[0:03] Yeah.

[0:03] >> I mean there's trucks that go down this

[0:05] road and disappear and then come back up

[0:07] this road.

[0:33] The whole character of the road

[5:25] » Some comments for you.

[5:27] >> It was so exciting.

[5:29] >> It looks well.

[5:31] >> Think about what I'm saying.

[5:33] Okay. Okay.

[5:36] >> Boy.

[5:37] >> Hey.

[5:38] >> That's all right.

[5:39] What does it tell you though?

[5:41] >> Uh

[5:42] okay.

[5:43] >> That's something we can put

[5:45] on your side of the door above. It's

[5:47] kind of uh

[5:48] working the old school

[5:53] » Okay.

[6:03] » We froze them in the pickle just to

[6:05] spare

[6:06] >> Well,

[6:06] >> [laughter]

[6:19] » That is what they did, yeah.

[6:21] That is true.

[6:58] Okay.

[6:59] Thank you. I appreciate that. Yeah.

[7:09] Uh-huh.

[7:11] Yeah.

[7:14] She has a lot of things in her

[7:16] collection

[7:20] But

[7:21] Okay.

[7:22] The one

[7:23] I got to be 20 minutes

[7:25] Oh. Okay.

[7:27] Thank you.

[7:34] Just like

[7:37] Yeah.

[7:39] So,

[7:43] I'm going to

[7:44] All right.

[8:04] » [laughter]

[8:08] » Okay.

[8:32] No, I think that's great. I appreciate

[8:34] that.

[8:35] Oh, thank you.

[8:38] too, and I thank

[8:52] Oh, no. Okay.

[8:58] Oh, dear. Okay.

[9:26] Wow, that's fabulous.

[9:39] I started here.

[9:46] » What is your name?

[9:54] » Okay, I left that about 4

[10:00] Okay.

[10:02] Oh, Jesus Christ. Personally

[10:07] I

[10:10] Pay my pay day.

[10:13] I could actually go in and talk to you

[10:14] all the time all the time I got

[10:32] Oh.

[10:34] he's out

[10:38] Yeah, that's not how it

[10:42] Oh. I can't go out and get that cuz I can buy some I've been buying some

[10:48] like this.

[10:49] I got my whistle sign up.

[10:54] He needed us

[11:12] Because it's hard to get Oh, it's too

[11:15] ugly for me to fly my way.

[11:18] Yeah, I know. That's just the

[11:21] In fact,

[11:22] Army

[11:24] I should take it over to the website.

[11:26] I'm going to study law and stuff.

[11:28] Army

[11:30] You can care of Rotary different way.

[11:33] Your force should be 25.

[11:49] » Uh-oh,

[11:51] we're in trouble now.

[11:55] Oh, we're saved.

[12:20] » I think so, but I'll ask.

[12:25] » I am burned out.

[12:27] >> Okay.

[12:27] >> You got a burn barrel?

[12:28] >> Yeah.

[12:30] >> I don't know what I'm going to do now.

[12:31] Okay.

[12:32] I mean, you can have some recreation's

[12:34] tires.

[12:35] >> No, burn barrel?

[12:36] >> In a barrel?

[12:39] » [laughter]

[12:40] >> Make it a religious function and you can

[12:41] do whatever you want.

[12:43] >> Sometimes they say if you're just have

[12:45] some marshmallows out there.

[12:47] Throw the bag in the pasture.

[12:48] >> Put up the lawn chair and get out a

[12:51] package of hot dogs and you can do

[12:52] whatever you want.

[13:11] » Yeah, you do.

[13:13] >> Um, why is it moving?

[13:16] >> They're

[13:16] sick. They're sick.

[13:19] >> Likely story.

[13:22] No, I'm not.

[13:23] I love you.

[13:25] I'm good.

[13:28] Is it hot in

[13:29] >> here? Please tell me someone else is

[13:31] hot. Turn the AC on.

[13:32] >> It's right on the verge.

[13:38] >> Something I agree on right now is that

[13:47] » Well, if you do that,

[13:51] » It is.

[13:53] Oh my gosh, I'm here.

[14:02] Around the corner from my favorite

[14:04] sister.

[14:14] » We good?

[14:24] Did you get it?

[14:27] for Jim.

[14:29] You have a new password?

[14:30] >> Yeah.

[14:40] » I got a South Weber Fire Department cap

[14:43] that I don't feel good wearing around

[14:46] anywhere.

[14:47] So,

[14:48] >> If you want that back, it's pretty much

[14:49] unused.

[14:52] >> Why don't you feel good?

[14:53] >> You know, I just cuz I'm having I have a

[14:55] fire department hat. I don't work on the

[14:56] fire department. I'm not risking my life

[14:58] going into these buildings.

[15:06] Okay.

[15:08] Let's begin, shall we?

[15:11] I'd like to welcome everyone to South

[15:12] Weber City Council.

[15:14] It is 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July the

[15:17] 14th, 2026.

[15:19] We'll begin with a pledge of allegiance

[15:22] by council member Deals and then we'll

[15:24] have a prayer by council member Davis.

[15:27] >> Please stand and repeat the pledge of

[15:29] allegiance.

[15:31] >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

[15:34] United States of America and to the

[15:36] republic for which it stands, one nation

[15:40] under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[15:43] justice for all.

[15:52] » Our Father in heaven, we're grateful to

[15:53] be here

[15:55] this evening together as citizens of

[15:57] this great city to

[15:58] discuss the needs of the day. We are

[16:01] hopeful that thy spirit may be here with

[16:03] us that we may

[16:04] treat each other with respect and

[16:06] dignity and that we'll be able to come

[16:08] to

[16:09] appropriate conclusions that will help

[16:11] our city continue to be strong and and

[16:13] move forward.

[16:15] We are grateful for for thee for these

[16:17] opportunities we have to come together

[16:19] to

[16:20] discuss important topics and and to help

[16:24] this great city continue to be

[16:27] a great city.

