[0:40] You know where anything from?
[0:49] I think
[1:01] passed away.
[1:09] » Yes, you do.
[1:18] » Oh, wow. Okay.
[1:43] » So, I was on my way to last week and I
[1:46] saw the
[1:49] Yeah. And I saw the fire and everything
[1:53] at the rehab center and I and Amy said.
[5:07] Look at that. We're fine,
[5:08] >> man. Whole city got
[5:12] invited.
[5:15] >> Should be quick one. Said that before
[5:18] though. But
[5:18] >> did you say
[5:19] >> No, I didn't. I didn't mean I didn't
[5:21] mean to.
[5:24] Good.
[5:25] >> Yeah.
[5:26] >> I didn't mean to say that
[5:34] for doing the pledge of allegiance.
[5:35] >> Yeah.
[5:36] >> All right.
[5:38] >> Oh, yeah.
[5:39] >> So,
[5:41] just tell me when we're live.
[5:46] » Okay.
[5:56] We waiting for someone. What?
[5:57] >> We waiting for someone.
[5:59] >> Oh,
[5:59] >> she's she's going to let us know we're
[6:01] live
[6:04] in five.
[6:15] » Nice Dave.
[6:19] I'd like to thank everybody for coming
[6:22] to u our planning commission meeting
[6:25] here on Thursday, March the 12th, 2026.
[6:30] I'd like to first excuse two of our
[6:33] planning commissioners, uh Chad Skola
[6:36] and uh Julie Losi.
[6:39] And to get things kicked off, we're
[6:41] going to go ahead and start off with a
[6:43] pledge of allegiance led by Chris
[6:46] Roberts. Commissioner Roberts
[6:53] to the flag of the United States of
[6:56] America and to the republic for which it
[6:58] stands. One nation under God,
[7:02] indivisible, with liberty and justice
[7:04] for all.
[7:13] » All right. Thank you. Um,
[7:16] so we're going to go ahead and move into
[7:19] public comment. Um, this is a section
[7:23] for public comment on anything unrelated
[7:25] to any of the action items to the um,
[7:29] agenda today. So, we'll go ahead and
[7:32] open the mic for public comment.
[7:43] Okay. All right, we're going to go ahead
[7:45] and close the public comment and we'll
[7:50] move straight into the um action items.
[7:54] So, consent agenda from February 12th,
[7:58] 2026 minutes. Um are there any comments?
[8:02] >> I do not have any. No.
[8:04] >> Okay. Neither did I. Um okay.
[8:09] So, we need to make a motion. I'll move
[8:11] to approve the consent agenda for
[8:13] February 12th, 2026. Minutes as
[8:16] presented.
[8:18] >> Second.
[8:19] >> A second.
[8:21] >> Okay.
[8:23] >> And
[8:24] >> roll call or no?
[8:25] >> Oh, do we need to do a roll call for
[8:27] that?
[8:29] >> Yeah.
[8:35] » Oh, Peter.
[8:36] >> Yes.
[8:37] >> I guess that's how I meant by roll call,
[8:38] but go ahead.
[8:40] Okay.
[8:41] >> Okay. All right. Let's go ahead and uh
[8:44] open up the public hearing for the PO
[8:47] bands reszone.
[8:50] >> Um absolutely. Lance, take it away.
[8:54] >> This is a request.
[9:02] The public went out for RM which is
[9:04] actually a higher density.
[9:06] >> Yes.
[9:06] >> Uh and so that was my mistake. Uh but
[9:10] it's it is actually a lower density.
[9:13] We feel it's okay to go forward with the
[9:15] public hearing. Uh given that you were
[9:18] concerned with that, we show up and and
[9:20] this is even less of an impact. So we
[9:23] feel good about that, but we decide
[9:25] where we go from there.
[9:28] And then it's it's just it's a parcel
[9:30] that's agricultural, has been for a long
[9:32] time, has the old shops on it. Um the B
[9:37] will if it is reszone it will be
[9:39] subdivided
[9:40] concept plans for two lots the culdeac
[9:43] there will have to be put in off leester
[9:45] that'll be completed for the access with
[9:47] these two lots.
[9:49] >> Okay. And uh from what I understand it
[9:52] uh complies with the general plan
[10:01] » that is 2.8 eight acres per well
[10:05] >> one
[10:06] >> dwelling units per acre.
[10:08] >> Okay.
[10:08] >> This is 1.45.
[10:11] >> Okay.
[10:12] >> It's actually considerably
[10:15] >> Okay.
[10:18] All right.
[10:21] >> Perfect. Thank you. Um and and with
[10:24] that, um I'll go ahead and open up the
[10:27] public hearing for Buban's reason.
[10:33] And
[10:35] okay, we'll go ahead and I guess just
[10:39] making sure that everybody's had a
[10:41] chance to
[10:44] making sure
[10:46] >> to open public hearing.
[10:47] >> Oh, this one we have to make a motion.
[10:49] That's right.
[10:50] >> I'll make a motion to open public
[10:52] hearing for PON resone.
[10:55] >> I'll second that motion.
[10:58] Okay.
[11:00] All in favor?
[11:01] >> Yes.
[11:10] Are there any public comments?
[11:14] All right. Looking good. Um and then
[11:17] need a motion to close. Yeah.
[11:21] >> Motion to close.
[11:23] public hearing for Pman
[11:26] zone.
[11:28] >> I'll second that. motion. Um,
[11:31] >> yeah. Vote.
[11:32] >> Yes.
[11:35] Okay. Um,
[11:38] at this point,
[11:40] we'll have discussion.
[11:41] >> Yeah. Do we need to hear from the
[11:43] developer provance? We have any
[11:45] questions or
[11:46] >> I mean, it's always good to hear from
[11:47] the applicant.
[11:50] >> I stand up there.
[11:51] >> You do.
[11:51] >> Yes.
[11:52] Please. For those good,
[11:55] >> those tuning in
[11:56] >> and say your name and where you're from.
[11:58] >> Yeah. My name is John Pobansz. I I'm
[12:00] actually a resident of Washington
[12:01] Terrace right above the top of the toll
[12:03] road, but I practiced orthodontics in
[12:06] this general community for 28 years. Uh
[12:10] fact, I know him from the office right
[12:12] there.
[12:14] and uh just really enjoyed um serving
[12:17] the families of South Weieber and I I
[12:20] love to drive my VW van in the parade
[12:23] every year and it's a great community
[12:26] that I live adjacent to and when this
[12:28] property came available um I was really
[12:31] excited about the fact that that
[12:33] building could be turned into something
[12:36] uh more aesthetic and more useful. We've
[12:38] already uh repaired the vandalized
[12:41] windows. Uh we have plans to eventually
[12:45] uh improve the exterior appearance of
[12:47] that building and and use it for um
[12:50] internal storage and hobby space for me
[12:53] and probably gardening around it. I
[12:55] really plan to have that second parcel
[12:57] just be my own space. Um we also um you
[13:02] know had some dilapidated um sheds that
[13:05] we just kind of pulled down because they
[13:07] were kind of unsightly and maybe um
[13:09] traps for whatever could grow in there.
