
[5:54:00] conditional use permits are nothing but
[5:54:02] trouble.
[5:54:03] So.
[5:54:04] >> Yeah, that that's absolutely true.
[5:54:06] >> Yeah. Yeah.
[5:54:06] >> There there's been some change in the in the the law regarding conditional use
[5:54:11] permit since 1997, which made it really
[5:54:14] unattractive, as the mayor's indicated,
[5:54:16] to have them as part of your ordinance.
[5:54:18] And so, we we made a concerted effort to
[5:54:20] get rid of them to the extent we could
[5:54:22] out of our ordinance.
[5:54:23] So.
[5:54:24] >> Yes, I'm sorry. I I did a big
[5:54:26] interruption. Go ahead.
[5:54:28] Um but I'm going to go ahead, and this
[5:54:30] is why I'm going to vote for it, because
[5:54:32] I know that um Mr. Dickerson said, and
[5:54:35] he's right, right, a C1 zone, you get a
[5:54:37] bundle of sticks. Each of stick is a use
[5:54:39] or a right, but the development
[5:54:41] agreement only gives them one stick.
[5:54:43] And we're not talking about apartments
[5:54:46] as far as what we're talking about
[5:54:47] high-density apartments or it like in
[5:54:50] the traditional sense, which I would
[5:54:51] never approve there.
[5:54:53] But
[5:54:54] uh the fact is this development
[5:54:55] agreement does not have any other uses
[5:54:57] besides that, and it's bound to the
[5:54:59] property
[5:55:00] rather than to an ownership. It it's so that sticks with the property. And the
[5:55:06] one thing that was very important to me
[5:55:08] is that the height is the same as the RA
[5:55:10] zone. Cuz I didn't want like the
[5:55:12] gentleman said, I wouldn't want a 40
[5:55:14] 5-ft or 48-ft. There's no way.
[5:55:17] And so, having this this 30-ft height
[5:55:19] bound by by a written contract, uh it
[5:55:22] was was appealing to me. And then also
[5:55:24] eliminating a conditional use.
[5:55:28] Any other discussion?
[5:55:30] Okay, we've got a motion and a second,
[5:55:32] and I guess it's my turn to go first. A
[5:55:34] motion to approve, and I vote I.
[5:55:38] >> And I second it, and I I.
[5:55:41] >> Nay.
[5:55:43] >> I.
[5:55:45] >> Nay.
[5:55:47] >> I.
[5:55:48] >> All right, the motion carries five to
[5:55:49] two. Thank you.
[5:55:51] >> Thank you all.
[5:55:52] >> Okay, council,
[5:55:54] what time do you want to reconvene here?
[5:55:56] What do you need?
[5:55:59] 5 minutes? Okay.
[5:56:01] 10 after? Okay, 10 after.
[5:56:05] Gives Pete time to run to Taco Bell or
[5:56:07] whatever.
[6:00:24] » Mhm.
[6:05:10] » Oops.
[6:05:11] We are here and we are ready
[6:05:16] for the next chunk of our meeting.
[6:05:19] >> And it's a chunk.
[6:05:20] >> It's a It is a chunk.
[6:05:23] And so, we are on item 10.4.
[6:05:26] Ordinance cultural arts and recreat- I
[6:05:28] can't talk. Recreation enrichment care
[6:05:31] tax allotment. So, I'll turn over to our chief financial officer Brandon
[6:05:36] Nelson
[6:05:37] for that presentation.
[6:05:39] >> Great. Let's see if I can make this
[6:05:43] little bit I don't know if you want to
[6:05:44] go bigger or smaller. I'm not sure. Get
[6:05:47] more on it or
[6:05:52] Okay.
[6:05:53] So, tonight we are here to
[6:05:57] um
[6:05:58] have a final discussion and then
[6:06:01] approval of the care tax
[6:06:03] um awards for fiscal year 26-27.
[6:06:08] Um and so, you know, we've had previous
[6:06:11] work session um discussions about
[6:06:13] various items. Um and and realistically
[6:06:16] at this point, um I I just need to turn
[6:06:19] the time over to you. If there's further
[6:06:21] discussion that uh you you guys feel is
[6:06:24] necessary.
[6:06:25] Um and then uh if
[6:06:28] based on that discussion, um and then uh
[6:06:31] an approval of some sort for the CARE
[6:06:33] Tax awards via ordinance.
[6:06:36] >> All right, thank you. Any questions
[6:06:39] for
[6:06:41] uh Brandon or Trevor?
[6:06:43] All right, Council. This is not a public
[6:06:45] hearing and I don't see
[6:06:47] Do any of you have a a
[6:06:49] desire to speak to this?
[6:06:52] They're laughing at You guys are
[6:06:53] laughing at me, so they take that as a
[6:06:54] no. Um
[6:06:56] All right, Council.
[6:06:58] I It's our turn now.
[6:07:01] >> One comment.
[6:07:01] >> Okay, we have a comment from Council
[6:07:03] member Meekam.
[6:07:05] >> Uh I'll just say I'm so grateful to live
[6:07:07] in a city with the CARE Tax. Um what a
[6:07:10] privilege it is
[6:07:12] to uh have funding that goes
[6:07:15] specifically to our arts and recreation.
[6:07:17] Um I don't think I appreciated
[6:07:21] uh this as well before I had a chance to
[6:07:25] listen to some of these folks. And I
[6:07:26] just I just uh just want to say that
[6:07:29] this is one of Orem's great strengths
[6:07:31] and I'm just delighted that we are able
[6:07:33] to
[6:07:35] uh fund often at a very startup level,
[6:07:38] but um
[6:07:39] fund a wide variety of groups. Some
[6:07:41] major groups, some
[6:07:42] small groups, but uh they all bring
[6:07:45] really
[6:07:46] great things to the city and great
[6:07:48] opportunities for us and that just just
[6:07:50] contributes to a culture where uh we get
[6:07:52] to celebrate
[6:07:54] lots of diverse arts. So, I'm grateful
[6:07:55] for that.
[6:07:57] >> All right, thank you.
[6:08:00] Anyone Okay, Council member Kilpack.
[6:08:03] Okay.
[6:08:05] >> Mayor, I move that to approve my
[6:08:07] ordinance the fiscal year 2026-2027
[6:08:11] CARE tax awards as outlined in exhibit A
[6:08:14] of the ordinance.
[6:08:15] >> All right, thank you. We have a motion.
[6:08:16] Is there a second?
[6:08:18] >> I'll second.
[6:08:19] >> All right, thank you, Councilmember
[6:08:20] Gale. Any other discussion?
[6:08:23] All right, Councilmember Kilpack, how do
[6:08:24] you vote?
[6:08:25] >> I.
[6:08:27] I.
[6:08:28] >> I.
[6:08:31] Motion carries. Thank you.
[6:08:34] Um item 10.5 is a resolution, creation
[6:08:37] of public safety special revenue bond,
[6:08:40] excuse me, revenue fund and statement of
[6:08:41] intent to dedicate the general
[6:08:44] operations portion of property tax to
[6:08:47] public safety. So, turn that time over
[6:08:49] to
[6:08:50] um Brandon Nelson again.
[6:08:54] >> Um sorry.
[6:08:56] So, thank you, Mayor. Um this is a
[6:08:58] continuation of the discussions we've
[6:09:00] been having in our work sessions
[6:09:01] regarding
[6:09:03] uh the uh creation of the public safety
[6:09:05] special revenue fund
[6:09:07] and uh a uh
[6:09:10] further dedication of the city's uh
[6:09:12] current um property tax to that special
[6:09:16] revenue fund as in as allowed in state
[6:09:19] law.
[6:09:20] Um just as a a reminder and you know,
[6:09:23] for all the public that's here to to um
[6:09:25] know exactly it is we're talking about.
[6:09:29] Um Utah State Code allows uh the city to
[6:09:33] create a special revenue fund um and
[6:09:35] dedicate uh any amount of its current
[6:09:38] property tax
[6:09:40] um towards that fund and and that fund
[6:09:43] has to have a dedicated purpose um
[6:09:45] behind it. In this case, public safety.
[6:09:49] Um and as mentioned up in the right
[6:09:51] corner there, why are we are interested
[6:09:53] in doing that are for several reasons to
[6:09:55] um further um
[6:09:57] identify the costs of public safety and
[6:10:00] be able to
[6:10:01] see that
[6:10:03] the elements that go into our public
[6:10:05] safety and see what kind of funding is
[6:10:08] being applied to towards that to that
[6:10:11] end being that one of the city's major
[6:10:14] functions is to provide public safety
[6:10:16] services.
[6:10:18] Um
[6:10:20] based on this resolution
[6:10:23] the it is a resolution not an ordinance
[6:10:25] so the the resolution that is before you
[6:10:27] is to be able to indicate to
[6:10:31] the county as well as the state tax
[6:10:33] commission what the city's intent um
[6:10:37] when we move to our June 9th council
[6:10:40] meeting so that they can be prepared for
[6:10:44] that meeting that does not bind us in
[6:10:46] any way in that June 9th meeting you
[6:10:48] still have the the right to make a
[6:10:50] decision one way or the other at that
[6:10:52] point.
[6:10:56] Um
[6:10:57] just to give you an idea the the
[6:11:00] approximations this was on fiscal 26 so
[6:11:02] this these slides were before we
[6:11:04] actually had our tentative budget
[6:11:06] completed but approximately 38 million
[6:11:09] in fiscal 26 there's related to the
[6:11:11] police and fire budgets
[6:11:13] by dedicating our property tax
[6:11:15] approximately eight plus million dollars
[6:11:17] would be moved towards
[6:11:20] covering those costs of that 38 million.