[16:29] We are grateful also for all those who

[16:31] serve in our city, for firemen, for the

[16:34] policemen,

[16:36] and for all their volunteers that

[16:39] support the function of

[16:41] the city. And we pray that thy spirit

[16:43] may be with them, they may be kept safe

[16:45] from harm and danger. And these blessings we pray

[16:48] for in the name of thy son, Jesus

[16:49] Christ. Amen.

[16:50] >> Amen.

[16:53] Okay, thank you councilman Deals and

[16:55] Davis. We appreciate that very much. The

[16:57] first item on our agenda then will be

[16:59] public comments. If anyone has comments,

[17:02] we'd ask that you come up

[17:03] to the microphone, state your name and

[17:05] city in which you reside. We'll allow

[17:07] you 3 minutes to speak and please be

[17:09] respectful.

[17:11] Anybody have

[17:12] comments?

[17:14] Seeing no comments, then we'll move

[17:16] along the agenda here.

[17:18] Uh we had

[17:20] a presentation by Davis County Sheriff

[17:23] for their quarterly report and we

[17:25] received a

[17:26] call just recently saying that uh

[17:29] they are

[17:31] uh not able to attend tonight and we've

[17:33] moved that to August. So,

[17:36] we'll have their report in August.

[17:39] So, next item is our consent agenda

[17:41] consisting of June 23rd, 2026 minutes,

[17:45] June's checks,

[17:47] May's budget to actual.

[17:49] Is there any changes, corrections, or

[17:52] discussion we need to have on any of

[17:54] these items?

[17:56] If none, then we'll ask for a motion. Go

[17:58] ahead.

[17:58] >> I actually have a question. Um

[18:00] Actually, like I don't ever

[18:02] um

[18:04] uh

[18:04] quick question on I was looking on the

[18:07] uh engineering

[18:09] um costs and some of the checks that

[18:10] were going through for I think it was

[18:12] like $42,000.

[18:14] Um

[18:15] >> Mhm.

[18:15] >> Most of that is what we pay to Jones and

[18:19] Associates, but of course part of that

[18:20] is also your pay-through account or the

[18:22] just the pass-through account. Um one

[18:25] thing I I was looking at though and

[18:27] uh when we

[18:31] ask for preliminary drawings

[18:34] uh from the developers,

[18:36] um

[18:37] that

[18:39] is one in which uh Jones and Associates

[18:42] charges them a certain amount of money.

[18:44] And if

[18:46] they go forward,

[18:48] then

[18:49] we put that into the escrow and I I

[18:51] believe that would be some of the costs

[18:54] that would be recouped,

[18:56] but with the numbers, it doesn't really

[18:58] show it. The it seems more like um

[19:02] like we ought to be putting that escrow

[19:03] earlier or we should make sure that that

[19:05] goes

[19:06] it's only a couple hundred bucks. I

[19:08] mean, it's not a huge thing. I I the

[19:10] whole total for this uh

[19:12] sheet was 600 and something, $630.

[19:15] Um

[19:17] is that is is that something that we

[19:19] could look into on when we

[19:22] um because I don't think that we should

[19:24] be uh charging

[19:26] uh them and not get or

[19:29] I don't think Jones should be charging

[19:31] them and that not be a pass-through cuz

[19:32] that is definitely a cost for the

[19:34] developers.

[19:37] » So, what what is your question?

[19:40] Out of out of that

[19:41] >> And we move either the requirement for

[19:45] the

[19:46] um escrow account in which they would

[19:48] have to be putting money into it to

[19:50] uh or part of the pass-through account,

[19:53] maybe I should say.

[19:54] >> Can I Can I ask you

[19:55] >> Yeah.

[19:55] >> cuz I'm just trying to follow it.

[19:57] >> Yeah.

[19:58] >> Cuz when we ask for a preliminary

[20:00] drawings

[20:01] Jones and Associates aren't the ones

[20:02] that do those drawings.

[20:04] >> But they're charging us a fee.

[20:06] >> a review fee.

[20:07] >> Right.

[20:08] >> And

[20:09] >> Shouldn't that

[20:10] >> That is pass-through.

[20:11] to a developer that

[20:13] they just goes to them and they have to

[20:14] pay it.

[20:15] >> And see, that's what I thought, but um

[20:17] the account numbers I I I can show you

[20:19] later so we don't bog the meeting down

[20:21] here, but um

[20:22] that amount isn't coming back. Uh we're

[20:25] not recouping that from them, at least

[20:27] go through that same account number.

[20:31] >> So, are are you looking at the

[20:34] cuz we we recoup it through the revenues

[20:36] in the revenue section where the expense

[20:39] is on the expenditure side. So, you

[20:41] won't see

[20:43] >> But what in

[20:43] >> coming in and out of one account. It'll

[20:45] be coming It'll be coming in on the

[20:47] revenue account and going out as an

[20:49] expense on on the expense

[20:51] >> as part of those um pass-through

[20:54] >> Yes.

[20:54] >> account numbers though, right?

[20:55] >> But there but there's a revenue pass-through account

[20:59] and then there's an expense

[21:01] >> Okay.

[21:01] >> account that that tracks the expenses

[21:03] and so we know if we're getting It's not one account that you can look

[21:07] at and compare those two. You have to

[21:10] compare a revenue account and expense

[21:12] account.

[21:14] >> Right.

[21:15] Yeah, that's that's what we're doing and

[21:16] that's how I came up with the number.

[21:18] Let's

[21:19] >> The question is about I mean of is if

[21:23] the engineer is doing any work that

[21:26] isn't getting reimbursed. That's what we

[21:28] want to look at and confirm that

[21:30] the timing of that and and what actions

[21:33] take place before and after.

[21:36] >> It's not a big deal.