[13:13] And so that's been a positive. And then
[13:15] the adjacent property plan is my my
[13:17] daughter um Jane Gurr is married to my
[13:21] son-in-law uh Skyler Gurr right there uh
[13:24] owner of Gur Construction. uh he's a
[13:26] energetic, ambitious young construction
[13:29] company owner and does a lot of
[13:31] commercial and residential pro projects
[13:33] along the Wasatch front. So, our hope is
[13:36] that they can build a a single family
[13:38] home on that second adjacent property
[13:40] where my grandkids will be. And uh we
[13:44] view that as a wonderful thing for our
[13:46] family, not just now, but in the long
[13:48] term future for them to contribute to
[13:50] that community, uh have their kids walk
[13:52] down the the sidewalk to the elementary
[13:55] school, and just think it'll be a great
[13:58] addition to what's already a fantastic
[14:00] um subdivision.
[14:02] >> All right. Fantastic.
[14:04] >> Thank you. Yeah, I know.
[14:06] >> Thank you.
[14:11] » I actually do not have anything
[14:13] questions for the reason. I don't have
[14:14] any questions. So,
[14:15] >> okay.
[14:18] » As well, um I think the information was
[14:20] laid out uh pretty plainly in the
[14:23] packet. Um thank you to the city staff
[14:27] um for getting that put together. Um
[14:30] we have a motion.
[14:33] I'll move to recommend the approval to
[14:35] the city council of the PON reszone
[14:37] request at approximately 1121 East
[14:40] Lester Street, a zone change from
[14:42] agricultural to residential low on 1.5
[14:45] acres.
[14:48] And I'll second that motion. Roll call.
[14:52] >> Yes.
[14:55] >> Um,
[14:58] next up is the annual training. Um,
[15:04] » thank you.
[15:05] John.
[15:16] » Jamie will not be presenting this
[15:18] tonight. We're just going to go over
[15:19] some slides he's previously provided to
[15:22] us. I believe Lance is just going to
[15:24] touch on these top. If you have any
[15:26] questions throughout, let us know.
[15:28] Okay,
[15:29] >> really quickly we start with the last
[15:30] slide. So sweet.
[15:33] >> Yeah, you record she's eager.
[15:44] » I can help myself.
[15:46] >> Yeah. So, and I think um you guys have
[15:50] had the training. This is kind of new
[15:52] for Brad, but just this is going to walk
[15:54] through kind of how the meeting should
[15:56] run a little bit. uh the types of
[15:58] decisions we make um you know how the
[16:01] code generally functions. I'm gonna say
[16:03] just really brief stuff and then any
[16:06] questions you have about it please ask
[16:08] um and we just need to make sure
[16:11] everybody's kind of on the same page and
[16:12] knows what's going on.
[16:14] >> We'll also send you slides out.
[16:17] >> Thank you.
[16:20] >> And I think Brad's actually watched some
[16:21] videos already. So
[16:24] >> good.
[16:25] >> Yeah. I think and we we operate with
[16:27] pretty informal rules but it is
[16:30] parliamentary rules keep it very simple
[16:32] straightforward and and the big part
[16:34] about having uh there's a lot to be said
[16:37] about having very consistent meetings
[16:38] that we do the same patterns so that if
[16:41] it's a simple one like tonight fine but
[16:44] if it's a complex one we need to make
[16:46] sure we're doing the same thing every
[16:47] time so that it's really clear and you
[16:50] know when we get to a complex one it's
[16:52] really easy for people to say well you didn't do that for so and so last
[16:56] meeting. So that's why it's kind of we
[16:58] get a little bit particular about
[17:00] brief introduction by staff, open and
[17:02] close the public hearing, take, you
[17:05] know, and and respond to those comments.
[17:06] So that's part of it. Um I think
[17:11] the the parliamentary rules, I'm sure
[17:12] you guys all know this, but I mean it's
[17:14] just to keep it clear and and really
[17:16] clear about clear and consistent and and
[17:19] then also just what what is being
[17:21] approved. So when we make a motion it,
[17:24] you know, it's to approve. Um, you know,
[17:26] the quick trip is a good example of one
[17:28] that was complex and we kind of worked
[17:30] on conditions during the or you guys
[17:32] worked on conditions during the meeting.
[17:34] >> Thanks for starting me off on that.
[17:36] >> Yeah,
[17:37] >> Ben, here you go.
[17:39] >> And uh so that is uh I mean that's what
[17:43] these are about. And so it's, you know,
[17:45] you make a motion, you state the
[17:47] conditions of approval, it gets a
[17:48] second. Now, any discussion on what we
[17:51] have on the table that we're discussing.
[17:53] >> I think would it be would it be accurate
[17:55] to say that this the parliamentary order
[17:59] really helps not in the heat of the
[18:01] moment as much as
[18:04] for for history, right? Future, right?
[18:08] when you when you refer back to
[18:10] it, you know,
[18:12] it was done right.
[18:14] >> Yeah. And it and it's it should be
[18:16] really clear. U you know, I made this
[18:19] motion to approve with these conditions.
[18:22] You know, Chris or you or Brad says,
[18:24] "Hey, well, I want to add something to
[18:26] that." Okay, they'll take your friendly
[18:28] amendment. Now, we we've modified the
[18:31] motion and it's really clear. And then
[18:32] we vote on that motion. Um the roll call
[18:36] vote is for uh ordinances and
[18:39] resolutions which is the reason and that
[18:41] type of thing but the date the smaller
[18:44] stuff you know meeting ajourn all that
[18:46] kind of stuff can just be a up or down
[18:47] vote um I don't know you have any
[18:50] questions about that I mean obviously
[18:52] there's whole books on parliamentary
[18:54] procedure and all that but we try and
[18:56] keep it simple but we also need to be
[18:57] clear
[18:58] >> what and can you clarify on like the
[19:00] general consent on number four what is
[19:02] uh
[19:06] may raise general consent chart.
[19:08] >> Yeah. No, that's exactly I mean the
[19:09] consent agenda is is where we use that
[19:11] on the minutes things like that where
[19:13] it's just
[19:14] >> you know does anybody have any questions
[19:16] on the minutes?
[19:17] >> No questions. Can I have a motion?
[19:19] >> Move to approve the minutes. All in
[19:21] favor? I. You're done.
[19:23] >> Okay. Perfect.
[19:23] >> So that's that at least that's how I
[19:25] read that is it's just it's
[19:27] >> Yeah, we're really clear on it.