[6:11:24] Um
[6:11:25] the dedication
[6:11:29] would show up on the property tax notice
[6:11:33] that each citizen receives
[6:11:36] and you would see the city of Orem's
[6:11:38] property tax go from a existing amount
[6:11:41] to zero and a new city of Orem public
[6:11:44] safety tax that would start at zero and
[6:11:46] show at its current balance based on
[6:11:48] these
[6:11:49] whatever the county auditor's certified
[6:11:51] tax rate and associated revenue would be
[6:11:55] related to that.
[6:11:56] >> So So, Brandon, just to clarify for the
[6:11:58] record,
[6:12:00] all of Orem's collected property tax,
[6:12:03] the intention with what you're proposing
[6:12:06] is to move all of it
[6:12:07] into this public safety
[6:12:11] to to this special revenue fund.
[6:12:12] >> Correct. 100%.
[6:12:14] >> 100% and then going forward until
[6:12:17] further notice of some sort,
[6:12:20] I guess to other to other you get other
[6:12:21] direction,
[6:12:23] going forward, 100% of Orem's property
[6:12:26] tax will go into this special revenue
[6:12:29] fund to um to fund partially fund police
[6:12:33] and fire.
[6:12:34] >> Correct.
[6:12:35] >> Okay, thank you.
[6:12:36] >> You bet.
[6:12:38] Um
[6:12:41] We are here at phase two, the tentative
[6:12:43] budget uh the this resolution before
[6:12:45] you. I've mentioned the June 9th
[6:12:47] meeting, which will be a public hearing.
[6:12:49] Um at that point um
[6:12:52] there would be a consideration of the
[6:12:53] adoption of the of the budget at that
[6:12:56] point. It may be the adoption of the
[6:13:00] certain portion of the budget and what
[6:13:02] is referred to maybe as There's been
[6:13:05] some debate with Steve and I as to what
[6:13:06] exactly the legislature intended between
[6:13:09] the term tentative budget and interim
[6:13:11] budget, but at some point here we'll make that conclusion.
[6:13:16] Uh this particular thing is not in any way
[6:13:21] associated with a property tax increase.
[6:13:24] They're They are two separate
[6:13:26] considerations.
[6:13:31] Um and just some more information uh
[6:13:33] regarding that timeline again related to
[6:13:35] this meeting as well as that June 9th
[6:13:37] meeting.
[6:13:40] Um
[6:13:40] >> So, okay, just kind of cuz you kind of
[6:13:43] confused me with that. So, just to
[6:13:45] clarify for the public, there are two Go
[6:13:47] back to the other slide there, two
[6:13:49] separate
[6:13:50] decisions.
[6:13:52] What you're trying to say is tonight's
[6:13:54] vote and then when we vote on this are
[6:13:57] two separate decisions.
[6:13:59] >> So, tonight's vote is you are not
[6:14:01] adopting anything tonight.
[6:14:04] you would be adopting this resolution
[6:14:09] that tells the county and the state tax
[6:14:11] commission what your intent is.
[6:14:16] The but the tentative budget that we
[6:14:18] will be doing later has the same impact.
[6:14:21] You are You are just accepting it um for
[6:14:25] consideration. You are not adopting it
[6:14:28] at that point, either.
[6:14:29] >> We're We're showing what could happen.
[6:14:31] >> I am saying Here it is.
[6:14:34] You have a month to review it. Not only
[6:14:37] you, but citizens at large. You have a
[6:14:39] month to review it and look at it.
[6:14:42] >> Thank you.
[6:14:42] >> We then come back on June 9th.
[6:14:45] And then we would make a decision
[6:14:48] based on other factors, whether those be
[6:14:51] property tax increase or not, whether
[6:14:54] there are things within that document,
[6:14:56] that but that tentative budget you would
[6:14:58] like to see changed or have questions
[6:15:00] about.
[6:15:01] Um those kind of things would then be
[6:15:03] addressed during that June 9th meeting.
[6:15:10] Um
[6:15:12] and then you will see in the down in the
[6:15:13] bottom right corner um in for the my
[6:15:16] annual financial report that the city
[6:15:18] issues, you would then start seeing that
[6:15:21] particular special revenue fund
[6:15:23] separated from the general fund and you
[6:15:26] would see it within uh the what was
[6:15:29] referred to as the act for
[6:15:31] as its own separate item as far as the
[6:15:33] actual financial results of the year, as
[6:15:36] well.
[6:15:39] Are there any other questions?
[6:15:42] It's going all right.
[6:15:43] >> Council, do you have any other questions
[6:15:45] for um Brandon regarding this?
[6:15:49] All right, is there anyone who would
[6:15:49] like to speak
[6:15:51] to this?
[6:15:54] Nobody's here to speak to that, so bring
[6:15:56] it back to the council.
[6:15:59] » I'll make a motion.
[6:16:01] >> Okay.
[6:16:01] >> Um
[6:16:03] I move to approve by resolution the
[6:16:05] creation of a new public safety special
[6:16:07] revenue fund and state that the Orem
[6:16:10] City Council intends to dedicate all of
[6:16:12] the city of Orem's regular general
[6:16:14] operations property tax levy to this new
[6:16:17] fund.
[6:16:18] >> Thank you. We have a motion. Is there a
[6:16:19] second?
[6:16:20] >> I'll second.
[6:16:21] >> All right, thank you Council member
[6:16:22] Meekam. Is there need for further
[6:16:23] discussion?
[6:16:26] Right, I'm just going to say that I I
[6:16:28] really as I as we've talked about this
[6:16:31] before I I
[6:16:32] very supportive of this idea. I like the
[6:16:35] idea of the clarity that property tax is
[6:16:37] going to be spent for very specific
[6:16:40] uses in our public safety department. I
[6:16:42] like that it gives a a stable a more
[6:16:44] stable funding source for public safety
[6:16:48] and and I just I like the transparency
[6:16:50] that this this will provide.
[6:16:53] So, any other discussion?
[6:16:57] All right, um Council member Mielsteen,
[6:16:59] how do you vote?
[6:17:00] >> I.
[6:17:07] >> Thank you. Motion carries.
[6:17:09] Okay, I um
[6:17:11] 10.6
[6:17:14] Oh, so we don't we just have to listen.
[6:17:17] >> You do.
[6:17:17] >> We don't have to take move take any
[6:17:20] action on this item. We just have to
[6:17:22] listen to our chief financial officer as
[6:17:25] he makes a statement.
[6:17:27] >> Yes. So, a part of the new legislative
[6:17:31] law regarding um
[6:17:34] property tax increases
[6:17:36] is that during a not only on our agenda,
[6:17:40] which you may have noticed, but as part
[6:17:42] of this meeting as a separate agenda
[6:17:45] item specifically where I tell you and
[6:17:49] the public there is a property tax
[6:17:53] increase of $450,000
[6:17:56] included within this tentative budget
[6:17:59] that we will be presenting next.
[6:18:03] >> That's it.
[6:18:03] >> And that's the end of the item.
[6:18:05] Okay.
[6:18:06] Thank you for your statement.
[6:18:09] All right, item 10.7, we're going to
[6:18:12] have a public hearing. It's a resolution
[6:18:14] fiscal year 26-27
[6:18:17] tentative budget. And so Brandon, we'll
[6:18:20] turn that time back over to you.
[6:18:22] >> All right, buckle up.
[6:18:24] So, to
[6:18:27] elect Yeah, I got your picture even. How
[6:18:29] about that?
[6:18:31] I had to bribe some people.
[6:18:32] Um this year's tentative budget that
[6:18:36] being presented to you
[6:18:37] is you can see the total amount of all
[6:18:40] funds
[6:18:42] of the city excluding the RDA and the
[6:18:45] special service lighting district. Those
[6:18:47] are not included as part of of this
[6:18:49] present specific presentation and not
[6:18:52] included as part of that $211 million.
[6:18:57] Um just to review the budget calendar
[6:18:59] that we went through. We had a our our
[6:19:01] council retreat in January. We had a a
[6:19:04] work session in April where we discussed
[6:19:06] revenue
[6:19:07] at the time and compensation elements.
[6:19:11] April 28th, we had another work session
[6:19:12] where we discuss dis- discussed
[6:19:14] operations and operational expansions
[6:19:17] as well as the IT component of the city.
[6:19:21] On May 5th, we had a special work
[6:19:23] session where we discussed the fleet
[6:19:26] needs as well as all capital elements
[6:19:29] within that Taggart presented that are
[6:19:32] also um either part of this budget or
[6:19:35] part of the use of those the reserves
[6:19:38] that we transferred back in I think it
[6:19:40] was February.
[6:19:41] Uh
[6:19:42] whichever way we were using those
[6:19:44] towards those capital needs.
[6:19:46] And then obviously here we're presenting
[6:19:48] our tentative budget this evening.
[6:19:51] Some highlights from the the budget.
[6:19:53] First thing you'll notice that increased
[6:19:55] $34 million.
[6:19:57] That is a bit deceiving. I will tell
[6:20:00] you. And we will get into that a little
[6:20:01] later um compared to the prior budget
[6:20:04] and and we'll discuss that. Know that
[6:20:07] this budget does cover the city's
[6:20:09] compensation programs including step
[6:20:11] adjustments and merit increases. It also
[6:20:14] um addresses uh various other targeted
[6:20:17] um
[6:20:18] adjustments that may occur during the
[6:20:20] year as we uh have act continue to
[6:20:22] evaluate uh HR continues to evaluate uh
[6:20:25] individual positions pay. It also uh
[6:20:29] funds all of the health care, any
[6:20:31] potential health care increases as well
[6:20:33] as any URS retirement costs that have
[6:20:35] been uh passed down to us.