[21:36] >> Yeah, we can double check that and make

[21:38] sure

[21:39] >> We can we can look at it. We do we

[21:42] typically

[21:43] don't get the revenue the same time that

[21:46] we get the expenses. We'll send out the

[21:48] invoice saying, "Okay, this is what you

[21:49] owe us for this work." And it can take

[21:52] anywhere between a day to 30, 60 days depending on how quick

[21:57] the

[21:59] developer turns around and

[22:01] >> Could they have been

[22:02] um no, cuz it was cap and

[22:05] um anyways

[22:07] we'll talk.

[22:09] Yeah, I just want to make sure that it's

[22:12] >> Mhm.

[22:12] >> No, that's a fair question and and we

[22:14] want to make sure that the reimbursement

[22:16] process is is efficient and also

[22:18] covering everything. So I know

[22:20] internally we have had conversation

[22:22] about whether or not it makes sense to change the methodology

[22:27] um so that developers aren't getting an

[22:30] individual bill over and over and over

[22:33] and don't really have an understanding

[22:34] of kind of the upfront cost and and what

[22:37] that may or may not be. Right now our

[22:39] consolidated fee schedule just says, you

[22:41] know, any other costs associated with

[22:43] that um and so we we have talked

[22:45] internally about whether we should

[22:47] adjust that. Maybe this is a good time

[22:48] to just review the the full process and

[22:51] make sure that we've got things covered

[22:52] the right way.

[22:53] >> Okay.

[22:54] Thanks. Sorry to interrupt.

[22:56] >> Anything else?

[22:59] » Anyone else? I'll look for a motion

[23:01] know, on this.

[23:02] >> Move to approve the consent agenda.

[23:05] >> Second.

[23:06] >> You have a motion and a second. All in

[23:09] favor say I.

[23:10] >> I. I. I.

[23:13] » Next item, resolution 26-27 South Weber

[23:18] Model Railroad Club agreement.

[23:22] Any discussions on this?

[23:25] Angie, have you got anything you want to

[23:28] necessarily bring up?

[23:30] >> Sure.

[23:30] >> Um I feel like some key points to note

[23:33] and if I miss any, Mayor and Dave, if

[23:35] you want to just help me make sure I

[23:37] remembered them all. Um key points is

[23:40] that they would be running two Saturdays

[23:41] a month, April

[23:44] we said April, right? April through

[23:46] October.

[23:47] Um they would like to also do one

[23:51] weekday a month, but we didn't put that

[23:53] in the agreement yet, but they would

[23:55] like to start doing that for the public.

[23:57] Um they will be responsible for all of

[24:02] the equipment on the ground and the

[24:05] city's will be responsible for

[24:07] weed um weed control and maintenance of

[24:11] the park as they're doing right now in

[24:13] the rest of the park.

[24:16] We also added um a couple of addendas I

[24:19] hope you saw on there in the

[24:21] um

[24:23] packet where they have a safety

[24:25] checklist they have to complete every

[24:26] time they run a train so they make sure

[24:28] everything's safe. Um we have [sighs]

[24:32] Sorry, let me just make sure what else

[24:33] is in here.

[24:34] >> The lease amount.

[24:35] Oh, and a project

[24:37] request form. So if there's something

[24:39] that they want to do, they can submit

[24:41] that and then the committee can review

[24:43] it and then they can bring it to

[24:44] council. So it's actually like a

[24:47] procedure that needs to be followed so

[24:48] we have like a paper trail and all of

[24:50] that.

[24:51] Am I missing anything else that we've

[24:53] changed from our last one?

[24:55] >> Anything else that can remember, Dave?

[24:57] >> No, I think that's a good summary. I

[24:59] think that there has been a a great

[25:01] conversation and process to this point

[25:03] after the last city council meeting. The

[25:06] committee and the club have worked well

[25:08] together and have tried to find kind of

[25:11] compromise and and a thought process, a

[25:15] mindset of this is where we're at today.

[25:17] How do we move forward and make it the

[25:18] best it can be. We we did not have too

[25:21] many conversations about, if at all,

[25:24] about uh the past. We we did try to

[25:27] learn from the past and bring up lessons

[25:29] that that we'd like to incorporate

[25:30] moving forward and ways we'd like to

[25:32] operate better

[25:33] in tandem. And and the club has given

[25:36] some and I think the city has given some

[25:38] in an effort to make this uh viable and

[25:42] productive moving forward. So, some of

[25:45] much of the agreement looks similar. We

[25:47] did reorganize a little bit to make it

[25:49] more readable, a little bit cleaner with

[25:52] sections that they clearly identify club

[25:54] responsibilities, city responsibilities,

[25:57] and what is included in both of those.

[25:59] And And our hope is that moving forward

[26:01] we'll be able to, you know, make this

[26:03] great for the public and for the club

[26:05] members as well.

[26:07] >> Yeah. Question.

[26:09] Um

[26:11] some question on the public is the $200

[26:14] for lease fee was kind of low. Wasn't

[26:17] there some additions on the city's

[26:19] behalf in lieu of fee that the city's

[26:21] receiving like additional run days and

[26:24] things of that nature? Angie.

[26:26] >> Yeah. And she was

[26:27] >> that was in lieu of a few

[26:29] sessions.

[26:29] >> yes, originally the contract was one day

[26:32] one Saturday per month. And now we've

[26:35] increased that to two Saturdays per

[26:36] month.

[26:38] >> Wasn't there something also in addition

[26:40] that the city can specify days just for

[26:43] the city to run

[26:44] for the city residents?

[26:46] >> So, those would be for just open run

[26:48] days for citizens and visitors, right?

[26:51] They but the train club actually offered

[26:54] to do it during the weekday, which is

[26:56] great I think to add that out. Um, they

[26:59] just didn't put in the con- We didn't

[27:00] put in the contract yet just to make

[27:01] sure that they had enough staffing. We

[27:03] didn't want to put that in without them

[27:05] being able to talk to us the to the rest

[27:07] of the train club members. Um,

[27:10] so those have been some concessions that

[27:13] they have made on there. And just a

[27:14] reminder, the original agreement

[27:18] the city was doing all the weed control.