[19:28] >> Okay. um the reasons the the more
[19:31] complex ones obviously get a little
[19:32] trickier but it's a similar pattern of
[19:35] do I have a motion
[19:37] >> and then you need to have the motion
[19:39] clear get a second
[19:41] >> now we're going to discuss
[19:43] >> so and
[19:44] >> oh so even after the second you want to
[19:46] discuss
[19:47] >> you don't have to okay but that would be
[19:49] the place to discuss
[19:50] >> after we have a motion on the table and
[19:53] I'm
[19:55] >> this is I don't want to go too far but
[19:57] that would be the idea deal way is we
[19:59] have a clear motion that we're
[20:00] discussing
[20:02] and and that's on the record. Uh now
[20:05] let's talk about it.
[20:06] >> Okay.
[20:07] >> Do we want to amend it? Do you want to
[20:09] withdraw it and make a different motion?
[20:11] That's what the parliamentary procedures
[20:13] will help us just keep get really clear
[20:15] what we're discussing.
[20:16] >> Um and if it's outside of that
[20:21] just it's it adds confusion to the
[20:23] minutes to the record but also for the
[20:26] that evening. So, I think we get there.
[20:28] It's a good conversation and all that,
[20:30] but it helps to at least to a degree.
[20:34] Um, you know, like in tonight, we have
[20:37] to have three people for a quorum. Um,
[20:40] and
[20:42] you know, but we don't need to have, you
[20:45] know, the majority rules. It doesn't
[20:47] mean there's five people on the planning
[20:49] commission and so three people have to
[20:51] vote in favor of something because
[20:52] there's no, it's the number of people
[20:54] here. the majority here is who votes. Um
[20:58] anyway,
[21:01] >> so so really quick, um and I I just want
[21:04] to make sure I understood that correctly
[21:05] regarding the motion uh comments that
[21:08] you made. Um when we typically uh
[21:12] discuss an agenda item, um we'll uh
[21:18] we'll talk about it and then make a
[21:20] motion.
[21:22] >> That's fine. to approve or to table or
[21:24] to
[21:26] >> do any one of these actions,
[21:28] >> right?
[21:28] >> Um, so
[21:31] did I misunderstand when you're saying
[21:34] that you should make a motion to
[21:36] discuss?
[21:36] >> No, let me let me back up and just say
[21:38] so I mean
[21:40] >> it's public hearing.
[21:42] >> Yep.
[21:42] >> Uh applicant gets a chance to speak.
[21:45] >> Yep.
[21:45] >> Uh questions, clarifications, then you
[21:48] guys discuss,
[21:49] >> right?
[21:50] Then somebody makes a motion one way or
[21:52] the other. The time of that discussion
[21:54] is when you're, you know, you're hashing
[21:56] out what conditions do you feel like
[21:58] you're kind of getting a feel for
[22:00] >> important issues. Yep.
[22:01] >> Then someone takes the the stab at, all
[22:03] right, I'm going to make a motion to do
[22:04] something
[22:06] >> with these elements.
[22:07] >> Okay.
[22:08] >> Once that's on the table, we're only
[22:10] discussing that,
[22:10] >> right?
[22:11] >> So it sets that other stuff kind of
[22:12] aside and it's just a way to make it
[22:14] one, two, three clear.
[22:16] >> Just a very focused name. You got you're
[22:18] discussing the project then you're
[22:19] discussing the motion.
[22:20] >> Gotcha.
[22:22] I understand.
[22:23] >> And that way yeah that motion's made
[22:26] like
[22:28] >> we'll sometimes
[22:31] uh have a quick discussion on exceptions
[22:34] or
[22:36] >> Yeah.
[22:36] >> conditions or whatever.
[22:38] >> Yeah.
[22:38] >> And that's what you're talking about.
[22:39] >> Yeah. I mean you're going to certainly
[22:40] deliberate and go through that.
[22:42] >> Right. Uh the other thing I'd say about
[22:43] motions
[22:46] these are the motion types. Um
[22:49] but uh is that just going to see uh oh
[22:54] make them based on facts you know um
[22:57] move to approve uh you know it meets the
[23:00] staff report the conditions in the staff
[23:02] report these facts uh what we heard
[23:04] tonight at public basis for your your
[23:07] motion is is always good to have should
[23:09] we have problems done
[23:11] >> so right
[23:12] >> I mean we generally don't have problems
[23:14] so we get a little loose but that's why
[23:17] it's there is if if there is a
[23:18] controversial issue, we we know how to
[23:20] handle it and we've got that process.
[23:23] >> Absolutely.
[23:27] » Yeah. Let's see. Well, okay. Every
[23:29] motion has six steps. Move, second,
[23:32] restate the motion. Whoops.
[23:35] Uh
[23:37] discuss, then vote, then announce. So,
[23:42] and again that's like we were just
[23:43] saying it's to keep everything clear and
[23:45] we know what's
[23:45] >> So the first one that says the hands
[23:47] like does a chair person doesn't have to
[23:49] give the motion.
[23:50] >> No.
[23:51] >> Okay.
[23:52] >> Member raises raises hand to say hey I'm
[23:55] ready to open
[23:57] >> and you guys don't necessarily raise
[23:58] hands. You would
[23:59] >> Yeah. You guys just say I'm ready to do
[24:01] it. But that's I mean this we don't want
[24:04] to get terribly formal but it's just
[24:06] good to be clear
[24:08] >> and restating the motion is a good step
[24:10] in there because it's okay this is what
[24:12] you said we often refer to Michelle tell
[24:16] it that all right this is what I heard
[24:17] the conditions were
[24:20] >> the basis the reasonings
[24:22] >> yeah
[24:26] there's the roll call votes
[24:29] like we
[24:32] And this is where it kind of crosses the
[24:33] line. It's like, well, point of order,
[24:36] you know, I don't think we're doing
[24:38] these motions, right? If somebody's
[24:41] made a motion and it's on the table and
[24:43] then we start discussing
[24:45] things outside of that, that's when you
[24:47] would say, a point of order, we have a
[24:49] motion on the table. What are we doing
[24:50] with it? And if we don't want it, let's
[24:52] vote it up or down and then discuss more
[24:54] if we need to discuss more. You know,
[24:56] that again, just to keep it organized.
[24:58] Um, you know, point of information is
[25:00] just to ask a question. Well, no,
[25:02] apparently it's additional information.
[25:05] Point of inquiry is to ask a question
[25:08] and then privilege is, hey, I can't sit
[25:11] here anymore. It's making me sick. I got
[25:12] to leave. So, anyway, um, I mean, we
[25:15] really don't use these very often, but
[25:18] technically that would be the formal way
[25:19] to do it.
[25:22] Um,
[25:23] >> the writing.
[25:25] >> I know. Let me see.