[6:20:38] Um as mentioned, we talked about fleet
[6:20:40] replacement and capital projects. It
[6:20:42] funds all of those dollars as well.
[6:20:46] Okay, so in discussion
[6:20:50] our budget overview, you can see the the
[6:20:53] uh revenues uh from the various adopted
[6:20:56] budgets over time and you can see the
[6:20:59] big item on there is the transfer to the
[6:21:01] new public safety fund. So, if you take
[6:21:05] that 25 million which is the amount
[6:21:09] necessary because we have a new fund
[6:21:12] and property tax doesn't cover it all
[6:21:15] and all of the other associated
[6:21:18] public safety revenues do not cover it
[6:21:20] all
[6:21:21] the general fund
[6:21:23] has to cover that variance. That's what
[6:21:26] that $25 million represents.
[6:21:30] So,
[6:21:31] keeping in mind, this is the city as a
[6:21:33] whole, right? So, that's that's why it's
[6:21:36] there. So, you can see if if we were not
[6:21:40] creating that special revenue fund,
[6:21:43] that 25 million would not occur and not
[6:21:46] be considered revenue.
[6:21:48] Therefore, you can you could if you want
[6:21:50] to look at it and you should look at it
[6:21:52] this way,
[6:21:53] that 211 would be reduced by $25 million
[6:21:58] because it would not exist.
[6:22:01] So, keep that in mind as as we talk
[6:22:04] about that large change in
[6:22:07] revenue.
[6:22:10] As we look at and you can see again the
[6:22:13] transfers in the public safety item.
[6:22:16] That's where that shows up in in this
[6:22:19] concept of where do all of the revenues
[6:22:23] come from that make up this 211,000
[6:22:26] or million.
[6:22:28] So, these are all the various fund large
[6:22:30] major funds of the city
[6:22:33] and then the other funds just so you're
[6:22:35] aware the large portion of the other
[6:22:36] funds are all those internal service
[6:22:38] funds that we have which include fleet
[6:22:40] maintenance,
[6:22:41] the largest portion of that is our IT
[6:22:44] fund,
[6:22:45] self-insurance,
[6:22:47] purchasing and warehousing, and
[6:22:48] facilities maintenance. They they are
[6:22:50] the lion's share of that 13 million 870
[6:22:53] at the near the very bottom there.
[6:22:56] So, really though I just this is tables
[6:22:59] to just give you an idea of where do
[6:23:01] those revenues come from and and which
[6:23:03] funds do they belong to.
[6:23:13] That you'll make an please note that the
[6:23:15] little tiny print up at the top,
[6:23:18] I've tried my best to pull out
[6:23:22] the public safety dollars out of this
[6:23:25] comparison so that you are seeing the
[6:23:27] general fund only as it technically now
[6:23:31] would exist.
[6:23:33] And you can see the revenues
[6:23:35] from the 529 to the 55
[6:23:39] for the current year. That increase is
[6:23:41] primarily sales tax related.
[6:23:45] Sales tax and franchise taxes with the
[6:23:49] property tax removed and and ambulance
[6:23:52] revenues removed and Vineyard and Lyndon
[6:23:55] fire contracts removed. Those all are
[6:23:57] now exist within the public safety fund.
[6:24:01] Sales taxes and franchise taxes
[6:24:03] primarily become your biggest sources of
[6:24:07] revenue for the general fund. So out of
[6:24:10] that 55 million approximately 43 of it
[6:24:16] is those two revenue sources.
[6:24:19] Obviously there are a large number of
[6:24:22] individuals that exist within the
[6:24:24] general fund
[6:24:26] but be it from
[6:24:27] yourselves, city manager, city finance,
[6:24:32] legal,
[6:24:34] engineering, many other individuals,
[6:24:36] departments, community development, etc.
[6:24:38] that exist within the general fund.
[6:24:41] That transfers in line
[6:24:43] are those transfers that we are charging
[6:24:46] to other funds
[6:24:48] for our services if you will.
[6:24:51] We do work for the water fund.
[6:24:54] We do work for the sewer, all of the
[6:24:56] enterprise funds. That's primarily what
[6:24:59] those
[6:25:00] charges represent as as our best guess
[6:25:03] and estimates as to what our services to
[6:25:06] those other funds is.
[6:25:11] Um
[6:25:12] the biggest change in that transfers in
[6:25:15] just to give you an idea.
[6:25:17] Um
[6:25:18] So, that public safety fund, again, we
[6:25:20] talked about the 25 million that
[6:25:23] exists only because we've created that
[6:25:25] new fund.
[6:25:26] $700,000
[6:25:28] of that transfers in only exists
[6:25:31] because we're now technically providing
[6:25:34] services
[6:25:35] to public safety.
[6:25:37] Same concept. So,
[6:25:39] that 700,000 would not also not exist
[6:25:43] had we not created that new fund.
[6:25:46] Uh
[6:25:47] engineering costs are up 182,000 as far
[6:25:50] as the money being charged to other
[6:25:53] funds. They are doing more work
[6:25:56] in relation to those other funds than
[6:25:57] they have in the past.
[6:25:59] In
[6:26:00] uh GIS,
[6:26:02] that group exists within the general
[6:26:03] fund.
[6:26:04] Prior to this year, several of those
[6:26:07] individuals that are in that division
[6:26:11] were in those directly in those funds.
[6:26:15] They are no longer in those funds. They
[6:26:16] are now in the general fund and being
[6:26:19] charging their cost out to those other
[6:26:21] funds. So, those are two three big
[6:26:24] components of that difference.
[6:26:29] This one, I I made it I just wanted to
[6:26:31] give an idea, so I didn't pull out
[6:26:33] public safety for fiscal year 26 cuz I
[6:26:36] wanted you to see
[6:26:38] what does that change of moving public
[6:26:40] safety out on its own, what does that do
[6:26:44] to those percentages as far as the total
[6:26:48] comparative to the total. So, you can
[6:26:49] see taxes now become a much larger
[6:26:52] portion
[6:26:54] of the total revenue of the general fund
[6:26:58] because property taxes were not a large
[6:27:00] portion of the total,
[6:27:03] especially when you're only adding 8
[6:27:05] million dollars of property tax, but you
[6:27:07] would be adding some 35 30 40 million
[6:27:10] dollars of
[6:27:12] um public safety costs to that bottom
[6:27:15] line. So, just wanted to give you And
[6:27:17] then you'll see charges for services is
[6:27:19] one of the other ones. I I already
[6:27:21] mentioned ambulance
[6:27:23] um
[6:27:24] Vineyard contract, lending contract,
[6:27:26] various other public safety costs
[6:27:28] revenues. Um those were are now pulled
[6:27:31] out and you can see the impact of
[6:27:33] pulling those out and how that drops
[6:27:34] from 19.5%
[6:27:36] to just under 13%. So, again, it's just
[6:27:39] to give you some relative picture there.
[6:27:42] Uh we've talked about sales tax revenues
[6:27:44] getting into the specifics for general
[6:27:46] fund. Um the fiscal year '26 estimate
[6:27:49] that you see there for 33.7 million is
[6:27:52] based on a 3%
[6:27:54] estimate increase for the current fiscal
[6:27:57] year.
[6:27:58] Then the proposed 34.7 million is
[6:28:01] another 3% increase on top of that 33.7
[6:28:06] million
[6:28:07] proposed increase for fiscal year '27.
[6:28:12] Are we
[6:28:13] clear on that? Do we understand what I
[6:28:14] mean by
[6:28:15] >> what's your Isn't that what you normally
[6:28:16] do? Do you three to four?
[6:28:17] >> Generally is what We're generally in the
[6:28:19] two and a half to three ballpark. Yes.
[6:28:23] So, so it's not out of the ordinary by
[6:28:25] any means.
[6:28:28] Uh I I mentioned franchise taxes being
[6:28:30] one of the other large uh
[6:28:33] tax uh revenue sources for the general
[6:28:35] fund, but you can see it's relatively
[6:28:38] flat over the last uh three years. We
[6:28:42] expect it to be relatively flat this
[6:28:43] year and not go up by much next year.
[6:28:46] But it is a large dollar amount. So, uh
[6:28:48] it is a stable as I said or let me say
[6:28:50] it's stable source. We can pretty much
[6:28:52] count on it.
[6:28:53] This is primarily Rocky Mountain
[6:28:55] PacifiCorp, Rocky Mountain Power
[6:28:57] um Enbridge and Comcast. Those are the
[6:29:01] large three. The city also does have a
[6:29:04] franchise tax associated with its
[6:29:07] enterprise funds as well that become
[6:29:09] part of the cost of this revenue source
[6:29:12] of this fund as well. And all the
[6:29:15] telephone providers. So any cell phone
[6:29:18] or telephone provider is also part of
[6:29:20] this franchise tax revenue source.
[6:29:27] Um just to give an idea the other some
[6:29:29] of the other um
[6:29:31] larger revenue sources within the
[6:29:32] general fund and or in this case the
[6:29:35] I've I've just indicated the development
[6:29:37] fees fund there for building permits
[6:29:38] just to give you an idea. So they're not
[6:29:40] part of the general fund um but you
[6:29:43] we're not really going to necessarily
[6:29:44] talk about the develop development fees
[6:29:46] fund but you can see that that building
[6:29:49] permits revenue has been pretty stable
[6:29:52] just over the So there's not when we
[6:29:55] talk about property tax and we talk
[6:29:56] about growth
[6:29:58] this is usually a key indicator as to
[6:30:00] whether you're going to see any growth
[6:30:02] in your property taxes.