[27:21] And then there had been discussions

[27:22] between the city and the train club

[27:25] about, you know, damaged rails. And so

[27:27] that's why

[27:29] damaged rails during

[27:31] um, mowing and such. So that's why it

[27:33] was sent back to the train club. Uh,

[27:36] we've had really good discussions about

[27:37] that. And so that's why we're bringing

[27:40] the weed control back since we have the

[27:42] staff to go ahead and do that. And they

[27:44] can focus on providing the amenity.

[27:47] What else can I answer for you?

[27:51] >> Sorry, I just thought there was

[27:51] something I read in the contract that

[27:53] the city

[27:54] there was there was an option for the

[27:55] city to request certain days that they

[27:57] run just for city events.

[28:00] >> Oh, absolutely. Yeah.

[28:01] >> was in concessions in lieu of additional

[28:03] monies for them to use the track the

[28:05] $200 that they offered to do a special

[28:08] run days

[28:09] for days to be picked by the city. And

[28:12] >> So yeah, that could be country fair

[28:14] days. That could be any other event that

[28:16] the city says we'd like you to do that.

[28:18] >> argument that I'm hearing that there was

[28:19] $200 is cheap. It is cheap, but they're

[28:21] also doing other things in lieu of

[28:24] dollars. And that's what I wanted to

[28:25] bring out.

[28:25] >> Sure. Yeah.

[28:26] >> Good point.

[28:27] >> Thank you.

[28:29] >> Joe?

[28:30] Just a couple questions. Um,

[28:33] then was this originally a 60-day and

[28:35] then we turned it down to 30-day?

[28:38] Or is that something that we did?

[28:40] >> As far as the potential like termination

[28:43] of the agreement language, it was uh,

[28:46] 60-day notice and 90 days. That was that

[28:49] was shrunk down to a 30 day notice and

[28:51] 60 days to then remove.

[28:53] >> Okay, so it got to that point. Okay, so

[28:55] it still has the removal of that. Yeah.

[28:56] I

[28:58] noticed in there we talk about dispute

[29:01] resolution.

[29:04] Who and through how how's that supposed

[29:07] to be handled?

[29:08] Or is that something we're going to

[29:11] approach on a

[29:13] one-by-one basis?

[29:15] Case-by-case. Thank you.

[29:18] >> Which section is that? Can you remind

[29:20] me?

[29:20] >> No, I just put the bare notes on here.

[29:25] It talks about

[29:28] If a dispute

[29:31] I believe it was in the

[29:34] um

[29:38] safety

[29:40] where it's talking about the

[29:42] um

[29:43] city manager has the ability to do stop

[29:45] it. um

[29:48] I should have written down the appendix

[29:50] that that was in. I apologize.

[29:54] » Well, it's okay. I'm just trying to look

[29:55] through all of your

[29:56] >> execution of agreements

[29:58] which country

[29:59] agreement course

[30:02] >> changes that might be needed

[30:05] >> Well, the changes changes I have another

[30:07] one cuz it actually says that the city

[30:09] manager can deny it.

[30:12] And then it later says so if there's any

[30:14] change or anything added

[30:16] any projects the city manager can deny

[30:19] it but then down on like the next line

[30:21] it says that those changes come to the

[30:24] city council. So is it that

[30:27] it can stop with the city council stop

[30:30] with the city manager and then go to it?

[30:35] I'm

[30:35] >> Well, I

[30:36] if there's a safety concern city staff

[30:39] would be the ones that would say, you

[30:42] know, we need to stop. And then it would

[30:44] come to council for us to consider any

[30:47] type of action after that.

[30:48] >> Okay. So,

[30:51] uh basically, city manager can veto it

[30:54] for it not being good enough, it's not

[30:55] put together, it's not safe, or anything

[30:57] like that. So, that way we just don't

[30:58] get every change coming up to the city

[31:00] council, right?

[31:01] >> Well, well, yeah. It would be similar to

[31:02] how it was earlier where it was like,

[31:04] "Hey, there's a situation. We need to

[31:05] stop for a minute so we can evaluate

[31:07] it." That wouldn't That process wouldn't

[31:10] really change from what it currently is.

[31:12] >> Um

[31:15] The audit section talks about providing

[31:18] acknowledgement of receipt project for

[31:22] uh

[31:24] any of the plans that they have

[31:27] for fixing safety items. The

[31:32] proposed modification section talks

[31:35] about submitting to the city manager the

[31:38] request form for modification with ex-

[31:41] explanation of why, any documentation,

[31:44] and whatnot. That that then is reviewed,

[31:46] and the city council has to approve

[31:50] the modifications.

[31:59] Okay.

[32:01] Um

[32:05] Yeah, I should I

[32:05] >> I think I think Dave's right. He's

[32:07] addressing section 3.10 audits.

[32:11] Um this Let's see.

[32:15] Talks about safety audits, and the

[32:16] second paragraph says that the city

[32:18] manager of the club shall provide

[32:20] manager with an acknowledgement of

[32:21] receipt

[32:23] to resolve identified action items.

[32:27] >> There's one other section that has a

[32:29] similar remedy provision. So, the

[32:31] principle in both the audit section, and

[32:33] then it's in

[32:36] uh

[32:37] Let's see. It's the default section,

[32:40] which is section 11.

[32:42] Notice of default and then fine or

[32:44] abatement. And both of them essentially

[32:47] operate on the same principle that the

[32:48] city provides notice. They have a cure

[32:50] period. If they don't cure, then you can

[32:52] roll into

[32:53] either fine abatement or default of the

[32:56] agreement.

[33:00] Okay.

[33:05] >> Um

[33:08] I don't know what I was talking about.

[33:10] >> Is that Is that Is that satisfactory?

[33:12] Do you feel okay with that procedure?