[25:29] Um and I think you know we we do we just
[25:32] did public hearing. I think we followed
[25:34] this right. Let's see if we did. Uh yes
[25:36] the residents all have right to be
[25:38] heard. They had that opportunity. Uh
[25:41] members of the public body are not
[25:42] required to respond to questions or
[25:44] comments. That is an area that can lead
[25:46] a lot of commissions and committees and
[25:48] councils into trouble is you want to
[25:51] answer their questions. you know, the
[25:53] public's here and um it's like, you
[25:56] know, maybe they're just
[25:57] misunderstanding something. I I go crazy
[25:59] over here. It's like, oh, come talk to
[26:00] me at another time because I can help
[26:02] you understand why we're doing what
[26:04] we're doing and, you know, where our
[26:05] hands are tied or what not. But in the
[26:07] meeting to keep it clear, we're just
[26:09] taking that information and then we will
[26:11] respond all at once and it's just to
[26:13] keep an orderly meeting,
[26:14] >> right? Um
[26:16] obviously public
[26:17] >> and usually during the larger groups
[26:20] we'll reiterate that to everybody. Yeah.
[26:23] Just to kind of help maintain
[26:25] everybody's expectations.
[26:26] >> Yes. Yeah.
[26:28] >> Um
[26:30] yeah, as we saw, do we open and close
[26:32] with motion? Um
[26:35] yes, we said that the applicant gets a
[26:37] right to respond after the public
[26:39] hearing. Uh I have had a lot of concerns
[26:41] and this is where you guys deliberate is
[26:44] um over the years public will get up and
[26:47] say a bunch of stuff uh their concerns
[26:50] and expressions and then the the
[26:52] applicant will get up.
[26:55] How can I play this? Some applicants
[26:57] have been known to stretch the truth at
[26:59] that time and you guys are still just
[27:03] because an applicant says something
[27:05] you're there to deliberate is you know
[27:07] and weigh it.
[27:08] >> Yeah. And so, you know, if they're just
[27:10] flat out contradicting and you know, one
[27:13] way or the other, you know, you've got
[27:15] to weigh those what you get. Sometimes
[27:17] this is just very helpful clarification.
[27:19] Sometimes it's it can be abused, but
[27:22] anyway, the applicant gets to respond.
[27:25] Um, of course, if we have a lot of
[27:27] people here, you're going to want to
[27:29] shorten, hey, everybody's got three
[27:30] minutes and and it's kind of to again
[27:32] keep the meeting moving and orderly.
[27:34] You're going to have some people that,
[27:35] you know, just will take up 15, 20
[27:37] minutes talking and they have a lot to
[27:39] say. We appreciate that, but we need to run a meeting. Uh the time for, you
[27:44] know, if they have a lot of concerns,
[27:46] they can come talk to staff. They can u
[27:49] you know, discuss it at other times, but
[27:51] in the meeting, we've got to be
[27:52] respectful of everybody in the room. Uh,
[28:01] no member of the public shall be
[28:02] recognized until by the church, you
[28:04] know, shall be heard until recognized by
[28:06] the chair. I think when you've invited
[28:07] them up and they come up, that's good.
[28:10] >> You don't need to state their address,
[28:12] just their city.
[28:14] >> Can I ask questions? Yes,
[28:16] >> it's probably going to be going probably
[28:18] going to go over it, but um being that
[28:21] we are in a small town seeing a lot of
[28:24] people, what are our rules and stuff as
[28:27] far as people calling us outside of the
[28:29] meeting?
[28:30] >> Okay, we are going to get to ethics
[28:31] later, but just to answer the question,
[28:33] I mean, you can have uh interactions and
[28:37] discussions
[28:38] um one-on-one.
[28:41] >> You're not supposed to talk to the
[28:42] council members, the other commission
[28:44] members.
[28:45] um about topics. You're just taking
[28:48] information. There's nothing wrong with
[28:49] that.
[28:52] Can't take money though. There's
[28:55] >> um I'm trying to think
[28:57] >> we've had I've like where
[29:00] >> there's incidents where like a person
[29:02] gave me a lot of information. Yeah.
[29:04] >> And I told them put in public comment so
[29:06] that we all have the same information. I
[29:08] don't want to be like
[29:09] >> the same.
[29:09] >> Yeah. I would always recommend they go
[29:11] to our city website
[29:13] >> and say please post your
[29:17] >> That's what I would say.
[29:19] >> Yeah. Put it on the public record.
[29:21] >> It's on public.
[29:22] >> Yep.
[29:22] >> Yeah. That first one is
[29:26] >> Yeah. Yeah.
[29:28] >> So you can Yeah.
[29:30] >> All right.
[29:31] >> Yeah. It's good to have good boundaries
[29:33] about that stuff because it can be
[29:35] abused. But
[29:37] >> now, can he bring that information up as
[29:40] long as he's
[29:41] >> That's a question I have.
[29:43] >> While we're in the meeting, can he bring
[29:44] that information?
[29:45] >> Yeah, he say I have a a phone call or I
[29:48] did a site visit
[29:49] >> res reach out to me. I've heard him say
[29:51] that.
[29:52] >> So, as long as it's within the meeting,
[29:54] >> but I don't have to disclose who it was.
[29:57] >> Um,
[29:58] >> I just I don't know the answer to that.
[30:00] Yeah, if you have to like Yeah.
[30:02] >> What would you say risk?
[30:04] >> I would say unless you feel like it's
[30:07] specifically
[30:08] needed,
[30:09] >> right? Yeah. And and I was just going
[30:12] there in my head too is is that when
[30:14] we're making decisions, we need to
[30:17] evaluate kind of like what Lance said
[30:19] earlier in the training. We need to
[30:21] evaluate factual information.
[30:24] that is allowable to be, you
[30:27] know, you know, of record to for
[30:30] consideration because there are
[30:32] sometimes when we do receive information
[30:35] uh that is is not allowable to the
[30:37] record that that may be you know uh
[30:41] erroneous or or or somewhat
[30:45] uh you know controvertible.
[30:48] >> Yeah. Um, you know, we are making
[30:51] decisions on uh on on code and fact, not
[30:54] on public outcry.
[30:56] >> Correct.
[30:59] >> Legal terms. Public clamor.
[31:01] >> Public clamor. Thank you.
[31:03] >> Outcry is actually more accurate. That's
[31:06] what outcry. Oh yeah, I know what that
[31:09] is. But yeah. Um,
[31:11] >> sorry, I got us off topic.
[31:14] Oh no, that's what we're do. That's
[31:15] great. all in formation
[31:20] comments. To matter of fact,
[31:22] you're only going to be able to go so
[31:23] long on that. Um, it will happen that,
[31:26] you know, sometimes there are people
[31:28] that make statements and whatnot. Um,
[31:32] I'm taking back at Cooper's Landing. I
[31:34] think someone asked me and I shouldn't
[31:36] have responded, but like they they asked
[31:39] me and said, "Well, would you want to
[31:40] live here?" You recommend. Would you
[31:41] want to live here? I was like, you know,
[31:45] Yeah. I'm a city planner. I don't care
[31:47] about density. But anyway, you know, uh
[31:50] should have just kept quiet on that and
[31:52] said, but it's it feels awkward. It's
[31:54] like I want to resolve the issue and
[31:56] concern. So,
[31:57] >> yeah, that's a great example of
[31:58] something that should not be, you know,
[31:59] considered on the record.