[6:30:04] Uh if you're not seeing stuff being
[6:30:06] built you generally aren't going to get
[6:30:08] more property taxes. So
[6:30:10] um just to give an idea there.
[6:30:12] Um and then some of the other larger
[6:30:14] sources of revenues um interest earnings
[6:30:18] um
[6:30:19] obviously we've spent a lot of money in
[6:30:20] this building in particular um as well
[6:30:23] as uh several other projects that uh uh
[6:30:26] have reduced the amount of cash that we
[6:30:28] have available to invest. And on top of
[6:30:31] that obviously interest rates have um
[6:30:33] declined just a little bit from their
[6:30:35] highs and so we uh
[6:30:38] proposing a a slight decrease in uh
[6:30:40] interest earnings.
[6:30:41] Our justice court fees have um
[6:30:43] fluctuated pretty dramatically over time
[6:30:46] um as we catch up and don't catch up
[6:30:49] with various uh cases as they come.
[6:30:52] Um and then our cemetery lot sales and
[6:30:54] interment fees which are also relatively
[6:30:57] stable um over time.
[6:31:01] And it Yes, before I jump to the
[6:31:03] expenditure side, any questions about
[6:31:05] any of those revenue points?
[6:31:09] Great.
[6:31:12] Uh
[6:31:13] expenditures, just to give you an idea,
[6:31:15] comparison from the prior year's adopted
[6:31:17] budget to the current year. Again, you
[6:31:20] see that 105.9
[6:31:22] million in the middle.
[6:31:23] Significantly impacted again by that
[6:31:26] almost $26 million
[6:31:29] because there's also an expenditure side
[6:31:32] to that on the general fund side. So,
[6:31:35] it has both sides of that element. And so, both sides get inflated because
[6:31:40] of that.
[6:31:41] Uh as obviously as we go down the road,
[6:31:44] that'll just be normal. What you you
[6:31:46] know, you wouldn't see that kind of
[6:31:47] fluctuation in the future.
[6:31:49] Um so, this just gives you some kind of
[6:31:52] idea of where our expenditures lie. Do
[6:31:54] they are they in that personnel
[6:31:55] category? Are they in operations? Are
[6:31:58] they in capital? Just so you're also
[6:32:00] aware, operations includes regular
[6:32:02] operations, any debt payments that we
[6:32:06] have, as well as all of those transfers
[6:32:09] that we referred to in case they're
[6:32:11] transfers out, not in in this case.
[6:32:20] This uh is just to give you an idea of
[6:32:23] the size of those expenditures in
[6:32:25] relation to the total for each fund and
[6:32:27] what and how those break down um between
[6:32:30] personnel, operations, and capital um
[6:32:33] for each of the major funds of the city.
[6:32:35] Uh as mentioned in our discussion with
[6:32:38] LRB, um you can see the the you know,
[6:32:41] and and this is where sometimes people
[6:32:43] get uh maybe a little lost in the sense
[6:32:45] of well, 71 million, that's only like a
[6:32:48] third of you know, I mean, 20 of 211
[6:32:51] million. But as we talk about the
[6:32:54] operations and especially uh in total,
[6:32:58] that 105 is a a pretty inflated number.
[6:33:02] So when you back out a lot of those
[6:33:03] transfer elements
[6:33:05] personnel becomes a large much larger
[6:33:08] percentage of that total.
[6:33:10] And and it's so I just want to make you
[6:33:12] aware of that and you can see we talked
[6:33:15] about the general fund and public safety
[6:33:17] by far the largest two places for
[6:33:20] personnel costs.
[6:33:22] And then as you look at capital
[6:33:25] you can see our enterprise funds the
[6:33:28] significant amount of capital that they
[6:33:31] expend on a regular basis.
[6:33:34] >> Okay, that's a good question.
[6:33:35] >> You bet.
[6:33:36] >> Um
[6:33:37] based on what you just said that 105
[6:33:39] figure is an inflated number and it does
[6:33:41] that because of all the transfers in and
[6:33:42] out? What
[6:33:43] >> Correct.
[6:33:44] >> Thank you.
[6:33:48] » And Brandon, though
[6:33:50] showing those transfers is and being
[6:33:53] transparent about that is is required of
[6:33:55] us, correct?
[6:33:56] >> Yeah, so it's just accounting in order
[6:33:59] to have a balanced fund which is
[6:34:01] required by law. Every every fund in the
[6:34:03] city has to have an equal amount of
[6:34:06] revenue and an equal amount of expense.
[6:34:08] In order to do that, we have to make
[6:34:10] transfers that balance those accounts,
[6:34:14] those funds.
[6:34:14] >> So if you were to pick a more accurate
[6:34:16] number and this is obviously be a
[6:34:17] ballpark, what could you do that? Like
[6:34:19] what would it be?
[6:34:20] >> I could do that, yes.
[6:34:21] So
[6:34:22] >> But will you?
[6:34:23] >> In the future
[6:34:25] I I I expressed my
[6:34:28] In the future I would have if I'd had
[6:34:30] the a little bit more time,
[6:34:32] I'm not sure how many of you were my
[6:34:35] issue with my son last week, but I I I
[6:34:37] ran out of time to really be able to
[6:34:40] identify those transfers separately from
[6:34:44] those operations. So in the future uh
[6:34:48] you would see a transfer line column
[6:34:50] there because they are such a
[6:34:52] significant impact um in relation to
[6:34:54] that. Um
[6:34:56] >> But the good news, Brandon, next year
[6:34:57] when we don't have that big transfer,
[6:34:59] it'll look like a big budget savings.
[6:35:01] This is This could be true.
[6:35:04] >> Um if you would like, uh I'm more than happy to provide you to take
[6:35:09] that same one and break those out for
[6:35:11] you so I can I can send that to you each
[6:35:13] individually just so you can see that
[6:35:15] breakout. So.
[6:35:17] Um
[6:35:19] as we've talked about in uh some of our
[6:35:20] work session meetings, uh just
[6:35:22] summarizing those uh operational
[6:35:24] expansion items that uh were discussed
[6:35:26] in those meetings in relation to
[6:35:29] personnel and various operational
[6:35:31] elements.
[6:35:33] Um
[6:35:34] we've talked about fleet replacements
[6:35:37] um and the totals in relation to the
[6:35:39] various funds uh for those elements.
[6:35:42] Just this kind of gives you a visual idea of what kinds of vehicles
[6:35:47] um are being spent in that arena
[6:35:49] comparatively to the prior year.
[6:35:52] >> Is the increase in police vehicles um
[6:35:55] for the two
[6:35:56] officers?
[6:35:58] >> Uh
[6:35:59] a portion of those Yes, so Yes, so the
[6:36:01] vehicles would be included as part of
[6:36:04] that 855. Yeah, there and I forget it's
[6:36:07] like a hundred something thousand of
[6:36:09] that is related to those vehicles for
[6:36:11] them.
[6:36:13] Um
[6:36:16] and
[6:36:23] Then the public safety fund. So, this
[6:36:25] year thought it would be uh relevant
[6:36:28] definitely to to kind of give you an
[6:36:30] idea of Well, and then again, I wanted I
[6:36:32] don't have a way to be able to make
[6:36:35] those perfectly
[6:36:37] uh equal. So,
[6:36:39] that's why I separated out the transfers
[6:36:40] in and so that you can have an some idea
[6:36:43] of if you were to remove that, uh
[6:36:45] you know, obviously we would expect it
[6:36:47] to be in that same $45 million
[6:36:48] neighborhood as we go down the road, but
[6:36:51] when we're comparing to past, I wanted
[6:36:53] to give you some idea in relation to
[6:36:56] what kind of property taxes are we
[6:36:57] talking about here in relation to their
[6:36:59] revenue.
[6:37:00] Kind of grants do we do we get?
[6:37:04] What or do we budget for, I should say.
[6:37:06] Kind of charges for services, the
[6:37:08] ambulance and Vineyard and Linden and
[6:37:10] various other components that we've
[6:37:12] talked about are in that charges for
[6:37:14] services line and you can see
[6:37:16] some of the elements there.
[6:37:18] Um, and and then as we talked, some fees
[6:37:22] and fines, whether they be related to
[6:37:24] fire inspections or various other
[6:37:26] revenue sources that are related to
[6:37:28] public safety in there as well.
[6:37:34] Uh, just a brief graph kind of showing
[6:37:36] you the general property tax
[6:37:40] that now would be applicable to the
[6:37:42] public safety funds. Just giving you an
[6:37:44] idea of the history there.
[6:37:47] Graphically.
[6:37:48] And then the expenditure side just to
[6:37:51] break down those components for police
[6:37:53] and for fire to give you an idea of the
[6:37:57] makeup of each of those particular
[6:37:59] departments in relation to this new
[6:38:01] fund.
[6:38:05] Um, and they again we discussed in those
[6:38:09] work session meetings those operational
[6:38:12] expansions
[6:38:13] in relation to them. Uh, the property
[6:38:16] tax increase item that I mentioned that
[6:38:18] is included in this budget, you can see
[6:38:20] as related to those two hiring of those
[6:38:22] two police officers um, in relation to
[6:38:25] that $450,000 property tax increase.