[33:14] Are there questions you have about that?

[33:16] >> Yeah. Um I think I'll I'll be quite

[33:19] honest. I'm so excited for this. I am

[33:21] very very happy. I think you guys have

[33:22] done a fantastic job and the club has

[33:25] done a fantastic job. I'm so glad that we get to keep this and do this and

[33:30] I think it's been a win-win for for

[33:32] both.

[33:33] Um and yeah, I

[33:37] I'm very excited about it. Um I was just

[33:40] trying to see on that um

[33:49] Yeah.

[33:50] I'll have to go back and look, but it

[33:52] won't matter at that time, I don't

[33:53] think.

[33:53] >> If If you have questions, just come back

[33:54] and

[33:55] >> Yeah.

[33:55] >> let me know anything that you have on

[33:57] there cuz we have worked hard. We've had

[33:58] very harmonious discussions. It's been

[34:00] really great. So

[34:01] >> I'm good.

[34:02] >> not contentious in any way and I'm I am

[34:04] excited to move forward. So

[34:06] >> Yeah. This has been great. I I'm again,

[34:08] I'm very grateful for you guys.

[34:09] >> It's been really good.

[34:10] >> So

[34:10] >> I will add from a city staff

[34:12] perspective, this is a major shift in

[34:15] the way that city staff has interacted

[34:17] with the club in the past. And the the

[34:20] agreement before essentially had the

[34:23] city staff as kind of the enforcement

[34:25] arm and a regulatory agency, where this

[34:30] changes that mindset and has city staff

[34:33] a little bit more as a partnership and

[34:35] the ability for staff to feel like we

[34:39] care a little bit more about the success

[34:41] of the train club. I don't want to say

[34:43] that in a in a negative way, but it

[34:46] frees us a little bit as staff. Also put

[34:49] some additional burden I would say with

[34:51] the weed maintenance and whatnot.

[34:52] There's a timing element, but

[34:54] the city council has directed us to to

[34:56] put more resource into this and to take

[35:00] care about it differently and and this

[35:02] agreement is a result of that and shows

[35:04] that

[35:05] commitment from the staff side from a

[35:07] time and a caring standpoint and and I

[35:09] hope that we can see that result.

[35:12] >> Agreed.

[35:12] >> Thank you. And I would say this we have

[35:14] come very far since our first agreement

[35:16] on Claire.

[35:17] >> You have done very good job.

[35:18] >> Thank you.

[35:20] Thanks everybody. I have one other thing

[35:21] though I want to bring up to the rest of

[35:23] the council. If the council would like

[35:27] we can ask

[35:29] our park staff just to monitor the

[35:31] amount of extra time and

[35:34] materials to maintain this so we can

[35:36] kind of get the best

[35:38] estimate of what this is going to cost

[35:40] our the city to maintain the weeds and

[35:42] such, but it shouldn't be significant.

[35:47] A significant investment of what we're

[35:49] doing right now.

[35:51] Over what we're doing now. Does that

[35:52] make sense? Wayne you're looking like

[35:54] I'm not making sense.

[35:55] >> No, it makes sense. It's just why we

[35:56] want to why we want to put emphasis on

[35:58] it.

[35:58] >> Okay. I'm I'm just asking.

[36:01] >> just like a pickleball court or baseball

[36:03] court. It's a park facility at that

[36:06] particular park and there's a cost

[36:07] associated with maintaining it. It by

[36:09] highlighting that it draws attention to

[36:11] it for what purpose?

[36:13] >> Okay, thank you. I know I agree. I just

[36:14] wanted to make sure we had discussed

[36:16] costs before so I wanted to make sure

[36:17] everybody was on the same page.

[36:19] Cool. Mayor I make a motion we approve

[36:21] resolution 2627 South Weber Model

[36:24] Railroad Club agreement.

[36:25] >> I second that.

[36:26] >> Have a motion second by Councilwoman

[36:28] Deales. We'll do a roll call vote

[36:30] starting with Councilman Windsor.

[36:32] >> I.

[36:35] >> Very unanimous. Motion carries. Thank

[36:37] you.

[36:38] Next resolution 26-28

[36:41] cooperative agreement with the Utah

[36:43] Division of Forestry Fire and State

[36:46] Lands.

[36:47] Any discussion on this resolution?

[36:50] Anyone?

[36:54] If not, we'll ask for a motion.

[36:59] » Mayor, I make a motion to approve

[37:00] resolution 26-28 cooperative agreement

[37:03] with the Utah Division of Forestry Fire

[37:05] and State Lands.

[37:06] >> Second it.

[37:08] >> Okay, we have a second by Councilman

[37:09] Davis.

[37:11] We'll do a roll call vote starting with

[37:14] Councilman Howerton.

[37:15] >> I.

[37:21] » You good, Chief?

[37:22] >> I'm good.

[37:26] » [laughter]

[37:27] >> Next item,

[37:29] resolution 26-29

[37:32] Utah Wildfire Resource Memorandum of

[37:35] Understanding.

[37:37] Any discussion on this?

[37:41] » Mayor, I make a motion to approve 20

[37:43] resolution 26-29

[37:45] Utah Wildlife Wildfire Resource

[37:48] Memorandum Understanding.

[37:50] >> Second.

[37:51] >> Okay, most Motion is seconded by

[37:54] Councilwoman

[37:55] >> Petty.

[37:56] >> We'll do a roll call vote starting with

[37:57] Councilman Windsor.

[37:58] >> I.

[38:03] >> Okay, that's unanimous.

[38:06] Next resolution 26-30

[38:10] amending the policy and procedure 3.040

[38:13] employment of relation

[38:15] relatives and nepotism.

[38:18] Any discussion on this resolution?

[38:21] >> Um I have a couple questions.

[38:23] >> Okay.

[38:24] >> Um, first one,

[38:26] uh, what is the impetus for this?