[32:01] >> And so, and
[32:02] >> yeah, and it's really and and multiple,
[32:05] you know, they want to get up and debate
[32:06] and all that and that's why we do the
[32:08] three minutes one time. You know, if
[32:10] there's information that you're
[32:12] gathering, that's okay. But to just take
[32:14] general more testimony after you've
[32:16] closed the public hearing is really it
[32:19] just makes everything so much harder.
[32:22] Right. So um and you guys are lucky sort
[32:27] of you can say take it to the city
[32:30] council. I love we we are done here
[32:34] but you guys could you know
[32:36] >> well and that's the biggest thing is
[32:38] we're going after facts like you said
[32:39] and what code is I can't decide if I
[32:41] don't like it it doesn't matter you know
[32:43] like
[32:43] >> right that's not our job
[32:44] >> that's not our job that's
[32:47] >> I think that was probably one of the
[32:49] hardest lessons to
[32:51] really incorporate is that my opinion
[32:54] when I was commission like 98% of the
[32:59] time was irrelevant doesn't
[33:01] >> because I'm not legally allowed to sort
[33:04] of the situation,
[33:06] >> right? And I think that's a
[33:07] misunderstanding a lot too.
[33:10] >> And that's why you see a lot of love and
[33:12] get angry that you're making a certain
[33:14] decision. It's like, but your hands are
[33:16] tied.
[33:17] So my recommendation is anytime there's
[33:19] a really hot topic to somehow insert
[33:22] that into your dialogue of why you're
[33:24] building
[33:26] and that might help alleviate some
[33:28] stress on you because you guys are bound
[33:31] by the code is the rules and so long as
[33:34] it meets code then there's not a lot you
[33:36] can do unless something goes down the
[33:38] path of a uh developers agreement or
[33:42] something like that and even then the
[33:44] majority will come to the council for
[33:46] approval.
[33:47] >> Final approval. Yeah.
[33:49] >> So,
[33:49] >> yeah. I want to start each one with we
[33:52] are looking at you know, you know, the
[33:54] code and the stuff that's it, you know.
[33:57] >> Yeah.
[33:58] >> Like if this meeting is like a one
[34:00] sentence that describes what the
[34:01] planning commission is, you know.
[34:04] >> Is that the agenda? something just to
[34:06] like we're only looking at does this
[34:08] meet
[34:11] » say hey as a reminder
[34:14] commission
[34:16] um I don't know how you
[34:19] >> their role is specifically to evaluate
[34:22] this application and its adherence to
[34:24] the code
[34:25] >> right
[34:28] >> help alleviate some of the out
[34:34] » I I would recommend that
[34:38] >> I guess you're right.
[34:40] >> Just make sure
[34:42] >> not misstating.
[34:44] >> Yeah.
[34:45] >> One more thought I have on this is is it
[34:47] al I've seen it been very helpful that
[34:50] you can say I heard this concern and
[34:53] that I mean letting them know that you
[34:55] know it's not falling on deaf ears.
[34:57] We're not ignoring it. We we appreciate
[34:59] the thought and concerns you have. uh
[35:02] here but here's where the code says I
[35:04] can look at you know
[35:08] it's a balance but
[35:09] >> right
[35:10] >> it's sometimes very helpful to say I
[35:12] heard these concerns
[35:13] >> yeah mediate the response a little bit a
[35:16] little bit of empathy
[35:18] >> yeah
[35:20] uh state law is the land use development
[35:23] management act
[35:25] section 10 for in the state code for
[35:27] cities municipalities
[35:29] um yeah our This is I don't know this is
[35:34] planning
[35:35] land use code 101 but it's the authority
[35:38] to operate and do land use issues comes
[35:41] from the state. It's granted by the
[35:43] state. Um uh we have so we have that
[35:47] direction and then we have personal
[35:48] property rights. It's often referred to
[35:50] as a bundle of rights, you know, to to
[35:53] use your land as you want and you're not
[35:54] harming others. Um
[35:57] so that's the state code. Our code
[36:00] complies with state code should it's
[36:02] just a little more refined. Uh some
[36:04] areas the state lets us make the
[36:06] decisions and calls just has to be
[36:08] within certain parameters and we have
[36:09] that. I think um you know I'm I've only
[36:13] been here a couple years but when I got
[36:14] here I was like we have a good code at
[36:16] Southwaver. I've been in commun I'm like
[36:18] this is bad. So we have a good code. You
[36:21] guys have done a lot of good work before
[36:23] I got here. So they stay on top of it
[36:26] really good. So it's a good team that's
[36:28] done that. So, I think we're pretty good
[36:30] on the code and and it's clear and
[36:33] compliant. Um,
[36:36] yeah, this is, you know, it allows us
[36:39] to, you know, create the plan
[36:40] commission, do a general plan. We're
[36:42] required to have a general plan and
[36:44] certain elements in it. Um,
[36:47] let's see what else.
[36:50] Yeah, you know, what property rights are
[36:52] there, what we may regulate. Uh, you
[36:55] know, the regulations are binding. We
[36:57] talked about that. Um,
[37:01] yeah. And and having an ordinance is
[37:03] plain and straightforward. That's we try
[37:05] to make that happen. Uh, if we're not
[37:08] clear in our code,
[37:10] uh, we have the responsibility to clear
[37:12] and if it's if we're too vague, then the then it goes it's a gray area
[37:18] that we didn't address. It tends to go
[37:19] in favor of the applicant,
[37:21] >> right? So that's something to keep in
[37:23] mind is you kind of if it's a tie we're
[37:27] responsible to have the code clear so it
[37:29] goes to the benefit of that.
[37:33] Um yeah so we have well let's we've got
[37:38] kind of the legislative land use
[37:40] authority and appeal authority. These
[37:42] are the executive uh the legislative and
[37:46] the judicial part of this the three
[37:48] parts of the government. Right? So the
[37:50] legislative body is the city council.
[37:52] You guys make recommendations on the
[37:54] city code. They adopt it. That's a
[37:56] legislative action. Reszones are
[37:58] legislative actions. General plans are
[38:00] legislative actions. So that's public
[38:02] hearings. Public can weigh in with
[38:03] opinions. Uh you know just general
[38:06] preferences, that type of thing. And
[38:07] you're going to weigh that based on your
[38:09] decisions. Uh then you're going to adopt
[38:12] the code. And this is where we have our
[38:14] biggest problem.