[6:38:29] Um, the other operational items down
[6:38:31] below are just included as normal
[6:38:34] coverage within our that that 25 million
[6:38:37] that's covering that that portion.
[6:38:41] Um,
[6:38:43] Oh, feedback.
[6:38:45] >> So sorry. Um
[6:38:47] So, how do we So, we are considering
[6:38:50] short-term rental legislation. And part
[6:38:53] of that legislation, we haven't got to
[6:38:54] this part yet, but is the costs
[6:38:57] associated to the city with enforcement
[6:38:59] if we do end up legalizing short-term
[6:39:01] rentals.
[6:39:03] Um I
[6:39:05] have had discussions with our police
[6:39:08] where there is a a a a
[6:39:11] suggestion of two to three more officers
[6:39:13] to assist with short-term rental
[6:39:16] enforcement.
[6:39:17] Um so, that would be right I guess this
[6:39:19] is two officers is 450. So, we take
[6:39:22] another half and add that and that would
[6:39:24] be our three. And then how do you how do
[6:39:26] you put that into our budget for next
[6:39:29] year because that would then go into
[6:39:30] effect immediately, the need for those
[6:39:32] officers.
[6:39:33] >> Yeah, so depending on the timing, exact
[6:39:35] timing of that, um we would either need
[6:39:38] to come back with a budget amendment
[6:39:41] adding that additional officer or
[6:39:43] potentially if it was at a later point
[6:39:46] in the year, uh there's always
[6:39:47] possibility that we
[6:39:49] evaluate how our uh available funds are
[6:39:54] and potentially you can cover it through
[6:39:55] the remainder of that fiscal year
[6:39:58] and then you would put it within your
[6:40:00] you would add it at that point to your
[6:40:01] fiscal 28 budget. It just becomes
[6:40:04] >> So, and then cuz I should have added
[6:40:05] too, there's also a conversation of at
[6:40:08] least one, maybe two more for our um
[6:40:11] attempts on um long-term rental
[6:40:14] uh code enforcement.
[6:40:16] >> Same concept.
[6:40:18] >> we're getting up in the numbers there.
[6:40:21] So, how do you, Brandon, how do you make that magic work?
[6:40:27] >> So, any any time we're discussing those,
[6:40:30] then we would have to determine where
[6:40:32] what the revenue source that is going to
[6:40:34] cover those costs is going to be.
[6:40:36] Um obviously, if we're already into the
[6:40:38] new fiscal year, it's not going to be
[6:40:40] via any sort of property tax increase
[6:40:43] because that's come and gone that would
[6:40:44] have come and gone by then potentially.
[6:40:47] So then again, it would be going back
[6:40:49] and determining okay, are sales taxes
[6:40:52] for instance
[6:40:53] better than what we anticipate better
[6:40:55] than that 3% that we anticipated. So are
[6:40:57] those going to cover are we going to use
[6:40:59] reserves from our general fund to cover
[6:41:03] those costs?
[6:41:04] Are there other revenue sources be it
[6:41:07] franchise taxes or other revenue sources
[6:41:10] or cost savings for instance maybe there
[6:41:13] are benefit fringe benefit estimates
[6:41:15] were too high. Maybe there are salary
[6:41:19] type of thing items that are are not
[6:41:22] being not needing to be spent for
[6:41:25] various turnover reasons. So all of
[6:41:28] those things would need to be evaluated
[6:41:29] and determined in order to figure out
[6:41:32] how exactly are we going to cover the
[6:41:34] costs of those particular officers if we
[6:41:36] are going to add them at some point
[6:41:39] during the year.
[6:41:40] >> And does that also affect when we would
[6:41:42] add them?
[6:41:43] >> It could determine that as well.
[6:41:45] >> issue, correct?
[6:41:46] >> Yes.
[6:41:47] >> If I can add to to Brandon's point of
[6:41:51] figuring out the revenue source
[6:41:54] also what we would
[6:41:57] ideally come back to you as part of the
[6:41:59] overall short-term rental consideration
[6:42:01] and long-term
[6:42:04] uh
[6:42:05] licensing and permitting enforcement is
[6:42:08] associated fees to go along with that
[6:42:12] and then I'd also say
[6:42:14] uh we would also we would also look at
[6:42:16] the cost of code enforcement officers
[6:42:21] um potentially
[6:42:23] uh
[6:42:23] not maybe not necessarily
[6:42:26] uh police officers per se um because the pay ranges might be different
[6:42:33] between those titles. Of course, code
[6:42:36] enforcement or our neighborhood
[6:42:38] improvement team is in the police
[6:42:40] department, but they're not sworn peace
[6:42:43] officers.
[6:42:44] >> Okay, so so you're saying that costs
[6:42:46] could be reflected differently from
[6:42:47] this?
[6:42:48] >> So so that the total cost of salary,
[6:42:51] benefits, equipment, etc.
[6:42:54] would likely be different than what
[6:42:56] we're seeing here for police officers.
[6:42:58] >> just to clarify,
[6:43:00] we do we can do truth in taxation
[6:43:03] this time of year.
[6:43:05] So when do we have to always do that? We
[6:43:06] can do it once a year?
[6:43:07] >> Yes.
[6:43:07] >> And we have to do it by August or by
[6:43:09] now, June.
[6:43:10] >> We have to do it by Yes, June 9th. Yeah,
[6:43:12] or June
[6:43:13] >> So that's why you said we have to wait a
[6:43:15] year, just to clarify.
[6:43:16] >> Yes. Yeah.
[6:43:18] That first meeting in June, we have to
[6:43:19] have already notified them that we're
[6:43:21] going to move forward with a property
[6:43:23] tax increase so that I can get a date in
[6:43:25] August with the county auditor.
[6:43:28] >> So the licensing is
[6:43:31] most likely the way we're going to go
[6:43:34] to fund these additional
[6:43:36] >> At least for initial
[6:43:39] increased enforcement,
[6:43:41] we we would look at landlord licensing
[6:43:44] fees and and probably engage with LRB to
[6:43:47] help us do that fee study to make sure
[6:43:49] that there's a good nexus there.
[6:43:51] >> Perfectly.
[6:43:55] » Okay, I'm
[6:43:56] moving on to our streets. And again,
[6:43:59] we've touched on this in part of the
[6:44:01] work session where we discussed capital
[6:44:02] projects. This is just kind of giving
[6:44:05] you an idea of you know, that was more
[6:44:07] in total. This kind of breaks that out
[6:44:10] between the two different funds that we
[6:44:12] have and and which type of project is
[6:44:15] being funded by which revenue source
[6:44:17] just so you kind of have some idea
[6:44:20] as to what our our plans are in this
[6:44:23] that are in this tentative budget.
[6:44:27] Our debt service fund
[6:44:29] obviously here in Utah we're very
[6:44:31] attuned to our debt elements.
[6:44:34] This just gives you that breakdown kind
[6:44:36] of a little slight history here of of
[6:44:39] what that debt service fund primarily
[6:44:41] covers. The primary elements right now
[6:44:44] of that are the Utopia payment that we
[6:44:46] had a discussion about earlier today.
[6:44:49] The new 2024 sales tax revenue bonds
[6:44:53] primarily funding the public safety
[6:44:55] building remodel and the fire training
[6:44:57] facility.
[6:44:58] As well as we have a lease where we did
[6:45:02] a bunch of energy improvements
[6:45:05] and so that lease runs through this fund
[6:45:07] as well.
[6:45:09] And all so those are the three major
[6:45:10] elements in the and then the GO bond the
[6:45:12] 2019 GO bond which is the only GO bond
[6:45:15] we had left which funded city
[6:45:17] um
[6:45:18] the library hall and the fitness center.
[6:45:21] So those are the four items that are
[6:45:23] part of um the debt service fund.
[6:45:30] I mentioned our five internal service
[6:45:32] funds just again just to give you an
[6:45:35] idea of the magnitude of each of those
[6:45:37] particular funds
[6:45:39] and the dollars how they break down
[6:45:42] between personnel operations and
[6:45:44] capital.
[6:45:45] The biggest item of change in these
[6:45:48] particular ones is as discussed in our
[6:45:50] work sessions and as what I wanted to
[6:45:52] mention here is in our information
[6:45:54] technology
[6:45:55] area.
[6:45:57] That 5,050,000
[6:45:59] that you see there the prior year was
[6:46:02] just just around 4.2 million.
[6:46:05] So that $800,000 increase
[6:46:08] is related to some of some regular you
[6:46:11] know
[6:46:12] pay increase items but these particular
[6:46:16] operational expansion items which we
[6:46:18] discussed in those work sessions. So
[6:46:20] these particular three
[6:46:23] four individuals well three individuals
[6:46:25] and an intern so the interns a
[6:46:27] part-time.
[6:46:28] And so they make up that amount and
[6:46:32] various elements that
[6:46:35] as IT goes I know not what many of those
[6:46:39] things even do or are but I know they're
[6:46:41] all important.
[6:46:43] So
[6:46:44] they add up the two of those and you're
[6:46:46] 600 of the $800,000 increase.
[6:46:52] All I know is that Azure one I have to
[6:46:53] put in a stinking password all the time
[6:46:56] so
[6:46:59] yeah.
[6:47:02] So moving on to the starting into our
[6:47:05] enterprise funds. Well before I do that
[6:47:07] is there anything else that's popped in
[6:47:09] your mind about anything that's not
[6:47:11] enterprise fund related? Okay, great.