[38:29] >> There have been a couple of uh,

[38:31] scenarios where

[38:33] uh, department heads have approached me

[38:35] on hiring situations that uh,

[38:39] have run directly into the nepotism

[38:41] policy. And so,

[38:43] um,

[38:44] we've had internal discussions about uh,

[38:46] the limitations that it provided to us

[38:49] and some of the restriction. It was very direct and very um, clear

[38:53] bright line of where that was and so,

[38:56] um, we tried to follow that. Uh, we have

[38:58] found that there are some employees

[39:01] already hired within the within the city

[39:04] that weren't directly in line with that

[39:06] policy.

[39:08] Um, and then running into these

[39:10] situations um,

[39:12] multiple times, um, it created a

[39:14] conversation about is that really the

[39:16] policy that is that is helping us the

[39:18] best.

[39:19] Ultimately, there's three different

[39:21] departments that run into challenges

[39:24] with hiring related to uh, family

[39:27] relationships. And And so, we've carved

[39:30] those out specifically recognizing that

[39:32] we'd like to have in certain

[39:35] circumstances only the ability to to

[39:38] have siblings or or family members be

[39:42] uh, hired in the city. Not in any type

[39:45] of supervisory line or anything like

[39:47] that, but um, specifically within the

[39:49] fire department as part-time employees

[39:52] within the recreation department and

[39:55] within our crossing guards. Um,

[39:57] recreation and fire Sorry, recreation

[40:00] and um, crossing guards because of the

[40:03] nature of those positions, we're not

[40:05] really hiring from outside the city. And

[40:09] uh,

[40:09] and so, it creates a limited pool for us

[40:12] um, which has created challenges in the

[40:14] past. So, this would free that up and

[40:16] open that up for us.

[40:18] Um we have some examples, like I said,

[40:19] within the city where we already have uh

[40:23] family relations working in the same

[40:25] department, crossing guards and

[40:26] recreation that are doing just fine and have not created any problems. And

[40:32] so, we talked about this as a leadership

[40:34] council within staff um department heads

[40:37] and uh and feel comfortable that uh

[40:40] putting it on paper this way still

[40:42] protects the city from any type of, you

[40:44] know, favoritism actions um and things

[40:47] like that. That that's really what we're

[40:48] trying to protect here. Um but freeing

[40:50] up and opening um some of those options

[40:53] for us and and making it so those

[40:54] challenges might not be as difficult to

[40:56] overcome.

[40:57] >> So, if I'm understanding you correctly,

[41:00] um this new policy does not allow for a

[41:05] um relative

[41:07] of the supervisor position,

[41:10] supervisory positions, um to have one of

[41:14] their relatives hired beneath them.

[41:16] >> True.

[41:17] >> Okay.

[41:18] Um

[41:20] does that mean then that we're really

[41:22] talking about uh

[41:24] family familial relationships just at

[41:28] basically same level type of thing. So,

[41:30] uh like for recreation, we had hired,

[41:32] you know, so-and-so's brother to also

[41:34] work at the FAC or things like that.

[41:37] >> Yes.

[41:38] >> And that's the same way we're looking at

[41:39] the fire department, correct?

[41:40] >> Yes.

[41:41] >> Okay. Um

[41:43] the

[41:45] uh this came up at um Zion's

[41:48] quite often.

[41:49] Um

[41:51] if there's any

[41:54] relationship

[41:55] um

[41:56] when you first apply for the job, it

[42:00] needs to be defined there. It needs to

[42:02] actually be reported at that time of

[42:04] applying, not afterwards.

[42:07] Um yeah, disclose. Um and then after

[42:11] uh say, you know, somebody gets married

[42:13] here to each other. Well, fine. You have

[42:15] a certain amount of time just to make

[42:16] sure that those things are reviewed and

[42:19] then

[42:21] approved or if changes have to be made,

[42:24] I didn't see anything on that and I

[42:26] that's just one of the things I would

[42:27] like to

[42:28] >> It did highlight that in our application

[42:31] process, it meaning this conversation,

[42:34] did highlight in our application process

[42:36] that we hadn't always asked the question

[42:38] on our application form, do you have any

[42:39] relatives currently working for the

[42:41] city? And so there have been instances

[42:44] where

[42:45] sisters, for example, have both been

[42:48] hired but they have different last

[42:49] names.

[42:50] You know, because of marriage and things

[42:51] like that. And so, you know, we we have

[42:53] now added that to the to the application

[42:56] process and and we've done that but

[42:59] that's a little bit

[43:01] tied to but not directly related to the document, right? The the language

[43:05] of the policy. So

[43:06] >> And do we have a diff

[43:08] >> There is a disclosure requirement in the

[43:10] policy. It's paragraph 10.

[43:13] And it's it's very short. It's one two

[43:15] sentences but it says all applicants and

[43:17] employees shall disclose any relative

[43:20] relationship with a city officer or

[43:22] employee as part of the hiring process

[43:25] or upon the development of such

[43:26] relationship. Failure to disclose may be

[43:29] grounds for discipline. Okay. So there's

[43:31] two points. One, at point of hiring if

[43:33] the relationship exists, they would have

[43:35] to if the relationship is formed later,

[43:39] marriage or something like that, then

[43:41] they would have to report it at that

[43:42] time.

[43:43] >> And do we define

[43:46] relative in here? Is that the same one

[43:48] that we've been using for like conflict

[43:49] of interest in the

[43:50] >> similar, yes.

[43:51] >> Okay.

[43:53] That's it. Those are my only questions.

[43:55] >> Thank you, John.

[43:57] >> Any other questions?

[44:02] Okay, we'll look for a motion.

[44:05] >> Move to approve resolution 26-30

[44:07] amending the policy and procedures 3.040

[44:09] employment of relatives relatives

[44:11] nepotism.

[44:12] >> Second.

[44:14] >> Give a motion second by Councilman

[44:16] Halverson.

[44:17] Do a roll call vote starting with

[44:19] Councilman Halverson.