[38:16] the state in the last few years has made
[38:17] a great effort to
[38:20] control our meanings a little bit and because when some when something's
[38:25] in the code and we've talked about it
[38:27] already that we have to follow the code
[38:30] it's not time to say well that's not
[38:31] wrong we shouldn't you know we should
[38:34] have a different traffic count standard
[38:37] you know no it's in the code now so the time to correct things is at the in
[38:42] the creating the law itself and
[38:44] hopefully once we get those standards
[38:46] were just most of our actions at the
[38:47] planning commission are do we meet these
[38:49] standards and there is some variation of
[38:52] opinion there but not it's pretty clear
[38:55] uh and then we also have an appeal
[38:57] authority we just use that uh last year
[39:00] for the first time my first time here in
[39:01] a couple years doesn't happen very often
[39:04] variances yeah I want to vary from the
[39:07] code because I have unique circumstances
[39:10] and there's five specific criteria in
[39:12] state code the one that kills a lot of
[39:14] variances is it's um it can't be an
[39:16] economic hardship. So, it's like, well,
[39:19] if I can get one more lot, I can make a
[39:20] hundred more thousand dollars. Uh yeah,
[39:23] we're not going to break the rules so
[39:24] you can make more money. So, that's that
[39:27] kills a lot of those requests. Um but,
[39:29] you know, I I actually sit on the Ogden
[39:32] City U board of adjustment and you know,
[39:36] we had one that's like, "Yeah, you're trying to put a development on
[39:39] this really weird sloped lot and it'd be
[39:43] good development." So, you know, be
[39:44] granted the variance. So, it there's
[39:46] criteria there, but um if there's a
[39:48] hardship or they're not getting to use
[39:50] it the way others would that all the
[39:53] legislative the the appeal body stuff
[39:56] goes to an outside attorney for South
[39:58] Weieber. So, we bring in an outside
[39:59] attorney to hear that
[40:02] the application and then staff responds
[40:04] with this is what we think the code says
[40:06] and then they make a final
[40:08] determination.
[40:10] Um, yeah. So, legislative bodies, the
[40:13] city council.
[40:15] >> Yeah, I think that's we kind of cover
[40:17] all those
[40:19] plain language again talking about that.
[40:23] Um,
[40:24] and then the bill. I think we covered
[40:26] those. Pretty good. Any questions on
[40:28] that?
[40:31] Again, this is another slide talking
[40:32] about the legislative administrative.
[40:35] Uh so conditional use permit is
[40:37] administrative, subdivisions
[40:39] administrative.
[40:41] You know what does the code say? Do they
[40:43] meet the code? We've already set up the
[40:45] standards with the leg the legislative
[40:48] act created the standards. Now do they?
[40:50] So the legislative is where people can
[40:54] uh have the public hearing. The
[40:55] administrative is you're reviewing that.
[40:58] Um yeah
[41:02] some hearing requirements.
[41:03] >> Can we go back to that? Yes.
[41:05] >> Slide the Yeah.
[41:10] » Yeah, that's a good slide. So, zoning
[41:12] ordinance, general plan, reszones,
[41:14] annexation, legislative
[41:18] condition, use site plan, development
[41:20] agreements. Development agreements
[41:22] actually there's kind of two types of
[41:24] development agreements. One is uh can be
[41:28] used to change the zoning. So that would
[41:30] be a legislative.
[41:33] South Gateway is, you know, under
[41:37] construction right now. They went
[41:38] through a development agreement. They
[41:40] changed zoning rights for that property
[41:43] and got into they're allowed to with a
[41:46] development agreement go different than
[41:48] just straight out of the city code and
[41:50] it allows for nuances, but that's a
[41:52] legislative act. This is a development
[41:54] agreement which is now we've adopted
[41:56] that development agreement. as that
[41:57] subdivisions well they went in and they
[42:00] came in previously did they meet the
[42:02] subdivision code and the development
[42:06] any more question on that?
[42:07] >> So um the appeal authority in in our
[42:11] little town where we don't have a board
[42:13] of adjustments
[42:14] um who handles that?
[42:16] >> We get an outside attorney.
[42:18] >> So just the attorney that's it.
[42:20] >> Yep.
[42:21] >> Okay. So we're not a part of that at
[42:22] all.
[42:23] >> We're our adopted code.
[42:24] >> Yep.
[42:24] >> Okay. Sweet. It's good enough.
[42:27] >> I didn't know if like that was a tag
[42:29] team sort of thing or not.
[42:32] >> Okay. Um and then um
[42:37] >> just that goes back to you're executive
[42:40] you're does this meet the code? That's
[42:43] judicial which is a little more
[42:47] >> agree for
[42:49] both. Yeah.
[42:52] >> Okay. Cool.
[42:55] Yeah, I'm good. Thanks.
[43:01] » And there's again the we we've got to
[43:03] have public hearings on those
[43:05] legislative items. The other items we we circumvent it by taking all the
[43:11] public comment during the public comment
[43:13] section. Um
[43:16] Utah's a little unique in in the states
[43:18] I've worked in, but in that they really
[43:20] separate those two things. But anyway,
[43:22] it's that's how Utah does it is this is
[43:24] legislative public hearings. This is
[43:27] administrative and so there's
[43:28] technically no specific discussion, but
[43:31] everybody comes to the open meeting and
[43:33] is able to put in their concerns. They
[43:36] could also write and put it in, you
[43:38] know, send it in before the meeting and
[43:39] that almost gets better attention
[43:41] sometimes,
[43:42] >> right? It's a give and take.
[43:54] Oh, here you go. So, chance meeting any
[43:57] social gathering.
[43:59] You guys are off the hook. Do not
[44:01] conduct city business.
[44:05] I don't know why he's got the criminal
[44:06] penalty.
[44:08] >> This is scarce.
[44:10] >> Um, yeah. And this has been from another
[44:12] community I've had where the text
[44:14] messages go around between the planning
[44:16] commission and it's like guys that's the
[44:19] same as talking. You know, you'll have a
[44:21] group text and if it's who's making it
[44:23] to the meeting tonight, fine. You're not
[44:26] discussing business. How are you voting
[44:28] on the reszone tonight is a problem.
[44:30] >> That's worse than writing.
[44:34] >> It's got a time date stamp.
[44:36] >> But oneonone you can
[44:39] technically correct. Yeah.
[44:40] >> Yeah.
[44:41] >> Once there's
[44:42] >> I can text you and then and text, you
[44:43] know.
[44:44] >> Yeah. Exactly. And and really the way
[44:46] communication should happen between the
[44:49] whole group is that it should come from
[44:51] staff,
[44:52] >> you know, hey, the chair says, hey,
[44:53] we're going to cancel meeting tonight.
[44:55] Staff does that. So, it's always coming
[44:57] from staff to the group. It's and and
[44:59] that that that is a lot of the ethics
[45:02] and and stuff like that is just it's a
[45:04] it's not even close to the line. So,
[45:07] we're okay.
[45:09] You know, maybe that group text is okay,
[45:11] but you know,
[45:13] >> it's real easy for it to slide off and
[45:15] not be okay.
[45:16] >> Fine.
[45:17] Yep. Exactly.