[6:47:14] Water fund so this year the bigger
[6:47:18] biggest items in there are the increases
[6:47:20] over on the left side you see the water
[6:47:22] source fee
[6:47:23] and the change there to that fee down in
[6:47:25] the bottom left corner the the new state
[6:47:27] regulatory fee which all of these we've
[6:47:30] discussed we discussed when we
[6:47:32] brought the revenue work session item to
[6:47:34] you but they're all uh
[6:47:37] put into this slide here
[6:47:39] and the water base rate on a 3/4 meter
[6:47:41] and then you know the base rates as
[6:47:44] mentioned down there on other meter
[6:47:45] sizes are are shown in the fees and
[6:47:48] charges section of the tentative budget.
[6:47:52] Um
[6:47:54] just to give you an idea in relation to
[6:47:57] our water and how that
[6:48:00] water
[6:48:01] even with those increases where Orem
[6:48:03] City's rate for water falls on the scale
[6:48:06] comparative to
[6:48:08] these particular cities. Um each each
[6:48:12] one of these is going to show a slide
[6:48:13] similar to this but you should know
[6:48:15] Uh,
[6:48:16] of the cities I changed, but that's
[6:48:18] because I wanted to put the highest one
[6:48:21] in and the lowest one in, so that you
[6:48:24] had some reference as to
[6:48:27] that full, cuz this isn't every city
[6:48:29] that you saw on that uh, other
[6:48:32] comparison, right? Um, and so I just
[6:48:34] wanted to make sure you we could see the
[6:48:37] range that we're talking about in
[6:48:39] relation to the highest and the lowest
[6:48:40] of that of those tables.
[6:48:44] Our water reclamation, otherwise known
[6:48:46] as sewer. Um, you can see the costs in
[6:48:50] relation to the kind of a historical
[6:48:53] um, size-wise there, as well as the
[6:48:56] sewer base uh, base rate increase that
[6:48:58] is being proposed and the volume charge
[6:49:00] associated with um, that increase as
[6:49:02] well.
[6:49:03] >> Can I just say something to that? Just,
[6:49:05] you know, so just
[6:49:07] common sense. This is inflation, folks.
[6:49:10] >> It is.
[6:49:10] >> Right. Okay.
[6:49:11] >> Yes.
[6:49:13] You bet.
[6:49:16] Take a pipe with corrosion inside of it,
[6:49:18] right, Chris?
[6:49:20] >> It's struvite, yes.
[6:49:21] >> Yeah.
[6:49:24] Okay. I said corrosion. He said
[6:49:26] struvite.
[6:49:31] Cholesterol in your arteries what he
[6:49:32] says.
[6:49:46] » Okay. So, no none of our public's
[6:49:48] hearing you say that, so I want that's
[6:49:49] important. I want you to say that.
[6:49:51] >> So, so he's he's just indicating, so we
[6:49:54] always have inflation. We we have
[6:49:55] construction inflation still, not as bad
[6:49:58] as it maybe it was been in the last
[6:49:59] little while, but most of this increase
[6:50:01] is related to unfunded man federal
[6:50:04] mandates primarily
[6:50:06] and which we're just needing to cover.
[6:50:08] >> good to add.
[6:50:08] >> To remove nutrients and various things.
[6:50:11] >> Okay. Thank you.
[6:50:13] >> So, improvements to the wastewater
[6:50:14] treatment plant, which then causes us to
[6:50:17] do major capital improvement projects.
[6:50:20] And so, then we have construction
[6:50:22] inflation associated with doing those
[6:50:25] capital improvements.
[6:50:28] » Um then just to give you an idea again
[6:50:30] where War falls in the pantheon of
[6:50:33] cities in relation to these
[6:50:36] the fees um
[6:50:38] for everybody else and and be still fair
[6:50:40] even with these especially these last 3
[6:50:42] years the rather large increases we've had in our fee
[6:50:47] we still sit pretty well comparatively
[6:50:50] speaking.
[6:50:50] >> And Brandon, just to emphasize these
[6:50:53] tables here are War's proposed FY 27
[6:50:59] rates with the other cities FY 26
[6:51:02] existing rates, correct?
[6:51:04] >> Correct. And there is a table at the
[6:51:05] very end where we kind of sum them all
[6:51:08] together with
[6:51:10] an increase a standard 4.9% increase to
[6:51:15] everybody else's to see where we stand
[6:51:18] in a total.
[6:51:19] So, you'll see that but these are all
[6:51:22] compared our 27 versus whatever their
[6:51:25] existing rate is.
[6:51:30] Stormwater
[6:51:31] again kind of you can see a history
[6:51:33] there
[6:51:34] in relation to and we have a lot of
[6:51:36] stormwater projects that we're trying to
[6:51:38] get resolved related to obviously the
[6:51:40] West Union Canal, North Union Canal,
[6:51:42] etc.
[6:51:43] Trying to figure out how to get those
[6:51:45] taken care of.
[6:51:47] There is an increase to the ESU rate
[6:51:50] in relation to that in this in this
[6:51:52] budget.
[6:51:54] Um and then you can see where War City
[6:51:56] falls with that new proposed rate
[6:51:59] in comparison to other cities.
[6:52:04] Um our recreation fund
[6:52:06] they're they're just boring 4.4 4.
[6:52:10] 4.6.
[6:52:13] >> Can you do something about that?
[6:52:16] » Um
[6:52:17] the the biggest item to to note are the
[6:52:19] two items on the right um that uh we are
[6:52:22] increasing the uh daily admission at the
[6:52:24] fitness center for the first time in
[6:52:26] over 3 years.
[6:52:28] Um so
[6:52:29] you know
[6:52:30] and then the indoor classes continues to
[6:52:32] grow, maybe not quite as uh big of a
[6:52:35] percentage jump as in past some past
[6:52:37] years, but uh 10% still a pretty good
[6:52:39] growth rate, so.
[6:52:44] Our solid waste fund
[6:52:46] um
[6:52:47] you can you can see the increases that
[6:52:50] have have occurred there. Uh we recently
[6:52:52] have uh negotiated a a expan- extension
[6:52:56] of our uh solid waste contract with
[6:52:58] Waste Management. Um um
[6:53:00] so that hopefully will be steady here
[6:53:03] for the next uh few years. Um and then
[6:53:06] just give you an idea of what those
[6:53:08] rates you can see from 25 to 26, we held
[6:53:11] the rates with no increase.
[6:53:13] Um and then the current rates are all a
[6:53:15] 2 and 1/2% increase uh from 26 to this
[6:53:19] proposed budget.
[6:53:20] Um and those are primarily just trying
[6:53:22] to pass on the costs of of our uh rate
[6:53:26] increases that uh Waste Management had given to us and to be honest in
[6:53:31] prior years that we we used reserves to
[6:53:34] cover, but now we need to cover those uh
[6:53:37] going forward.
[6:53:40] Um and then just again to kind of give
[6:53:43] you an idea where we fall with our solid
[6:53:45] waste rate comparatively to uh to other
[6:53:47] cities.
[6:53:50] And that total that I was referring to,
[6:53:54] so this one um
[6:53:56] includes them at that adjusted, so
[6:53:58] everybody every city there is adjusted
[6:54:01] by 4.9% in their total so that it trying
[6:54:05] to give a better picture comparative to
[6:54:07] our
[6:54:08] 27 rate and you can see that somehow we
[6:54:11] just got to take Springville out.
[6:54:14] So, I don't know what we got to do but
[6:54:17] anyway
[6:54:18] yeah.
[6:54:20] So, that's
[6:54:22] it for our regular tentative or regular
[6:54:25] budget. Are there any questions in
[6:54:28] relation to as mentioned?
[6:54:30] Uh you are being just presented this to
[6:54:33] you.
[6:54:34] I you're welcome to review with whatever
[6:54:37] questions you may have review the actual
[6:54:39] tentative budget document.
[6:54:42] Please do go through that if you if you
[6:54:44] have certain questions that are in
[6:54:46] there. Trevor Bell or myself will be
[6:54:48] happy to to answer try to answer those.
[6:54:51] I I can almost guarantee you might find
[6:54:55] an error or two in spelling or the how
[6:54:59] aesthetics or things like that. We're
[6:55:01] still trying to work through our new
[6:55:04] ClearGov budgeting program. It's only
[6:55:06] the second year that we've fully used
[6:55:08] that program.
[6:55:09] And so we can
[6:55:10] continue to find things that
[6:55:13] we didn't know before. So, we're we're
[6:55:15] trying to improve there as well. So,
[6:55:18] we would appreciate that if you found
[6:55:20] things in there that didn't make sense
[6:55:22] or look weird or whatnot that you could
[6:55:24] bring those to our attention as well.
[6:55:27] >> All right, thank you. Council, do you
[6:55:29] have any questions? Council member Gale.
[6:55:31] >> I just have a comment and that is you've
[6:55:32] been going over this with us for months
[6:55:34] and months and and we appreciate the
[6:55:35] effort. I know it takes a ton of work
[6:55:37] and you've done a great job. So, thank
[6:55:38] you.
[6:55:39] >> Thank you.
[6:55:40] >> All right, thank you.
[6:55:42] Uh
[6:55:43] this is a public hearing
[6:55:46] and we have one esteemed member in the
[6:55:48] audience who has declined by shaking his
[6:55:51] head to that
[6:55:54] provide any public comment at this time.
[6:55:57] You're a good sport that I could tease
[6:55:59] you a little bit.
[6:56:01] All right, I'm going to open the public
[6:56:03] hearing and I'm going to close the
[6:56:05] public hearing and bring it back to the
[6:56:08] council.