[44:20] >> Aye.

[44:24] >> Okay, that's unanimous. Thank you.

[44:27] Our next item our fraud risk assessment.

[44:30] We need to uh

[44:33] have a motion to accept this. Uh every

[44:35] year we have a fraud risk assessment

[44:39] down here in the city and I believe that

[44:41] this year was came back as a low risk.

[44:45] Is that correct?

[44:48] » We were one point away from very low.

[44:52] >> Yes, we right now we're at the at the

[44:54] low risk level.

[44:55] >> Okay.

[44:57] Anyone have any uh comments or questions

[44:59] on this?

[45:00] >> No.

[45:02] >> Mayor, I make a motion to approve the

[45:04] fraud risk assessment.

[45:05] >> Second.

[45:06] >> Okay, motion second by Councilman

[45:08] Windsor. We'll do a roll call vote

[45:10] starting with Councilman Windsor.

[45:11] >> Aye.

[45:15] >> Okay, that's unanimous.

[45:18] Thank you. Resolution 26-31

[45:21] Utah Retirement System URS contribution

[45:24] for firefighters.

[45:27] Any questions, concerns, or

[45:32] discussion on anything here?

[45:34] >> So, this is just where

[45:36] uh the state has now allowed an extra 1.

[45:40] 25%

[45:41] to be able to um be contributed by the

[45:44] city for full full-time employees,

[45:47] right?

[45:47] >> Right. The state will adjust or the not

[45:49] the state, URS will adjust this every

[45:51] once in a while and um they adjusted it

[45:54] again this year and so the city has the

[45:57] opportunity to say um it's past the

[46:00] point where it's specific requirement

[46:03] for the entity to make the payment. And

[46:05] so the the option is to choose will the

[46:07] city take this employee coverage amount

[46:10] or leave it up to the employee. In the

[46:12] past, the council has said as a city we

[46:15] want to take that on and provide that

[46:17] benefit.

[46:18] >> Absolutely.

[46:18] >> Still more clarification, Joel.

[46:21] >> [clears throat]

[46:22] >> There's a difference in the Utah

[46:23] retirement system between a type one

[46:25] employee and a type two employee. 2012

[46:28] became type two employees.

[46:30] Um they capped the percentage that

[46:33] companies, cities would have to

[46:36] contribute towards their retirement.

[46:38] >> Correct.

[46:38] >> That cap got reached several years ago.

[46:41] And now cities and public entities who

[46:44] participate Utah retirement systems

[46:47] uh have a choice before them. This isn't

[46:49] for every type two employee, it's just

[46:51] the firefighters that the state made

[46:53] provisions that cities with firefighting

[46:57] uh crews could elect to pay the

[47:00] additional amount. Um this question's

[47:02] going to come to us every year because

[47:04] the

[47:06] you know, the economy keeps growing. So

[47:07] we're going to continue to be faced with

[47:08] this question and it becomes an issue

[47:10] between

[47:12] why not the regular employees. Uh the

[47:14] type two employees also have the option

[47:16] instead of participating strictly with

[47:18] the URS, they can do a hybrid or they

[47:20] can do all the 401K. Uh so there's some

[47:23] other moving pieces amongst this, but

[47:25] the core question is do we want to

[47:27] continue to finance the retirement of

[47:29] our type two firefighter employees

[47:32] beyond what the cap was. And the cap was

[47:34] set many years ago so that agencies,

[47:38] cities could budget for these retirement

[47:41] systems and not have to continue to

[47:43] forecast what these ever-growing

[47:45] expenses are. So

[47:47] anyway, there's there's the two sides of

[47:48] it.

[47:49] >> Oh yeah. Um my my darling wife has just

[47:52] retired using the Utah retirement system

[47:54] and there's a lot of

[47:56] balance in there.

[47:59] >> Mhm.

[48:01] Okay, we'll look for motion on this.

[48:05] » May I move to approve resolution 2631 as

[48:08] read?

[48:10] >> Second it.

[48:12] >> Okay, a motion is seconded by councilman

[48:14] Dills. Do a roll call vote starting with

[48:17] councilman Howerton.

[48:18] >> I.

[48:24] >> Hey. Perfect.

[48:27] Unanimous.

[48:29] Next item is new business. I've asked

[48:33] if he would take just a minute. We

[48:35] recently gone through the process of

[48:37] having a

[48:38] bond rating on our city and we've got

[48:41] some information here that I'd like for

[48:43] him to

[48:44] tell us about that we all should be

[48:46] proud of and

[48:48] not only is uh city here in our city,

[48:51] but all of our residents should be proud

[48:54] as well. So,

[48:56] and it's worth

[48:57] noting and and talking about. So, Dave,

[48:59] would you take a few minutes and

[49:01] tell us about our bond rating?

[49:03] >> Yes, as part of the process for going

[49:07] out to market for a bond, the city has

[49:09] to present to a rating agency. There's

[49:13] three main

[49:15] rating agencies, Standard & Poor's,

[49:17] Moody's, and Fitch. We went before

[49:19] Moody's and uh

[49:22] you explain the city, you explain the

[49:25] financial circumstances of the city and

[49:27] the practices, operating principles that

[49:29] we follow,

[49:31] economic development, and things that

[49:33] are just the story of the city, as well

[49:35] as the bond and why we are doing the

[49:37] bond and what it goes toward, you know,

[49:38] those types of things. And then the

[49:40] rating agency

[49:42] will evaluate a number of metrics that

[49:45] the city has financially and otherwise,

[49:48] that some of which we provide, some of

[49:50] which they, you know, gather on their

[49:52] own research. And ultimately they give

[49:54] two different ratings. One for the

[49:56] entity as a whole and then one for the

[49:59] bond specifically.