[45:19] >> Yeah. I've gotten text messages from
[45:21] people in my community or in my part of
[45:24] the city and and a lot of times if
[45:26] they're, you know, re because in in
[45:29] these in these circumstances, they'll,
[45:32] you know, like mention, hey, I hope
[45:35] that, you know, this happens at the
[45:36] meeting tonight. And like
[45:39] you know unfortunately like well you
[45:41] know and I'll do a quick little you know
[45:43] primer saying
[45:45] the planning commission is a
[45:47] recommending body only
[45:49] >> you know and and it's we are responsible
[45:52] to the code.
[45:54] >> Um
[45:55] >> it's okay to educate and and to take the
[45:58] information. I think that's why
[46:01] >> make promises.
[46:02] >> Exactly.
[46:05] >> Yeah.
[46:05] It can go a long way.
[46:07] >> That is Tom.
[46:09] >> Yeah.
[46:14] >> So, I think this is the ethics training.
[46:18] >> I'm not sure what that has to do with
[46:20] presentation.
[46:21] >> Jamie knows the details of these slides.
[46:23] I have no idea.
[46:28] » So,
[46:30] >> this shows some examples.
[46:33] >> We've talked about that. We did see this
[46:36] by last year,
[46:37] >> but nothing's changed.
[46:44] » Yeah. So,
[46:47] >> so you need to know
[46:49] no, you know, can't use your office for
[46:51] personal benefit. Uh, no, no money for
[46:55] assistance of a transaction.
[46:57] Business regulated by the city. Business
[46:59] doing business with the city.
[47:04] So, I think these are the six elements
[47:08] that he's talking about or where there's
[47:10] a potential conflict
[47:12] >> where you're crossing that line. You
[47:14] guys know this as well as I do. So,
[47:17] >> um yeah, no using it for personal
[47:19] benefit.
[47:23] Really hard not to go political, but
[47:26] it right there.
[47:31] Oh, Jeremy's back. Never mind. Um,
[47:36] let's see. Yeah, obviously personal
[47:42] I think. Yeah, I mean it's like it seems
[47:44] so simple. Uh, like obviously you're
[47:47] crossing a line, but man, when you get
[47:48] in those ethical scenarios, all of a
[47:50] sudden it gets really very fast. And so
[47:52] it's always okay to talk to staff. We al
[47:55] we talk to Jamie if there's something.
[47:58] I like that $50 is is up to $50 is okay.
[48:03] Uh that's been $50 for 20 years. So I
[48:07] don't know that needs to go up to the
[48:08] 500 or something.
[48:11] >> Yeah. I mean a $50 uh you know
[48:13] Burleyburg gift card doesn't go far.
[48:15] >> That'd be all right.
[48:16] >> But anyway,
[48:24] » yeah. And this appearance, right? That's
[48:28] just don't even come close.
[48:39] Yeah, I mean he's got probably whole
[48:41] stories to each one of these slides. I
[48:43] don't know them.
[48:43] >> Sorry. But watch out for those elements.
[48:50] So I think this is talking about if I
[48:53] mean we have the ethics statement at the
[48:55] beginning of the year but if someone I'm
[48:57] not sure if this is even saying it but
[49:00] if someone you know or have a financial
[49:02] relationship with comes in you recuse
[49:04] yourself
[49:06] uh and you step down and you can sit in
[49:09] the audience and listen but you're done
[49:10] talking on that topic.
[49:14] >> So yeah one of
[49:14] >> I have stories about that too. Yeah. One
[49:16] of the things that could be concerned,
[49:17] this is a small community and I we have
[49:19] friends that like I approve something
[49:22] for his father-in-law and then tomorrow
[49:24] I'm at his house hanging out, right? So,
[49:26] it's like could get a little gray.
[49:28] >> Again, I think a social relationship is
[49:30] one thing, it's financial. Okay, that's
[49:32] where you're crossing the line.
[49:35] >> And if and even if you state that in the
[49:38] meeting, I I know this person uh you
[49:40] know, they live down the block. I've
[49:42] known him for 10 years, but we have no
[49:44] financial
[49:45] >> relationship.
[49:48] That's the type of
[49:50] >> blew a Tacoma, you know, brand new car
[49:52] >> week before. Just because you're a good
[49:55] guy.
[49:56] >> Yeah.
[50:05] » Talk to Jamie and
[50:07] >> absolutely thumbs up or thumbs down and
[50:10] give you some good advice.
[50:13] But
[50:13] >> I I would definitely er on the side of
[50:15] transparency for sure.
[50:18] >> I was at a university town and the
[50:20] professor was on the planning commission
[50:22] and she said well I have a conflict
[50:23] because this is a I worked with the
[50:25] university but she stayed up on the disc
[50:28] and participated in the conversation. We
[50:29] were like um wait a minute that default
[50:33] but weighed in on every other aspect of
[50:35] it. It's like yeah that we're playing
[50:38] both sides of the fence there.
[50:39] >> Yeah it's kind of funny.
[50:42] and you know, professor of land use
[50:45] development. So, it's kind of funny.
[50:47] You would think that she knew she was
[50:50] doing anyway.
[50:52] >> Yeah. And we can throw you in jail.
[50:56] I don't know what else.
[50:58] >> I don't know. Somebody will. I do code
[50:59] enforcement. I'm start.
[51:03] » Oh, yeah. Brought that up.
[51:07] any general questions or anything about
[51:09] I mean how the meetings are running or
[51:12] >> I think we're pretty good about
[51:15] >> So is the rule up to us if a citizen
[51:19] wants to come back up and talk. I know
[51:21] that's been some you know heartburn.
[51:25] >> Yeah, let's talk about that for a
[51:26] second.
[51:28] >> And everybody can weigh in. I I my vote
[51:30] is that if they're coming up to say I I
[51:34] need to correct I I said it's a 100
[51:36] acres and it's actually 50 or 10 or so.
[51:38] If there's a factual correction, fine.
[51:41] >> Um I can't it was a few months ago we
[51:44] had a hearing where they came back and
[51:45] they were just doing more testimony.
[51:47] >> The quick stop whatever it was about the
[51:49] lights and stuff and an hour later he
[51:51] brought it up and wanted to get up and
[51:54] go on again.
[51:55] >> Yeah. the content that we were
[51:56] discussing kind of spurred some thoughts
[51:58] of somebody in the audience and they're
[52:01] just like, "Oh, I've got a lot of input
[52:03] on this." Well, because it's tough
[52:05] because they they hear the direction
[52:06] you're going like, "Oh, wait. I didn't
[52:08] communicate clearly. You don't
[52:09] understand. This is going to destroy my
[52:10] world."
[52:12] >> You know, and I appreciate that, but
[52:14] they're done. And it's easier just to
[52:17] say, "Sorry, that's close and we're
[52:18] done."
[52:19] >> Close,
[52:21] >> right?