[6:56:11] So, we have uh
[6:56:14] I say we can't we can't tentatively
[6:56:16] accept the budget. We have to accept the
[6:56:18] tentative budget. So, this you got to be
[6:56:20] pretty solid in your motion if you can
[6:56:22] >> I'll make your motion
[6:56:24] >> for you.
[6:56:24] >> I move to accept for consideration the
[6:56:27] City of Orem fiscal year 2026-2027
[6:56:29] tentative budget and set a public
[6:56:32] hearing to receive public comment and to
[6:56:34] accept, modify, or reject this tentative
[6:56:37] budget on June 9th, 2026 at 6:00 p.m.
[6:56:41] and to set the specific date and time
[6:56:43] for an August public hearing to accept
[6:56:45] public comment on the proposed public
[6:56:47] safety special revenue fund property tax
[6:56:49] increase.
[6:56:52] >> I
[6:56:52] second that.
[6:56:53] >> All right, we have a motion and a
[6:56:55] second. Where did I leave off? Let me
[6:56:57] see.
[6:56:59] Uh
[6:57:00] So, we took it uh
[6:57:03] Let's go ahead. Council member Gale, how
[6:57:04] do you vote?
[6:57:05] >> I.
[6:57:12] >> All right, motion carries.
[6:57:15] All right.
[6:57:17] Item 10.8,
[6:57:19] statement that the city is considering
[6:57:21] levying a tax rate that exceeds the
[6:57:23] city's certified tax rate, the
[6:57:25] approximate dollar amount of and purpose
[6:57:27] for the additional tax revenue that
[6:57:29] would be generated by the proposed tax
[6:57:31] increase, the approximate percentage
[6:57:33] increase in tax revenue for the city
[6:57:35] based on proposed tax rate increase,
[6:57:39] and that if the city proceeds with a
[6:57:41] proposed tax rate increase, the city
[6:57:43] will write notice and conduct a public
[6:57:45] hearing at which members of the public
[6:57:46] will have the opportunity to provide
[6:57:49] comments on the proposed tax rate
[6:57:51] increase and presentation of the
[6:57:53] property tax impact schedule. Period.
[6:57:56] That is a long sentence.
[6:57:58] >> Congratulations for completing that.
[6:58:00] >> You are welcome. I did even though I
[6:58:02] went to school in another state, I
[6:58:03] learned to read.
[6:58:05] >> You want to know who wrote that?
[6:58:08] An attorney.
[6:58:13] » Paid by the word, right?
[6:58:16] >> And even if it wasn't, Steve.
[6:58:17] >> this statement requires will require an
[6:58:20] action from us as a council after
[6:58:23] Brandon does his presentation.
[6:58:26] >> Yes, thank you, Mayor.
[6:58:28] So, as part of again, as part of new
[6:58:30] legislation in relation to property tax
[6:58:32] increases,
[6:58:33] part of the requirement is number one, I
[6:58:36] as mentioned previously, I have to state
[6:58:38] that that tentative budget included a
[6:58:40] property tax increase.
[6:58:42] That that tentative budget includes a
[6:58:45] separate line item so that you can see
[6:58:49] the amount of the property tax increase
[6:58:51] that is being proposed. So, in that
[6:58:53] tentative budget, you will see that line
[6:58:54] item existing within there.
[6:58:57] And then the third item is that there's
[6:59:00] a separate agenda item related to this
[6:59:02] property tax impact schedule um
[6:59:06] outlining what is the amount that we're
[6:59:09] asking for in relation to the property
[6:59:11] tax increase.
[6:59:13] That is this $450,000
[6:59:15] as stated in that first paragraph.
[6:59:18] Um and then uh gives you an idea of what
[6:59:22] our And and since I don't know what our
[6:59:25] what the certified tax rate is going to
[6:59:26] be yet, I don't know that until the 1st
[6:59:29] of June, that is what our current
[6:59:32] certified property tax rate is.
[6:59:35] And then what the budgeted revenue based
[6:59:38] off of that rate was for 2025.
[6:59:42] >> And that is again, just for the city of
[6:59:44] Orem's portion.
[6:59:46] >> Correct.
[6:59:47] >> Not the entire property tax one pays.
[6:59:50] >> So, all the Not include the school
[6:59:51] district or the county or any of the
[6:59:54] other rates.
[6:59:54] >> Which please specific to WARMS.
[6:59:55] >> Please say, do you have in front of you
[6:59:57] the dollar amount per month it is
[7:00:00] anticipated to be on a $550
[7:00:03] >> Getting there.
[7:00:04] But but thank you for bringing that up.
[7:00:05] Yes. So, and
[7:00:07] >> You have a segue, right?
[7:00:08] >> And you will notice that we in
[7:00:10] parentheses there we've also then
[7:00:11] indicated as as we've indicated earlier
[7:00:14] we related to dedicating our property
[7:00:17] tax
[7:00:18] all of our property tax to that new
[7:00:19] special revenue fund. We've also tried
[7:00:21] to indicate here that current certified property tax rate
[7:00:27] actually still belongs to the city. But
[7:00:29] under what we are attempting to do
[7:00:32] the this property tax increase would be
[7:00:34] going towards public safety and would be
[7:00:37] included within that special revenue
[7:00:40] fund that is going to be part of the the
[7:00:42] budget. And then
[7:00:45] >> Let's see if I can scroll down here a
[7:00:46] little bit.
[7:00:47] >> You can see the increase of the 450,000
[7:00:50] and what that would mean to our revenue.
[7:00:53] And then that means that that's an
[7:00:55] approximately a seven little over 7%
[7:00:58] increase. To council member Millett's
[7:01:01] point then we have a calculations here
[7:01:03] of what that means to an average primary
[7:01:06] residence. The 513,000 comes from the
[7:01:09] county.
[7:01:10] And so that would equate to an $11.85
[7:01:15] annual increase. So, I'm going to have
[7:01:17] to make you do a little bit of math.
[7:01:19] >> Less than a dollar a month.
[7:01:22] And then for a residence and then you
[7:01:24] can see the business one is just a
[7:01:26] little over $2 a month in relation to to
[7:01:30] that value for them.
[7:01:32] It identifies here on this impact
[7:01:35] schedule that it would be going to the
[7:01:36] police department and be increasing
[7:01:39] their budget accordingly
[7:01:41] by that 450,000.
[7:01:43] and the last item is what is that being
[7:01:46] spent on and that is the we are hiring
[7:01:48] two new officers and all the related
[7:01:50] vehicles and equipment related to having
[7:01:53] those officers.
[7:01:55] So are there any questions about that
[7:01:57] this impact schedule will be
[7:02:00] posted online with everything else. It
[7:02:03] does need to be posted front and and
[7:02:06] center and this schedule needs to be
[7:02:09] available to the public and so via not
[7:02:13] only that method but if they
[7:02:15] you know, we'll have it in a couple of
[7:02:17] places as well so that they have it
[7:02:19] available to them as well.
[7:02:22] Any questions about anything on there
[7:02:24] that I discussed?
[7:02:27] >> Any questions Council?
[7:02:30] All right, but looks like they've given
[7:02:32] us a motion that's much shorter than
[7:02:34] what
[7:02:35] >> All those are done.
[7:02:36] >> Yes, for someone if you would like to
[7:02:38] make a motion.
[7:02:39] >> I move to approve the resolution
[7:02:41] acknowledging several state required
[7:02:43] actions related to increasing the city
[7:02:45] of Orem's property tax revenues as part
[7:02:48] of the fiscal year 2026-2027
[7:02:50] tentative budget.
[7:02:52] >> Thank you we have a motion is there a
[7:02:54] second?
[7:02:55] >> I'll second that.
[7:02:56] >> All right, thank you.
[7:02:57] All right, we'll go ahead and start with
[7:02:59] you Council member Lamson. Is there any
[7:03:01] discussion?
[7:03:04] All right.
[7:03:05] >> I
[7:03:12] >> All right, motion carries.
[7:03:14] Next item on the agenda is city manager
[7:03:16] information items.
[7:03:19] What we've learned.
[7:03:22] It says okay.
[7:03:23] >> I hope it's okay if I'm closing all
[7:03:25] these things.
[7:03:28] » Um I just wanted to say thank you for
[7:03:31] your full involve involvement uh
[7:03:34] during the city's birthday 107th
[7:03:36] birthday and kindness week. Uh we as
[7:03:39] staff enjoyed seeing all of you help us
[7:03:42] pass out birthday cake, and plant
[7:03:45] flowers, and do service. So, thank you
[7:03:47] so much. Uh the next big kind of city
[7:03:50] event that we're looking forward to is
[7:03:53] uh during Memorial Day weekend. First
[7:03:56] with our Gold Star Family
[7:03:58] Memorial dedication, and then with our
[7:04:00] Memorial Day program at the cemetery on
[7:04:03] the following Monday morning at 10:00
[7:04:05] a.m. at the cemetery. So,
[7:04:07] but again, thank you so much for being
[7:04:09] so involved, and and sure appreciate
[7:04:12] working with you.
[7:04:14] >> Right, thank you. And just a reminder,
[7:04:16] there is a Miss Orem and Miss
[7:04:18] Teen Orem Orem Teen
[7:04:21] pageant this weekend as well.
[7:04:24] Um
[7:04:26] there are no other pieces of no other
[7:04:27] information. I would entertain a motion
[7:04:30] to adjourn from this being from the City
[7:04:33] Council meeting, and reconvening
[7:04:36] uh
[7:04:37] to a meeting of the Orem Redevelopment
[7:04:39] Agency.