[50:01] And they're not always the same. And the

[50:03] reason for that is the type of bond will

[50:06] determine whether or not it's a higher

[50:07] credit risk or lower credit risk um

[50:10] depending on the circumstances. So,

[50:12] ultimately we ended up with the highest

[50:15] bond rating we could hope for, which is

[50:19] double A2 in Moody's terminology. Um

[50:24] they have a triple A which is the

[50:25] highest and then in the double A

[50:27] category double A1 2 3.

[50:30] Uh a lot of times we think of that in

[50:32] the other rating agencies terminology of

[50:35] a double A plus, double A and double A

[50:37] minus. So, as an entity we were given a

[50:40] double A1.

[50:42] Um

[50:43] the second highest rating possible.

[50:46] Triple A being the highest. Second is

[50:48] double A1. And then the type of bond we

[50:50] have being a lease revenue bond rather

[50:52] than a general obligation bond

[50:54] automatically notches that one down.

[50:57] That that's just standard for them. It

[50:59] has nothing to do with the

[51:01] uh the agency. It really is they set the

[51:04] agency bond rating and then drop it one

[51:07] for a lease revenue. Just the type of

[51:09] bond determines that.

[51:11] So, a double A2 is our bond rating. The

[51:14] uh types of cities that get

[51:19] this type of rating

[51:22] usually average 22,000 in population and

[51:26] 57 million dollars in revenue.

[51:28] So, we are not in that same type of

[51:30] category size-wise and revenue-wise, um

[51:33] which tells me that the other things

[51:35] that we're doing right and the other

[51:36] decisions that the council are making

[51:38] and operational decisions that are

[51:40] taking place are the things that are

[51:42] proving that we are a good credit risk

[51:44] and that we are doing things well. And it was really exciting to see after

[51:49] we were on the call with Moody's um and

[51:52] we got off the call and immediately got

[51:54] a got a phone call from Mark Anderson

[51:56] with Zion's Public Finance and and he's

[51:59] like, you guys that was the that was the

[52:00] best you could get. Like you should be

[52:02] thrilled. And and we are. So, that's a really big deal and a pat on

[52:06] the back I think for for all of the

[52:08] council on the decisions that have been

[52:10] made over many years to get us to this

[52:11] point. So, I didn't pull up what our

[52:14] rating was before. I I want to look at

[52:16] that. I've been a little preoccupied,

[52:18] but I will I'll take a look at that and compare. I'm interested to see how

[52:22] that relates to previous bonds. We did

[52:24] not do this process

[52:27] for

[52:28] the bond that we're refunding in 2023

[52:31] because it was uh

[52:33] placed individually. We didn't go out to

[52:35] market to sell it. So, you do this

[52:37] process when you go out to market, and

[52:39] the last time we did that was more than

[52:41] a decade ago. So,

[52:42] um I think it proves that we're in a

[52:45] good spot and things are going well, and

[52:47] that was really exciting news. So,

[52:49] Thanks, Mayor, for letting me bring that

[52:50] up.

[52:51] >> That's worth noting. So, thank you so

[52:53] much.

[52:54] Any other new business anyone have?

[52:57] Let's do uh

[52:59] committee reports then.

[53:02] Uh

[53:03] Councilman Woodbury, you want to start

[53:04] with that?

[53:05] >> Um the committees haven't met, but uh a

[53:07] subset of the

[53:10] gravel committee uh the aggregate the

[53:12] state aggregate operations work group

[53:14] which is uh

[53:16] I've been uh asked to be a member of for

[53:19] the represent the city.

[53:21] Uh they've

[53:22] have [clears throat] scheduled a meeting

[53:23] tomorrow

[53:24] uh 1:30. Um this is the ongoing

[53:28] discussions that ended last December.

[53:31] Um postponed, I should say, so that they

[53:33] uh they could go through the legislative

[53:34] process.

[53:35] So, we're continuing to have these

[53:37] discussions. This is about fugitive

[53:38] dust. And that's what this this

[53:40] committee meets. It's statewide uh

[53:42] committee members.

[53:43] There was also, and I didn't realize

[53:44] this, but House Bill 378 in the 2026

[53:48] legislative session was passed that had

[53:51] um

[53:52] some modification to fugitive dust

[53:54] mitigation. It was more administrative

[53:55] changes, but that was a

[53:57] uh

[53:58] a bill that was ran. Uh we didn't hear

[54:00] anything about it, but it didn't seem

[54:02] like it was uh

[54:09] I'll be attending that meeting tomorrow.

[54:10] I can have some report in a couple

[54:11] weeks, if any.

[54:13] >> Good.

[54:14] >> Jeremy.

[54:16] >> Uh nothing uh solid. Uh Dave just

[54:19] presented us with uh

[54:21] a kind of first draft of the uh golf

[54:24] cart policy. So, that's under review

[54:26] right now, and

[54:27] hopefully we'll be bringing that to the

[54:29] full council soon.

[54:31] That's it.

[54:33] >> Joel.

[54:34] >> Um

[54:36] uh I guess this would fall under it.

[54:37] I've

[54:38] uh received a request uh where I used to

[54:41] be um with the Parks Committee. Um

[54:44] they're already looking for the day of

[54:46] service,

[54:47] and some people are wanting to request

[54:50] specific parks like they have in the

[54:51] past. Um I'll just forward them over to

[54:53] you, and then

[54:55] uh

[54:56] you guys can decide how to how to work

[54:57] those.

[54:58] >> Thank you.

[54:59] >> That's it.

[55:01] >> Angie.

[55:01] >> Nothing further to report.

[55:03] >> Blair.

[55:04] >> Nothing to report.

[55:05] >> Shaylee, have you got anything?

[55:08] We're good. Okay.

[55:10] Then next item on the agenda is our

[55:12] favorite one of the day.

[55:15] Look for a motion to adjourn.

[55:17] >> So moved.

[55:20] » Nobody wants to second

[55:22] >> All in favor, say aye.

[55:24] >> Aye.

2026.07.14 South Weber City Council Meeting

Transcript