[52:23] My opinion is it's really up to the
[52:25] chair to allow or not allow but I would
[52:28] error that way because once you do it
[52:31] once
[52:33] >> and you're almost like sliding off
[52:35] >> and then every meeting you're did it two
[52:37] meetings ago why can't I do it now kind
[52:39] of so
[52:41] >> also got where people didn't even go up
[52:44] to the podium and they just started
[52:46] >> speaking then you lose control of the
[52:47] meeting
[52:48] >> yeah yeah and you lose control of the
[52:49] meeting yeah
[52:50] >> and I wasn't here for the general plan,
[52:53] but it some of the stories I've heard
[52:56] I'm a little concerned to have those
[52:57] meetings and they get
[52:58] >> it was a wild west
[52:59] >> and mean and and it's like no, we're not
[53:01] going there.
[53:02] >> Yeah.
[53:03] >> And and you just it's hard to do.
[53:05] >> Yeah.
[53:06] >> But nope, sorry. We're not doing that.
[53:08] >> It's okay.
[53:09] >> The chair really has a lot of control.
[53:11] >> Yeah.
[53:11] >> And the the way a meeting is ran is is
[53:17] you can blame it on the chair really
[53:19] because they have that gavvel. they have
[53:21] every right to stop and get control of
[53:24] the meeting and not let it get out of
[53:25] hand. And that's the hardest part is
[53:28] when everybody starts talking and we're
[53:30] recording this meeting, you can't tell
[53:32] who's saying what.
[53:33] >> Yeah.
[53:34] >> And it just, you know,
[53:36] >> that's why those rules of order are
[53:37] there.
[53:38] >> Yeah.
[53:40] >> And always go back to the rules of
[53:42] order, right? And you know that is you
[53:45] know that law of as you mentioned
[53:47] consistency and clarity and and so yeah
[53:50] and you know it it's a very simple
[53:52] principle that just you know percolates
[53:55] through everything that you've just gone
[53:57] through on the slides.
[54:01] One last question which doesn't pertain
[54:03] to us but what is how do you do a closed
[54:06] door meeting like what constitute a
[54:08] closed
[54:09] >> what would I call that
[54:10] >> close session
[54:13] >> usually it it involves like legal matter
[54:16] like someone's sued the city or someone
[54:21] situation has happened that could lead
[54:23] to something litigation or if we're
[54:26] talking about sale of city property we
[54:29] haven't put it up for sale yet, but
[54:31] we're debating what we want to do with
[54:33] this
[54:35] >> personel
[54:36] personnel changes and issues that go
[54:42] >> just out of curiosity.
[54:43] >> But the the time I've been on city
[54:46] council, it has been almost 100% related
[54:50] except for one year, almost 100% related
[54:53] to sale property. Okay.
[54:56] The other one was a legal discuss
[54:59] >> some some cities I know put it on every
[55:01] agenda full session as needed to discuss
[55:04] real estate
[55:07] that way just they can always jump into
[55:09] a close session
[55:11] >> door is always open. Yeah.
[55:13] >> I think you have to say what it's about
[55:15] though. You have to say it's for real
[55:16] estate discuss real estate or discuss
[55:18] litigation. You do have to
[55:20] >> kind of just a very general
[55:22] >> this is what we're talking about in that
[55:23] close session. But it's not documented
[55:25] any way in the meeting like you guys
[55:27] don't record or you know transcribe
[55:29] anything in the meeting.
[55:30] >> We do.
[55:31] >> Yeah. It has to be for
[55:33] >> Okay. That's what I was making sure.
[55:34] Yeah.
[55:38] » I'm not sure that doesn't get released
[55:40] to
[55:40] >> it does not get released but
[55:44] information
[55:45] >> meetings are not allowed to say outside
[55:48] of
[55:49] >> are those are those subject to foyer.
[55:53] For what?
[55:53] >> FOYA grant
[55:54] >> freedom of information.
[55:57] >> That's a good question. I don't think
[55:58] so.
[55:59] >> I think I think you have that cause in
[56:04] » Yeah,
[56:04] >> that'd be a good question for J.
[56:07] >> There it could be for a lot of C. I'm
[56:08] assuming people go after that like that
[56:10] they think something was not done right.
[56:13] If that's the case, then I think that
[56:14] the and this is Jeremy's been
[56:19] Jeremy is you would probably have to go
[56:21] down the path of you are opening up an
[56:24] actual litigation against the city and
[56:27] that gives you the right to pull in
[56:30] intel.
[56:30] >> Okay. And I think that would be the only
[56:32] case that I
[56:34] one of the only cases that I that you
[56:38] that
[56:40] >> there is very sensitive details
[56:42] sometimes that is discussed there
[56:45] you definitely
[56:47] want everybody to know
[56:49] >> right
[56:49] >> not that we're being secretive that's
[56:51] not
[56:54] >> right I like you know land deals you
[56:56] know need to have some privacy
[56:59] >> the uh But um everyone should know that
[57:03] obviously we can't do anything legal on
[57:05] those. They're being recorded. So any
[57:08] decisions were held liable to those just
[57:10] like we would if we're doing something
[57:13] in the public on the dis. So all the
[57:17] same rules apply. There's just a little
[57:20] bit card out to to allow you to
[57:24] right.
[57:27] It's a great question though.
[57:31] I have a question,
[57:33] right?
[57:34] >> Not yet.
[57:36] >> I'm just so
[57:38] >> Well, and you can always email. We can
[57:39] always talk later. I mean, stuff comes
[57:41] up and or before a meeting, you've been,
[57:44] you know, we're here to talk and we can
[57:46] always get a good answer.
[57:48] >> No, these trainings are phenomenal.
[57:50] >> They're great.
[57:52] >> I always learn little nuggets at a time.
[57:54] >> Sorry. Uh Jamie is at your best.
[57:58] >> So if you have like a concern or
[58:02] curiosity question, please don't hold
[58:05] back. You can email alongside.
[58:08] He's pretty quick to respond. It's he's
[58:12] that we are paying him as our attorney
[58:13] to give us advice to help guide us to
[58:15] help direct us. So take advantage of
[58:18] that.
[58:18] >> Especially if you feel like you have a
[58:20] conflict of interest.
[58:21] >> Absolutely.
[58:21] >> He get he deals with that all the time.
[58:23] No.
[58:24] >> Okay.
[58:27] I'm just going to plug him into my phone
[58:28] here if you don't mind keeping that up
[58:30] for just a second longer.
[58:34] >> You you emailed this to us. So, you said
[58:36] >> I will. Yes.
[58:42] » I'll make sure we've got phone numbers
[58:44] current too. This slide might be a
[58:47] little
[58:48] >> I don't think so.
[58:51] » People change numbers sometimes.
[59:00] » We have to move to close, right? Or
[59:02] motion.
[59:02] >> Oh, yeah. Sorry, I'm typing really slow.
[59:06] >> It's okay. We don't have any rest.
[59:11] » We have the motion to close, right? I
[59:13] motion to close. uh planning commission
[59:16] meeting today.
[59:20] I almost got the date on top of this in
[59:22] January.
[59:23] >> I'll second that motion.
[59:27] >> Yes.