[7:04:39] >> So moved.
[7:04:40] >> All right, thank you. Is there a second?
[7:04:42] >> Second.
[7:04:42] >> All right, we have a second. Thank you.
[7:04:45] Oh.
[7:04:45] Open. Open.
[7:04:46] >> I.
[7:04:50] >> All right, motion This is like this
[7:04:52] break over. We're This is great. You got
[7:04:55] All right.
[7:04:56] Welcome, Redevelopment Agency members.
[7:05:00] Uh we have one item on our consent
[7:05:02] calendar,
[7:05:04] and that is approval of the meeting
[7:05:05] minutes of December 9th, 2025. Do you
[7:05:08] have a motion to approve?
[7:05:09] >> I move to approve the consent items.
[7:05:11] >> have a motion? Is there a second?
[7:05:13] >> Second.
[7:05:13] >> A second. Um
[7:05:16] Councilman or
[7:05:17] agent, whatever your title is, Mr.
[7:05:19] Meekam.
[7:05:21] >> I.
[7:05:26] All right, I can vote twice. Never
[7:05:28] mind. That was kids past my bedtime. I
[7:05:30] apologize. Uh motion carries. That's
[7:05:32] what I meant to say. All right, our next
[7:05:34] item is number 14, RDA scheduled items
[7:05:37] resolution redevelopment agency of the
[7:05:39] city of Orem fiscal year 26 27 tentative
[7:05:43] budget and we turn the time over to
[7:05:45] Brandon Nelson, chief financial officer.
[7:05:47] >> Thank you, Mayor. This one's really
[7:05:48] short.
[7:05:49] So, our redevelopment agency, um
[7:05:53] as mentioned before, the only there are
[7:05:55] some remnants of the prior old RDAs that
[7:05:58] we still have monies that we are
[7:06:00] expending, but there are really no very
[7:06:03] little revenue
[7:06:04] coming in for those prime
[7:06:06] and so that the the really the only
[7:06:08] remaining item is the University Place
[7:06:11] CDA that's part of underneath the
[7:06:13] umbrella of the RDA.
[7:06:14] Um which we have an agreement with them
[7:06:17] to um rebate 90% of the property tax we
[7:06:21] receive
[7:06:22] um for their uh
[7:06:25] developments that are part of the CDA
[7:06:28] agreement.
[7:06:29] Um you can see the prior year there kind
[7:06:32] of in the middle bottom section there.
[7:06:35] Uh the current year estimate,
[7:06:38] uh we refunded
[7:06:40] almost 1.7 million. We expect that to be
[7:06:42] a little bit higher here in 28 or 27,
[7:06:45] sorry, of 1.8. The two items below that
[7:06:48] are related to that. So, I mentioned 90%
[7:06:52] 5% is stays within the fund and that's
[7:06:55] that future projects item. 5% is
[7:06:59] uh charged as an administrative overhead
[7:07:01] fee
[7:07:02] uh and goes back to uh the general fund
[7:07:06] uh for services of all of us and as well
[7:07:10] as um various other uh
[7:07:13] elements that may be needed related to
[7:07:15] that CDA.
[7:07:16] The bottom area, the project area totals
[7:07:18] item are those the remnants of those
[7:07:22] uh old RDAs.
[7:07:24] Um and so that's the makeup of the RDA
[7:07:29] and this uh elements within it. Are
[7:07:31] there any questions about the RDA?
[7:07:34] >> Right, any questions?
[7:07:37] All right.
[7:07:38] And this is not a public hearing and
[7:07:40] we're
[7:07:41] so I'm not going to open it to public
[7:07:42] hearing, but go ahead I would entertain
[7:07:44] a motion.
[7:07:45] >> I move to accept by resolution the
[7:07:47] Redevelopment Agency fiscal year
[7:07:49] 2026-2027
[7:07:51] tentative budget and to set a public
[7:07:53] hearing to adopt the final budget on
[7:07:56] June 9th, 2026 at 6:10 p.m.
[7:08:00] >> Second.
[7:08:01] >> All right, we have a motion and a
[7:08:02] second. I'll start with me, I vote I.
[7:08:04] >> I.
[7:08:10] >> All right, motion carries. I would
[7:08:12] entertain a motion to adjourn from the
[7:08:14] meeting of the as the Redevelopment
[7:08:16] Agency and reconvene as the Orem Special
[7:08:18] Service Lighting District.
[7:08:19] >> So moved.
[7:08:20] >> We have a motion, is there a second?
[7:08:23] >> Second.
[7:08:24] >> The motion is second. Um
[7:08:26] I'll start with me, I vote I. Okay.
[7:08:29] >> I.
[7:08:33] >> Right, motion carries. Welcome to the
[7:08:35] Special Service Lighting District
[7:08:37] meeting.
[7:08:38] Um we have one item on our consent
[7:08:41] um items and that's approval of the
[7:08:43] meeting minutes of June 10th, 2025.
[7:08:48] Uh is there a motion to approve?
[7:08:49] >> So moved.
[7:08:50] >> Right, motion is there a second?
[7:08:51] >> Second.
[7:08:52] >> Right, motion is All right, Councillor
[7:08:55] Rameal Stein, how do you vote?
[7:08:56] >> I.
[7:09:01] >> All right, motion carries. We're on item
[7:09:04] 17, resolution Special Service Lighting
[7:09:07] District the City of Orem fiscal year
[7:09:09] 2026-2027 tentative budget.
[7:09:11] Brandon Nelson, Chief Financial Officer
[7:09:14] will be presenting.
[7:09:16] >> Thank you.
[7:09:18] >> Good mayor.
[7:09:19] Uh so, our street lighting uh
[7:09:22] fund and uh is a separate entity and
[7:09:24] that's why it's uh
[7:09:26] a separate uh budget discussion.
[7:09:29] Uh you can
[7:09:30] have an idea here of what we are
[7:09:32] proposing in relation to the street
[7:09:34] lights, uh revenues associated with
[7:09:36] them,
[7:09:37] um and you'll notice in the far bottom
[7:09:39] right corner the appropriation of
[7:09:40] surplus. So, we are using some of the
[7:09:43] surplus that we've accumulated over a
[7:09:45] number of years to try to finish up the
[7:09:48] very um street lights. I believe it's
[7:09:51] the old poles uh from Rocky Mountain
[7:09:54] Power if I remember correctly.
[7:09:56] Uh but anyway, that we're using some of
[7:09:58] those funds to to complete some capital
[7:10:00] those capital projects.
[7:10:03] Um
[7:10:04] here's a breakdown of the expenses
[7:10:06] related to street lighting. We have a a
[7:10:08] few personnel that exist within there.
[7:10:11] Um as you can see, most of it is related
[7:10:13] to the the You'll recall when I talked
[7:10:16] in the debt service fund that energy
[7:10:18] savings lease, uh this fund actually
[7:10:20] pays money to pay for that debt service
[7:10:23] as um
[7:10:24] a large portion of that uh those energy
[7:10:27] savings were changing out all of the
[7:10:29] bulbs in the the street lights to LED
[7:10:32] bulbs.
[7:10:33] Um and so, they participate in paying
[7:10:35] for a portion of that debt.
[7:10:37] Um the holiday lighting, which obviously
[7:10:40] we have a lot of lights out in the uh
[7:10:43] city center park now and the the street
[7:10:45] lighting fund uh
[7:10:46] pays for a large portion of all the the
[7:10:49] power and lights for that particular um
[7:10:52] event as well as
[7:10:54] um various other paying for power for
[7:10:56] many of the other all the lights
[7:10:58] throughout the city as well.
[7:11:01] Um you'll the the capital amount there
[7:11:03] the 420 is larger than it normally would
[7:11:05] be um because of that appropriation of
[7:11:07] surplus. Um so, you may notice that if
[7:11:09] you were comparing that to a prior year.
[7:11:12] Uh just to give you an idea, uh the
[7:11:14] proposed rate changed for the street
[7:11:17] lighting.
[7:11:18] Um again, changing from 328 to 336. That
[7:11:22] was a 2.4% increase.
[7:11:24] Um the
[7:11:27] residents pay that monthly on their
[7:11:29] utility bill. Uh businesses pay that all
[7:11:31] up front. Uh as you can see down at the
[7:11:33] bottom there, the $40.32 when they um
[7:11:37] renew their business license.
[7:11:40] And that's
[7:11:41] Is that it?
[7:11:42] >> That's it.
[7:11:42] >> All right. Any questions?
[7:11:45] All right. I would entertain a motion.
[7:11:49] » I'll do it. I move to accept by
[7:11:51] resolution the special service lighting
[7:11:53] district of the city of Orem fiscal year
[7:11:56] 2026-2027
[7:11:58] tentative budget and to set a public
[7:12:01] hearing to adopt the final budget on
[7:12:02] June 9th, 2026 at 6:20 p.m.
[7:12:06] >> Second.
[7:12:07] >> All right. Thank you. Motion is second.
[7:12:08] Um Council member Gale.
[7:12:10] >> Aye.
[7:12:15] >> All right. Motion carries.
[7:12:17] All right, friends.
[7:12:18] >> I move that Mayor that we
[7:12:20] >> We've got one more motion.
[7:12:21] >> I move that we adjourn.
[7:12:23] >> Second.
[7:12:24] >> All right.
[7:12:25] Do we have to do I can't remember. Do we
[7:12:26] do a roll call? Can you just say
[7:12:27] >> Aye.
[7:12:29] >> And if you say nay, you can just sit
[7:12:31] here.
[7:12:31] >> Yeah.